Impact of Genetic Risk Information and Type of Disease on Perceived Risk, Anticipated Affect, and Expected Consequences of Genetic Tests

Health Psychology

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 307-316

  Cameron, Linda D ^a   Sherman, Kerry A ^b   Marteau, Theresa M ^c   Brown, Paul M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^b MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

affect; attitudes; communication; genetic testing; risk perception

Indexed keywords

ANAMNESIS; ARTICLE; COLON CANCER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIABETES MELLITUS; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; DISTRESS SYNDROME; FEMALE; GENE CLUSTER; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC RISK; GENETIC SCREENING; GEOGRAPHY; HEART DISEASE; HUMAN; LUNG CANCER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATION;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AFFECT; AGED; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COLONIC NEOPLASMS; COMPREHENSION; CORONARY DISEASE; CULTURE; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; DNA MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; GENETIC PRIVACY; GENETIC SCREENING; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SELF DISCLOSURE; SICK ROLE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 65849113644     PISSN: 02786133     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0013947     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Aiken L.S., Fenaughty A.M., West S.G., Johnson J.J., and Luckett T.L. Perceived determinants of risk for breast cancer and the relations among objective risk, perceived risk, and screening behavior over time. Women's Health: Research on Gender, Behavior, and Policy 1 (1995) 27-50
2. Audrain J., Boyd N.R., Roth J., Main D., Caporaso N.E., and Lerman C. Genetic susceptibility testing in smoking cessation treatment: One-year outcomes of a randomized trial. Addictive Behavior 22 (1997) 741-751
3. Axworthy D., Brock D., Bobrow M., and Marteau T.M. Psychological impact of population-based carrier testing for cystic fibrosis: 3-year follow-up. Lancet 347 (1996) 1443-1446
4. Brewer N.T., Weinstein N.D., Cuite C.A., and Herrington Jr. J.E. Risk perceptions and their relation to risk behavior. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 27 (2004) 125-130
5. Brown P.M., Cameron L.D., and Reeve J. Assessing the clinical utility of genetic tests: Implications for health technology assessment. Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management 8 (2007) 522-535
6. Bruine de Bruin W., Fischhoff B., Millstein S.G., and Halpern-Felsher B.L. Verbal and numerical expressions of probability: "It's a fifty-fifty chance.". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 81 (2000) 115-131
7. Cameron L.D., and Diefenbach M.A. Responses to information about psychosocial consequences of genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: Influences of cancer worry and risk perceptions. Journal of Health Psychology 6 (2001) 47-59
8. Cameron L.D., and Reeve J. Risk perceptions, worry, and attitudes about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Psychology and Health 21 (2006) 211-230
9. Collins F.S., Green E.D., Guttmacher A.E., and Guyer M.S. A vision for the future of genomics research: A blueprint for the genomic era. Nature 422 (2003) 835-847
10. Connolly T., and Reb J. Regret in health-related decisions. Health Psychology 24 (2005) S29-234
11. Esplen M.J., Madlensky L., Butler K., McKinnon W., Bapat B., Wong J., et al. Motivations and psychosocial impact of genetic testing for HNPCC. American Journal of Medical Genetics 103 (2001) 9-15
12. Etchegary H. Psychological aspects of predictive genetic test decisions: What do we know so far?. Analysis of Social Issues and Public Policy 4 (2004) 13-31
13. French D.P., and Marteau T.M. Communicating risk. In: Ayers S., Baum A., McManus C., Newman S., Wallston K., and Weinman J. (Eds). Cambridge handbook of psychology, health, & medicine. 2nd ed. (2007), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK 431-434
14. Gollust S.E., Hull S.C., and Wilfond B.S. Limitations of direct-to-consumer advertising for clinical genetic testing. Journal of the American Medical Association 228 (2002) 1762-1767
15. Hallowell N. Doing the right thing: Genetic risk and responsibility. Sociology of Health and Illness 21 (1999) 597-621
16. Harris P.R., and Smith V. When the risks are low: The impact of absolute and comparative information on disturbance and understanding in U.S. and U.K. samples. Psychology and Health 20 (2005) 319-330
17. Hay J.L., McCaul K.D., and Magnan R.E. Does worry about breast cancer predict screening behaviors? A meta-analysis of the prospective evidence. Preventive Medicine 42 (2006) 401-408
18. Helmes A.W. Application of the Protection Motivation Theory to genetic testing for breast cancer risk. Preventive Medicine: An International Journal Devoted to Practice and Theory 35 (2002) 453-462
