Genetic health messages in the mass media: Do the general public perceive non-personalized genetic health message as personally relevant?

British Journal of Health Psychology

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 941-956

  Smerecnik, Chris M R ^a   Mesters, Ilse ^a   Candel, Math J J M ^a   De Vries, Hein ^a   De Vries, Nanne K ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CLINICAL TRIAL; FEMALE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; MALE; MASS MEDIUM; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK;

ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMANS; MALE; MASS MEDIA; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK;

EID: 77952521606     PISSN: 1359107X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/135910710X494574     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Beeks, E., Kessels, A. G. H., Kroon, A. A., Van der Klauw, M. M., & De Leeuw, P. W. (2004). Genetic predisposition to salt-sensitivity: A systematic review. Journal of Hypertension, 22, 1243-1249. doi:10.1097/01.hjh.0000125443. 28861.0d (Pubitemid 38888066)
2. Berlyne, D. E. (1970). Novelty complexity and hedonic value. Perception and Psychophysics, 8, 279-286.
3. Brewer, N. T., Chapman, G. B., Gibbons, F. X., Gerrard, M., & McCaul, K. D. (2007). Meta-analysis of the relationship between risk perception and health behavior: The example of vaccination. Health Psychology, 26, 136-145. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.26.2.136 (Pubitemid 46494598)
4. Bubela, T. M., & Caulfield, T. A. (2004). Do the print media 'Hype' genetic research? A comparison of newspaper stories and peer-reviewed research papers. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 170, 1399-1407. doi:10.1503/cmaj.1030762 (Pubitemid 38594632)
5. Burke, W., Atkins, D., Gwinn, M., Guttmacher, A., Haddow, J., Lau, J., Wiesner, G. L. (2002). Genetic test evaluation: Information needs of clinicians, policy makers, and the public. American Journal of Epidemiology, 156, 311-318.
6. Butow, P. N., Lobb, E. A., Meiser, B., Barratt, A., & Tucker, K. M. (2003). Psychological outcomes and risk perception after genetic testing and counselling in breast cancer: A systematic review. Medical Journal of Australia, 178, 77-81.
7. Cappella, J. N., Lerman, C., Romantan, A., & Baruh, L. (2005). News about genetics and smoking: Priming, family smoking history, and news story believability on inferences of genetic susceptibility to tobacco addiction. Communication Research, 32, 478-502. doi:10.1177/0093650205277320 (Pubitemid 41057064)
8. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-252). New York: The Guilford Press.
9. Chen, S., & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 73-96). New York: The Guilford Press.
10. Collins, F. S., Green, E. D., Guttmacher, A. E., & Guyer, M. S. (2003). A vision for the future of genomics research. Nature, 422, 835-847. doi:10.1038/nature01626 (Pubitemid 36520032)
11. Condit, C. M. (2005). Lay people actively process messages about genetic research. In E. F. Einsiedel & F. Timmermans (Eds.), Crossing over: Genomics in the public arena (pp. 131-156). Calgary: University of Calgary Press.
12. Condit, C. M., Gronnwoll, M., Landau, J., Shen, L., Wright, L., & Harris, T. M. (2009). Believing in both genetic determinism and behavioral action: A materialist framework and implications. Public Understanding of Science, 18(6), 730-746. doi:10.1177/0963662508094098
13. Fairchild, A. J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2009). A general model for testing mediation and moderation effects. Prevention Science, 10, 87-99. doi:10.1007/s11121-008-0109-6
14. Frewer, L. J., Howard, C., Hedderley, D., & Shepherd, R. (1999). Reactions to information about genetic engineering: Impact of source characteristics, perceived personal relevance, and persuasiveness. Public Understanding of Science, 8, 35-50. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/8/1/003
15. Guttmacher, A. E., & Collins, F. S. (2005). Realizing the promise of genomics in biomedical research. Journal of the American Medical Association, 294, 1399-1402. doi:10.1001/jama. 294.11.1399
16. Janoff-Bulman, R., & Lang-Gunn, L. (1988). Coping with disease, crime, and accidents: The role of self-blame attributions. In L. Y. Abramson (Ed.), Social cognition and clinical psychology: A synthesis (pp. 116-147). New York: The Guilford Press.
17. Janssens, A. C. J. W., & Van Duijn, C. M. (2008). Genome-based prediction of common-diseases: Advances and prospects. Human Molecular Genetics, 17(2), 166-173. doi:10.1093/hmg/ddn250
