Table 3.

Mean (Standard Deviation) Perceptions and Intentions by Information Type and Benefit or Risk Level in Each Design

			Numeric		Numeric + Qualitative		Absolute Difference + Qualitative		Full
	No-information	Qualitative- Only	Low	High	Low	High	Low	High	Low	High
Benefit Design
N	256	253	255	252	250	255	255	255	256	250
Perceived benefit	5.43 (1.11)	5.12 (1.23)	4.32*♦ (1.51)	5.54♦ (1.18)	4.71*♦ (1.34)	5.61♦ (1.05)	4.91* (1.27)	5.26 (1.12)	4.47*♦ (1.58)	5.56♦ (0.91)
Perceived risk	4.13 (1.23)	4.67* (1.30)	4.42 (1.29)	3.83♦ (1.50)	4.34 (1.36)	3.91♦ (1.39)	4.29♦ (1.32)	4.00♦ (1.40)	4.25♦ (1.41)	3.83♦ (1.35)
Intention	2.32 (0.88)	2.12 (0.90)	1.77*♦ (0.80)	2.33 (0.86)	1.92* (0.84)	2.26 (0.78)	2.02* (0.92)	2.17 (0.81)	2.03* (0.92)	2.35 (0.84)
Risk Design
N	253	247	255	250	254	255	255	254	255	253
Perceived benefit	5.16 (1.25)	4.94 (1.31)	5.20 (1.11)	5.28♦ (1.06)	5.10 (1.17)	5.27♦ (1.11)	5.07 (1.21)	5.08 (1.13)	5.19 (1.10)	5.10 (1.04)
Perceived risk	3.71 (1.26)	4.41* (1.35)	3.37♦ (1.38)	4.01♦ (1.28)	3.61♦ (1.33)	3.89♦ (1.25)	3.55♦ (1.48)	4.00♦ (1.32)	3.42♦ (1.28)	3.96♦ (1.39)
Intention	2.46 (0.92)	2.16* (0.85)	2.44♦ (0.82)	2.11* (0.79)	2.32 (0.80)	2.30 (0.84)	2.29 (0.83)	2.22* (0.82)	2.31 (0.85)	2.24* (0.86)

Note. Low = low benefit or low risk. High = high benefit or high risk. The following scales were used: perceived benefit (1 = very unlikely/would eliminate very little of my heartburn, 7 = very likely/would eliminate all of my heartburn), perceived risk (1 = very unlikely/not at all serious, 7 = very likely/very serious), and intention (1 = not at all likely, 4 = extremely likely).

^*Significantly different from no-information conditions.

^♦Significantly different from qualitative-only conditions

^{^}Significantly different from absolute difference + qualitative conditions.

^†Significantly different from full conditions. Significance was defined as p < .003.