↓ Skip to main content

Circumventing the “Ick” Factor: A Randomized Trial of the Effects of Omitting Affective Attitudes Questions to Increase Intention to Become an Organ Donor

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Circumventing the “Ick” Factor: A Randomized Trial of the Effects of Omitting Affective Attitudes Questions to Increase Intention to Become an Organ Donor
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01443
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally Doherty, Elizabeth Dolan, Jennifer Flynn, Ronan E. O’Carroll, Frank Doyle

Abstract

Objectives: Including or excluding certain questions about organ donation may influence peoples' intention to donate. We investigated the effect of omitting certain affective attitudinal items on potential donors' intention and behavior for donation. Design: A cross-sectional survey with a subgroup nested randomized trial. Methods: A total of 578 members of the public in four shopping centers were surveyed on their attitudes to organ donation. Non-donors (n = 349) were randomly assigned to one of three groups: Group 1 completed items on affective and cognitive attitudes, anticipated regret, intention, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control. Group 2 completed all items above but excluded affective attitudes. Group 3 completed all items but omitted negatively worded affective attitudes. The primary outcome was intention to donate, taking a donor card after the interview was a secondary behavioral outcome, and both were predicted using linear and logistic regression with group 1 as the reference. Results: Mean (SD) 1-7 intention scores for groups 1, 2 and 3 were, respectively: 4.43 (SD 1.89), 4.95 (SD 1.64) and 4.88 (SD 1.81), with group 2 significantly higher than group 1 (β = 0.518, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18 to 0.86).At the end of the interview, people in group 2 (66.7%; OR = 1.40, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.07, p = 0.096) but not those in group 3 (61.7%; OR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.75, p = 0.685), were marginally more likely to accept a donor card from the interviewer than people in group 1 (59.7%). Conclusion: Omitting affective attitudinal items results in higher intention to donate organs and marginally higher rates of acceptance of donor cards, which has important implications for future organ donation public health campaigns.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Professor 2 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Other 4 19%
Unknown 4 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 5 24%
Engineering 3 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 April 2019.
All research outputs
#5,547,970
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,915
of 31,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,210
of 317,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#211
of 591 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,000 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 591 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.