To compare two strategies of consent requirement (classical informed consent and randomised consent according to Zelen), the Clinical Data Elaboration Centre of South Italy, within the special project Clinical Application of Oncological Research of the National Research Council of Italy (CNR-ACRO) invited healthy people visiting the 7th edition of the scientific exhibition "Futuro Remoto" to simulate of being ill and receiving the offer of entering a clinical trial. Within informed consent strategy patients are asked to agree to the randomisation process, while, in the randomised consent, randomised treatment assignment is performed before consent requirement and patients should agree directly to the assigned therapy. Major aims of the study were (a) to compare the strategies in terms of refusal rate to a hypothetical clinical trial, and (b) to estimate whether severity of prognosis affected subjects' decision. 3,217 visiting people participated to the simulation; they were prevalently young, males and with a high level of school education. The study was performed in two different scenarios. In the first one, with one choice option, subject refusing consent could receive standard therapy only; refusal rate was 16% after informed consent and 13.4% after randomised consent (for experimental therapy). In the other scenario, with two choice options, subjects refusing consent could choose the preferred therapy; refusal rate was 20.6% after informed consent, 48.1% after randomised consent (for standard therapy) and 13.4% after randomised consent (for experimental therapy).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)