PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Plain Language Summaries (PLS) offer a promising solution to make meta-analytic psychological research more accessible for non-experts and laypeople. However, existing writing guidelines for this type of publication are seldom grounded in empirical studies. To address this and to test two versions of a new PLS guideline, we investigated the impact of PLSs of psychological meta-analyses on laypeoples\' PLS-related knowledge and their user experience (accessibility, understanding, empowerment). In a preregistered online-study, N = 2,041 German-speaking participants read two PLSs. We varied the inclusion of a disclaimer on PLS authorship, a statement on the causality of effects, additional information on community augmented meta-analyses (CAMA) and the PLS guideline version. Results partially confirmed our preregistered hypotheses: Participants answered knowledge items on CAMA more correctly when a PLS contained additional information on CAMA, and there were no user experience differences between the old and the new guideline versions. Unexpectedly, a priori hypotheses regarding improved knowledge via the use of a disclaimer and a causality statement were not confirmed. Reasons for this, as well as general aspects related to science communication via PLSs aimed at educating laypeople, are discussed.
摘要：
简单语言摘要（PLS）提供了一个有前途的解决方案，使元分析心理学研究更容易为非专家和外行人。然而,这类出版物的现有写作指南很少以实证研究为基础。为了解决这个问题并测试新PLS指南的两个版本，我们调查了心理荟萃分析的PLS对外行人PLS相关知识及其用户体验的影响(可访问性，理解,赋权)。在一项预先注册的在线研究中，N=2,041名讲德语的参与者阅读了两个PLSs。我们改变了PLS作者身份的免责声明，关于影响因果关系的声明，有关社区增强荟萃分析（CAMA）和PLS指南版本的其他信息。结果部分证实了我们预先注册的假设：当PLS包含有关CAMA的其他信息时，参与者更正确地回答了有关CAMA的知识项目，并且新旧指南版本之间没有用户体验差异。出乎意料的是,关于通过使用免责声明和因果关系声明来改善知识的先验假设没有得到证实。这样做的原因,以及与通过PLSs进行的旨在教育外行人的科学交流相关的一般方面，正在讨论。