19. Hernandez L. Implications of genomics for public health: Workshop summary (2005), The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
20. Jemmott J.B., Ditto P.H., and Croyle R.T. Judging health status: Effects of perceived prevalence and personal relevance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50 (1986) 899-905
21. Klein W. Objective standards are not enough: Affective, self-evaluative, and behavioral responses to social comparison information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72 (1997) 763-774
22. Lerman C., Croyle R.T., Tercyak K.P., and Hamann H. Genetic testing: Psychological aspects and implications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 70 (2002) 784-797
23. Lerman C., Hughes C., Croyle R.T., Main D., Durham C., Snyder C., et al. Prophylactic surgery decisions and surveillance practices one year following BRCA1/2 testing. Preventive Medicine 31 (2000) 75-80
24. Lerman C., Schwartz M.D., Lin T.H., Hughes C., Narod S., and Lynch H.T. The influence of psychological distress on use of genetic testing for cancer risk. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 65 (1997) 414-420
25. Leventhal H., Brissette I., and Leventhal E.A. The common-sense model of self-regulation of health and illness. In: Cameron L.D., and Leventhal H. (Eds). The self-regulation of health and illness behaviour (2003), Routledge, London 42-65
26. Loewenstein G.F., Weber E.U., Hsee C.K., and Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin 127 (2001) 267-286
27. Low L., King S., and Wilkie T. Genetic discrimination in life insurance: Empirical evidence from a cross-sectional survey of genetic support groups in the United Kingdom. British Medical Journal 317 (1998) 1632-1635
28. Marteau T.M., and Lerman C. Genetic risk and behavioural change. British Medical Journal 322 (2001) 1056-1059
29. Marteau T.M., Senior V., Humphries S.E., Bobrow M., Cranston T., Crook M.A., et al. Psychological impact of genetic testing for familial hypercholesterolaemia in a previously aware population: A randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Medical Genetics 128A (2004) 285-293
30. McBride C.M., Bepher G., Lipkus I.M., Lyna P., Samsa G., Albright J., et al. Incorporating genetic susceptibility feedback into a smoking cessation program for African American smokers with low income. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers, and Prevention 11 (2002) 521-528
31. Peterson E.A., Milliron K.J., Lewis K.E., Goold S.D., and Merajver S.D. Health insurance and discrimination concerns and BRCA1/2 testing in a clinic population. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 11 (2002) 79-87
32. Reyna V.F., and Brainerd C.J. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in choice: Gist extraction, truncation, and conversation. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 4 (1991) 249-262
33. Senior V., Marteau T.M., and Weinman J.A. Impact of genetic testing on causal models of heart disease and arthritis: An analogue study. Psychology and Health 14 (1999) 1077-1088
34. Shiloh S., Petel Y., Papa M., and Goldman B. Motivations, perceptions and interpersonal differences associated with interest in genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility among women at high and average risk. Psychology and Health 13 (1998) 1071-1086
35. Shiloh S., and Sagi M. Effect of framing on the perception of genetic recurrence risks. American Journal of Medical Genetics 33 (1989) 130-135
36. Slovic P., Finucane M.L., Peters E., and MacGregor D.G. The affect heuristic. In: Gilovich T., Griffin D., and Kahneman D. (Eds). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (2002), Cambridge University Press, New York 397-420
37. Slovic P., Fischhoff B., and Lichtenstein S. Facts and fears: Understanding perceived risk. In: Schwing R., and Albers W.A. (Eds). Societal risk assessment: How safe is safe enough? (1980), Erlbaum, New York
38. Turner R. Economics of genetics from a health commissioning point of view. Disease Markers 15 (1999) 175-176
39. Wagner C.J., Malick J., Babb J.S., Bove B., Godwin A.K., and Daly M.B. Communication of BRCA1 and BRCA2 results to at-risk relatives: A cancer risk assessment program's perspective. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part C, Seminars in Medical Genetics 119 (2003) 11-18
40. Weinstein N.D. Perceived probability, perceived severity, and health-protective behavior. Health Psychology 19 (2000) 65-74
41. Weinstein N.D., and Klein W.M. Resistance of personal risk perceptions to debiasing interventions. In: Gilovich T., Griffin D., and Kahneman D. (Eds). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (2002), Cambridge University Press, New York 313-323
42. Weinstein N.D., Kwitel A., McCaul K.D., Magnan R.E., Gerrard M., and Gibbons F.X. Risk perceptions: Assessment and relationships to influenza vaccination. Health Psychology 26 (2007) 146-151