English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of presenting risk on decision making and evaluations with regard to the valence (positive vs. negative) and the linguistic polarity (direct vs. indirect). Participants were presented with a message in which patients were informed about risk associated with some diagnostic medical procedures. In the presented text, before obtaining statistical information about risk (e.g., 1 in 1000), four types of the verbal descriptions were used (risk is high/risk is not low/risk is low/risk is not high). The valence of information influenced the decision and respondent's evaluation. Participants receiving a verbal description with a positive valence were more positive about the patient' decision, and more positively evaluated the doctor and patient's mood than participants receiving a description with a negative valence. Neither main nor interaction effects with linguistic polarity were found. The research does not support that indirect wording mitigates the meaning of a message on risk and highlights the strength and persistence of relying on the verbal description, particularly their affective valence.

Verbal Descriptions Accompanying Numeric Information About the Risk: The Valence of Message and Linguistic Polarity