Perceived Susceptibility to Breast Cancer Moderates the Effect of Gain- and Loss-Framed Messages on Use of Screening Mammography

Health Psychology

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 145-152

  Gallagher, Kristel M ^a   Updegraff, John A ^a   Rothman, Alexander J ^b   Sims, Linda ^c  

^a KENT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^c SUMMA HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Health behavior; Mammography; Message framing; Perceived risk; Persuasive communication

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER SUSCEPTIBILITY; FEMALE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTION; SELF REPORT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; MIDWESTERN UNITED STATES; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK;

EID: 79952828846     PISSN: 02786133     EISSN: 19307810     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0022264     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Aiken L.S., Fenaughty A.M., West S.G., Johnson J.J., Luckett T.L. Perceived determinants of risk for breast cancer and the relations among objective risk, perceived risk, and screening behavior over time. Women and Health 1995, 1:27-50.
2. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2007-2008 2007, American Cancer Society, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA.
3. Apanovitch A.M., McCarthy D., Salovey P. Using message framing to motivate HIV testing among low-income, ethnic minority women. Health Psychology 2003, 22:60-67.
4. Banks S.M., Salovey P., Greener S., Rothman A.J., Moyer A., Beauvais J., Epel E. The effects of message framing on mammography utilization. Health Psychology 1995, 14:178-184.
5. Bartels R.D., Kelly K.M., Rothman A.J. Moving beyond the function of the health behaviour: The effect of message frame on behavioural decision-making. Psychology & Health 2010, 25:821-838.
6. Blackman D.K., Bennett E.M., Miller D.S. Trends in self-reported use of mammograms and papanicolaou tests: Behavioral risk factor surveillance system. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 1999, 48:1-22.
7. Burack R.C., George J., Gurney J.G. Mammography use among women as a function of age and patient involvement in decision-making. Journal of American Geriatrics Society 2000, 40:817-821.
8. Champion V.L. Revised susceptibility, benefits, and barriers scale for mammography screening. Research in Nursing and Health 1999, 22:341-348.
9. Cioffi D. Asymmetry of doubt in medical self-diagnosis: The ambiguity of "uncertain wellness." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1991, 62:969-980.
10. Clark M.A., Rakowski W., Bonacore L.B. Repeat mammography: Prevalence estimates and considerations for assessment. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 2003, 26:201-211.
11. Edwards A., Elwyn G., Covey J., Matthews E., Pill R. Presenting risk information-a review of the effects of framing and other manipulations on patient outcomes. Journal of Health Communication 2001, 6:61-82.
12. Esserman L., Shieh Y., Thompson I. Rethinking screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer. Journal of the American Medical Association 2009, 302:1685-1692.
13. Finney L.J., Iannotti R.J. The impact of family history of breast cancer on women's health beliefs, salience of breast cancer family history, and degree of involvement in breast cancer issues. Women and Health 2001, 33:15-28.
14. Finney L.J., Iannotti R.J. Message framing and mammography screening: A theory-driven intervention. Behavioral Medicine 2002, 28:5-14.
15. Fox S.A., Murata P.J., Stein J.A. The impact of physician compliance on screening mammography for older women. Archives of Internal Medicine 1991, 151:50-56.
16. Han P.K.J., Kobrin S.C., Klein W.M.P., Davis W.W., Stefanek M., Taplin S.H. Perceived ambiguity about screening mammography recommendations: Association with future mammography uptake and perceptions. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 2007, 16:458.
17. Horner M.J., Ries L.A.G., Krapcho M., Neyman N., Aminou R., Howlader N., Edwards B.K. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2006. National Cancer Institute 2006, Retrieved from http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2006/.
18. Howard M., Agarwal G., Lytwyn A. Accuracy of self-reports of Pap and mammography screening compared to medical record: A meta-analysis. Cancer Causes & Control 2009, 20:1-13.
19. Humphrey L.L., Helfand M., Chan B.K.S., Woolf S.H. Breast cancer screening: Summary of the evidence. Annals of Internal Medicine 2002, 137:344-346.
20. Jaccard J. Interaction effects in logistic regression 2001, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
21. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 1979, 47:263-291.
22. Katapodi M.C., Lee K.A., Facione N.C., Dodd M.J. Predictors of perceived breast cancer risk and the relation between perceived risk and breast cancer screening: A meta-analytic review. Preventive Medicine 2004, 38:388-402.
23. Lalor K.M., Hailey B.J. The effects of message framing and feelings of susceptibility to breast cancer on reported frequency of breast self-examination. International Quarterly of Community Health Education 1990, 10:183-192.
24. Lerman C., Ross E., Boyce A., Gorchov P.M., McLaughlin R., Rimer B., Engstrom P. The impact of mailing psychoeducational materials to women with abnormal mammograms. American Journal of Public Health 1992, 82:729-730.
25. Lerman C., Schwartz M. Adherence and psychological adjustment among women at high risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1993, 28:145-155.
26. Meyerowitz B.E., Chaiken S. The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1987, 52:500-510.
27. O'Keefe D.J., Jensen J.D. The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease detection behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Communication 2009, 59:296-316.
28. Pearlman D.N., Clark M.A., Rakowksi W., Ehrich B. Screening for breast and cervical cancers: The importance of knowledge and perceived cancer survivability. Women and Health 1999, 28:93-112.
29. Rakowski W., Andersen M.R., Stoddard A.M., Urban N., Rimer B.K., Lane D.S., Costanza M.E. Confirmatory analysis of opinions regarding the pros and cons of mammography. Health Psychology 1997, 5:433-441.
30. Rakowski W., Breen N., Meissner H., Rimer B.K., Vernon S.W., Clark M.A., Freedman A.N. Prevalence and correlates of repeat mammography among women aged 55-79 in the Year 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Preventive Medicine 2004, 39:1-10.
31. Rauscher G.H., Johnson T.P., Cho Y.I., Walk J.A. Accuracy of self-reported cancer-screening histories: A meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 2008, 17:748-757.
32. Rothman A.J., Kelly K.M., Hertel A., Salovey P. Message frames and illness representations: Implications for interventions to promote and sustain healthy behavior. The self-regulation of health and illness behavior 2003, 278-296. Routledge, London, England. L.D. Cameron, H. Leventhal (Eds.).
33. Rothman A.J., Salovey P. Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin 1997, 121:3-19.
34. Schneider T.R., Salovey P., Apanovitch A.M., Pizarro J., McCarthy D., Zullo J., Rothman A.J. The effects of message framing and ethnic targeting on mammography use among low-income women. Health Psychology 2001, 20:256-266.
35. Tversky A., Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981, 211:453-458.
36. Updegraff, J. A., Rothman, A. J., & Gallagher, K. M. (2010). Tailoring framed messages to women's construals of mammography. Manuscript in preparation.
37. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Annals of Internal Medicine 2009, 151:716-726. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
38. Vernon S.W., Vogel V.G., Halabi S., Bondy M.L. Factors associated with perceived risk of breast cancer among women attending a screening program. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1993, 28:137-144.
39. Williams T., Clarke V., Borland R. Effects of message framing on breast-cancer-related beliefs and behaviors: The role of mediating factors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 2001, 31:925-950.