Designing health communication: Testing the explanations for the impact of communication medium on effectiveness

Objective. The written format has been found consistently to be the most effective medium for communicating relatively complex information (e.g. Furnham, Gunter, and Green, 1990). Looking at the communication of health information, Corston and Colman (1997) accounted for media differences by referring to the facts that reading a written presentation is self-paced (the self-pacing theory) and that a written presentation contains fewer distracting characteristics than either audio-visual or auditory-only presentations (the distraction theory). The present study sought to test these theories. Method. Female students (N = 175) between the ages of 16 and 18 from two secondary schools were exposed to a fictitious health warning and completed a questionnaire immediately afterwards, measuring communication effectiveness via recall. Participants were divided into seven treatment condition groups which varied in the medium of presentation (two written, three audio-visual and three auditory-only) and distraction level inherent to the design of the communication. Results. In line with previous literature, the written format was the most effective way to communicate a piece of health-related information (P < .01). No evidence was provided for the 'self-pacing theory'. Substantial support, however, was found for the 'distraction theory'. Conclusions. In general, minimally distracting communication proved maximally effective. A simple distraction effect, however, was not found within the audio-visual medium. Here the presentation where the viewers see a reader conveying the message (the 'talking head' condition) proved most effective, even though it was not the least distracting. Being able to see someone reading the message appears to convey a special communication advantage on the presentation.