Novelty as a Parameter for Using Arguments in Persuasive Communication

Kok, Gerjo

doi:10.5334/hpb.13

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most retention interventions are behavioural [ 5 ] and barriers to reply to a questionnaire or attend an appointment may vary during the course of a trial [ 27 ]. Behavioural literature shows that interventions might be more likely to work the first time they are implemented [ 7 , 28 ] rather than subsequent times. This makes the assumption of a constant intervention effect questionable in this context, which has implications for both the choice of design and also to the SWAT intervention implementation if found effective.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Parallel arm trials, which are the most common design for retention SWATs [ 5 ], assume the intervention effect is the same independent of the time point it is assessed at. However, this assumption might not be realistic, especially considering retention SWATs often test behavioural interventions and their effectiveness can be affected by repeated exposure [ 7 ]. As such, alternative trial designs, which allow evaluation of interventions across multiple time-points and exploration of the effect of the intervention at different time points, should be considered.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using re-randomisation designs to increase the efficiency and applicability of retention studies within trials: a case study

Goulão

Duncan

Innes

et al. 2023

Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Poor retention in randomised trials can lead to serious consequences to their validity. Studies within trials (SWATs) are used to identify the most effective interventions to increase retention. Many interventions could be applied at any follow-up time point, but SWATs commonly assess interventions at a single time point, which can reduce efficiency. Methods The re-randomisation design allows participants to be re-enrolled and re-randomised whenever a new retention opportunity occurs (i.e. a new follow-up time point where the intervention could be applied). The main advantages are as follows: (a) it allows the estimation of an average effect across time points, thus increasing generalisability; (b) it can be more efficient than a parallel arm trial due to increased sample size; and (c) it allows subgroup analyses to estimate effectiveness at different time points. We present a case study where the re-randomisation design is used in a SWAT. Results In our case study, the host trial is a dental trial with two available follow-up points. The Sticker SWAT tests whether adding the trial logo’s sticker to the questionnaire’s envelope will result in a higher response rate compared with not adding the sticker. The primary outcome is the response rate to postal questionnaires. The re-randomisation design could double the available sample size compared to a parallel arm trial, resulting in the ability to detect an effect size around 28% smaller. Conclusion The re-randomisation design can increase the efficiency and generalisability of SWATs for trials with multiple follow-up time points.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using re-randomisation designs to increase the efficiency and applicability of retention studies within trials: a case study

Goulão

Duncan

Innes

et al. 2023

Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When these conditions (i.e., parameters for effectiveness) are not met, the method, and its practical application(s), is less likely to be effective. Similarly, for persuasive communication to be effective, the arguments presented need to be novel and relevant to the person being targeted, and not too discrepant from their initial beliefs (Kok, 2021; McGuire, 2001). Only then does persuasive communication really work.…”

Section: Ascertaining How To Effect Change: Selecting Methods and Pra...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intervention mapping as a guide to developing, implementing, and evaluating stigma reduction interventions.

Stutterheim¹,

Kooij²,

Crutzen³

et al. 2023

Stigma and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When these conditions (i.e., parameters for effectiveness) are not met, the method, and its practical application(s), is less likely to be effective. Similarly, for persuasive communication to be effective, the arguments presented need to be novel and relevant to the person being targeted and not too discrepant from their initial beliefs (Kok, 2021;McGuire, 2000). Only then does persuasive communication really work.…”

Section: Getting Started: Needs Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intervention Mapping as a guide to developing, implementing, and evaluating stigma reduction interventions

Stutterheim¹,

Kooij²,

Crutzen³

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stigmatization is a complex and deeply ingrained process, not easily amenable to change. The field of systematic behavior change can offer guidance for the improvement of stigma reduction efforts. In this paper, we describe Intervention Mapping as a relevant approach for designing stigma interventions. We demonstrate that, for stigma reduction to be effective, a number of actions are essential. We must: 1) ascertain, at various socioecological levels, relevant and changeable determinants of stigmatizing behavior and target them specifically in our interventions; 2) delineate exactly what change our stigma reduction interventions aim to achieve at the level of determinants; 3) ensure that the methods employed to reduce stigmatization are aligned with the determinants of stigmatizing behavior, and that the theoretically-defined conditions under which those methods are most effective are considered, along with characteristics of the target population and intervention context; 4) pre-test and pilot-test newly developed interventions, and ensure budgetary capacity for these ; 5) consider intervention adoption, implementation, and maintenance right from the outset, and approach these systematically as well; and 6) measure, in our evaluations, changes in not only the desired outcome of interventions (i.e., stigma reduction) but also in the objectives of the interventions and the determinants of stigmatizing behavior, and complement effect evaluations with process evaluations that assess implementation reach, completeness, and fidelity. For each of the six Intervention Mapping steps, we provide concrete examples and discuss the current stigma and behavior change literature. Importantly, we also summarize a number of evidence-based stigma reduction methods.

show abstract

Novelty as a Parameter for Using Arguments in Persuasive Communication

Cited by 3 publications

References 12 publications

Using re-randomisation designs to increase the efficiency and applicability of retention studies within trials: a case study

Using re-randomisation designs to increase the efficiency and applicability of retention studies within trials: a case study

Intervention mapping as a guide to developing, implementing, and evaluating stigma reduction interventions.

Intervention Mapping as a guide to developing, implementing, and evaluating stigma reduction interventions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About