Offering male endoscopists as decoy option to nudge disinclined women to have colorectal cancer screening

No abstract is available for this paper.

• Publication year

  2019

• Venue

  Journal of behavioral medicine

• Publication date

  2019-08-30

• Fields of study

  Medicine

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1007/s10865-019-00095-4PMID 31471827
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar, PubMed

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• The impact of descriptive norms on motivation to participate in cancer screening – Evidence from online experiments

  2019cited by this paper
• Testing the decoy effect to increase interest in colorectal cancer screening

  2019cited by this paper
• Testing active choice for screening practitioner’s gender in endoscopy among disinclined women: An online experiment

  2018cited by this paper
• Evaluating an instrument to measure mental load and mental effort considering different sources of validity evidence

  2017cited by this paper
• The Effects of Strategy Training and an Extrinsic Incentive on Fourth- and Fifth- Grade Students’ Performance, Confidence, and Calibration Accuracy

  2017cited by this paper
• The Theory and Practice of “Nudging”: Changing Health Behaviors

  2016cited by this paper
• Changing minds: Bounded rationality and heuristic processes in exercise-related judgments and choices.

  2016cited by this paper
• Testing the decoy effect in the presence of store brands

  2015cited by this paper
• Measurement of Cancer Health Literacy and Identification of Patients with Limited Cancer Health Literacy

  2014cited by this paper
• Altering micro-environments to change population health behaviour: towards an evidence base for choice architecture interventions

  2013cited by this paper
• Changing Human Behavior to Prevent Disease: The Importance of Targeting Automatic Processes

  2012cited by this paper
• Thinking, Fast and Slow

  2011cited by this paper
• Does the brain calculate value?

  2011cited by this paper
• Strengthening acceptance for xenotransplantation: the case of attraction effect

  2008cited by this paper
• Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness

  2008cited by this paper
• Women patients' preference for women physicians is a barrier to colon cancer screening.

  2005cited by this paper
• Barriers to Endoscopic Colorectal Cancer Screening: Are Women Different from Men?

  2004cited by this paper
• Interventions to change health behaviours: evidence-based or evidence-inspired?

  2004cited by this paper
• Patient preferences for physician characteristics in university-based primary care clinics.

  2003cited by this paper
• Determinants of colorectal cancer screening in women undergoing mammography

  2003cited by this paper
• The importance of physician gender in the selection of an obstetrician or a gynecologist.

  2002cited by this paper
• Patient preferences for gender of endoscopists.

  2002cited by this paper
• General Performance on a Numeracy Scale among Highly Educated Samples

  2001cited by this paper
• Sex and Familiarity of Colonoscopists: Patient Preferences

  2000cited by this paper
• Are More Options Always Better?

  1999cited by this paper
• The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice

  1999cited by this paper
• The robustness of the asymmetrically dominated effect: Buying frames, phantom alternatives, and in‐store purchases

  1999cited by this paper
• Patient preference for genders of health professionals.

  1997cited by this paper
• Decoy alternatives in policy choices: Asymmetric domination and compromise effects

  1997cited by this paper
• Context-Dependent Selection: The Effects of Decoy and Phantom Job Candidates

  1996cited by this paper
• The Attraction Effect and Political Choice in Two Elections

  1995cited by this paper
• Sex of physician: patients' preferences and stereotypes.

  1990cited by this paper
• Patient choice in a practice with men and women general practitioners.

  1990cited by this paper
• Contingent weighting in judgment and choice

  1988cited by this paper
• Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity & the Similarity Hypothesis.

  1981cited by this paper

• Nudging to increase the uptake of cancer screening: scoping review of empirical studies.

  2026cites this paper
• A randomized controlled trial testing behavioral economics messages and screening choices to increase participation among previous non-attenders in florence's colorectal cancer screening program.

  2026cites this paper
• Using an inferior decoy alternative to nudge COVID-19 vaccination

  2025cites this paper
• Nudging safety behavior in the steel industry: Evidence from two field studies

  2024cites this paper
• Testing the decoy effect to improve online survey participation: Evidence from a field experiment

  2023cites this paper
• Effectiveness of behavioural economics-based interventions to improve colorectal cancer screening participation: A rapid systematic review of randomised controlled trials

  2022cites this paper
• Evaluating behavioral economic interventions for promoting cancer screening uptake and adherence in targeted populations: a systematic review protocol.

  2022cites this paper
• Testing messages from behavioral economics to improve participation in a population-based colorectal cancer screening program in Cyprus: Results from two randomized controlled trials

  2021cites this paper
• Barriers to flexible sigmoidoscopy colorectal cancer screening in low uptake socio‐demographic groups: A systematic review

  2020cites this paper
• Offering disinclined people the choice between different screening appointments: a randomised online survey

  2020cites this paper