18. Katz Rothman, B. K. (1998). Genetic maps and human imaginations: The limits of science in understanding who we are. New York: W. W. Norton.
19. MacKinnon, D. P., Fritz, M. S., Williams, J., & Lockwood, C. M. (2007). Distribution of the product confidence limits for the indirect effect: Program PRODCLIN. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 384-389.
20. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test the significance of mediation and other intervening variables. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83
21. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99-128. doi:10.1207/ s15327906mbr3901-4
22. Meiser, B., & Halliday, J. L. (2002). What is the impact of genetic counseling in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer? A meta-analytic review. Social Science and Medicine, 54, 1463-1470. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536 (01) 00133-2
23. Morgan-Lopez, A. A., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2006). Demonstration and evaluation of a method for assessing mediated moderation. Behavior Research Methods, 89, 852-863.
24. Muthen, B., & Muthen, L. (2006). Mplus 4.2: Statistical software.
25. National Institutes for Health (2009). Human genome project - fact sheet (Vol. 2009).
26. NCBI (2009). Genetests-geneclinics. Retrieved from http://www. geneclinics.org
27. Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades' evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 243-281. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02547.x
28. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
29. Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 3-19. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3
30. Rothman, A. J., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Constructing perceptions of vulnerability: Personal relevance and the use of experiential information in health judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1053-1064. doi:10.1177/01461672982410003
31. Ruiter, R. A. C., Abraham, C., & Kok, G. (2001). Scary warnings and rational precautions: A review of the psychology of fear appeals. Psychology and Health, 16, 613-630. doi:10.1080/08870440108405863
32. Saab, P. G., McCalla, J. R., Coons, H. L., Christensen, A. J., Kaplan, R., Bennet Johnson, S., Melamed, B. (2004). Technological and medical advances: Implications for health psychology. Health Psychology, 23, 142-146.
33. Sanada, H., Yatabe, J., Midorikawa, S., Hashimoto, S., Watanabe, T., Moore, J. H., Felder R. A. (2006). Single-nucleotide polymorphisms for diagnosis of salt-sensitive hypertension. Clinical Chemistry, 52, 352-360.
34. Senior, V., & Marteau, T. M. (2007). Causal attributions for raised cholesterol and perceptions of effective risk-reduction: Self-regulation strategies for an increased risk of coronary heart disease. Psychology and Health, 22, 699-717. doi:10.1080/14768320601020253
35. Smerecnik, C. M. R., Mesters, I., de Vries, N. K., & de Vries, H. (2009). Alerting the general public to genetic risks: The value of health messages communicating the existence of genetic risk factors for public health promotion. Health Psychology, 28, 734-745. doi:10.1037/a0016386
36. Smerecnik, C. M. R., Mesters, I., Verweij, E., de Vries, N., & de Vries, H. (2009). A systematic review of the impact of genetic counseling on risk perception accuracy. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 18, 217-228. doi:10.1007/s10897-008-9210-z
37. Ugalde, A., Martin, P., & Rees, G. (2008). Psychological impact of receiving genetic risk information for breast cancer, with and without lifestyle information. Australian Journal of Psychology, 60, 1-9. doi:10.1080/ 00049530701449497
38. van 't Riet, J., Ruiter, R. A. C., Werrij, M. Q., & de Vries, H. (2010). Self-efficacy moderates messageframing effects: The case of skin-cancer detection. Psychology and Health, 25(3), 339-349. doi:10.1080/08870440802530798
39. Wang, C., Bowen, D. J., & Kardia, S. L. R. (2005). Research and practice opportunities at the intersection of health education, health behavior, and genomics. Health Education and Behavior, 32, 686-701. doi:10.1177/ 1090198105278827 (Pubitemid 41426749)
40. Wright, A. J., French, D. P., Weinman, J., & Marteau, T. M. (2006). Can genetic risk information enhance motivation for smoking cessation? An analogue study. Health Psychology, 25, 740-752. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.25.6.740 (Pubitemid 44747856)