Participant Engagement and Reactance to a Short, Animated Video About Added Sugars: Web-based Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Short, animated story-based (SAS) videos are a novel and promising strategy for promoting health behaviors. To gain traction as an effective health communication tool, SAS videos must demonstrate their potential to engage a diverse and global audience. In this study, we evaluate engagement with a SAS video about the consumption of added sugars, which is narrated by a child (a nonthreatening character), a mother (a neutral layperson), or a physician (a medical expert). OBJECTIVE: This study aims to (1) assess whether engagement with the sugar intervention video differs by narrator type (child, mother, physician) and trait proneness to reactance and (2) assess whether the demographic characteristics of the participants (age, gender, education status) are associated with different engagement profiles with the sugar intervention video. METHODS: In December 2020, after 4013 participants from the United Kingdom completed our randomized controlled trial, we offered participants assigned to the placebo arms (n=1591, 39.65%) the choice to watch the sugar intervention video (without additional compensation) as posttrial access to treatment. We measured engagement as the time that participants chose to watch the 3.42-minute video and collected data on age, gender, education status, and trait reactance proneness. Using ordinary least squares regression, we quantified the association of the demographic characteristics and trait reactance proneness with the sugar video view time. RESULTS: Overall, 66.43% (n=1047) of the 1576 participants in the 2 placebo arms voluntarily watched the sugar intervention video. The mean view time was 116.35 (52.4%) of 222 seconds. Results show that view times did not differ by narrator (child, mother, physician) and that older participants (aged 25-59 years, mean = 125.2 seconds) watched the sugar video longer than younger adults (aged 18-25 years, mean = 83.4 seconds). View time remained consistent across education levels. Participants with low trait reactance (mean = 119.3 seconds) watched the intervention video longer than high-trait-reactance participants (mean = 95.3 seconds), although this association did not differ by narrator type. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of participants in our study voluntarily watched more than half of the sugar intervention video, which is a promising finding. Our results suggest that SAS videos may need to be shorter than 2 minutes to engage people who are young or have high trait proneness to reactance. We also found that the choice of narrator (child, mother, or physician) for our video did not significantly affect participant engagement. Future videos, aimed at reaching diverse audiences, could be customized for different age groups, where appropriate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00022340; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00022340. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/25343.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".