Using the interdependence model to understand spousal influence on colorectal cancer screening intentions: A structural equation model

Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Volumn 43, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 320-329

  Manne, Sharon ^a   Kashy, Deborah ^b   Weinberg, David S ^c   Boscarino, Joseph A ^d   Bowen, Deborah J ^e  

^a RUTGERS CANCER INSTITUTE OF NEW JERSEY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c FOX CHASE CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^d GEISINGER HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^e BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Actor partner independence model; Colorectal cancer screening intentions; Couples; Interdependence model

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BEHAVIOR; COLORECTAL TUMOR; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; RISK; SPOUSE;

AGED; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INTENTION; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; RISK; SPOUSES;

EID: 84863985992     PISSN: 08836612     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12160-012-9344-y     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures 2011, Atlanta: American Cancer Society. Available at http://www.cancer.org/Research/CancerFactsFigures/ index. Accessed 12 April 2011.
2. US Dept of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2010, Washington, DC: US Dept of Health and Human Services, Office of Population Affairs. Available at http://www.healthypeople.gov/2010/. Accessed 12 April 2011.
3. Beydoun HA., Beydoun MA. Predictors of colorectal cancer screening behaviors among average-risk older adults in the United States. Cancer Causes Contr. 2008; 9: 339-359.
4. McQueen A., Vernon SW, Rothman AJ., Norman GJ, Myers RE, Tilley BC. Examining the role of perceived susceptibility on colorectal cancer screening intention and behavior. Ann Behav Med. 2010; 40: 205-217.
5. Madlensky L, Esplen MJ, Gallinger S, McLaughlin JR, Goal V. Relatives of colorectal cancer patients: Factors associated with screening behavior. Am J Prev Med, 2003; 25: 87-94.
6. Manne S, Markowitz A,Winawer S,Meropol NJ,Haller D, Rakowski W, Babb J, Jandorf L. Correlates of colorectal cancer screening compliance and stage of adoption among siblings of individuals with early onset colorectal cancer. Health Psych. 2002; 21: 3-15. (Pubitemid 34158007)
7. Harris JN, Hay J., Kuniyiki A., Asgari MM, Press N, Bowen DJ. Using a family systems approach to investigate cancer risk communication within melanoma families. Psych Onc. 2010; 19: 1102-1111.
8. Falba TA, Sindelar JL. Spousal concordance in health behavior change. Health Serv Res. 2008; 43: 96-116. (Pubitemid 351601528)
9. Kolonel LN, Lee J. Husband-wife correspondence in smoking, drinking, and dietary habits. Am J Clin Nutr. 1998; 34: 99-104.
10. Wilson SE. The health capital of families: An investigation of the interspousal correlation in health status. Soc Sci Med. 2002; 55: 1157-1172.
11. Lewis MA, DeVellis BM, Sleath. Social influence and interpersonal communication in health behavior. In: Glanz DK, Rimer BK, Lewis FM, eds. Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice. 3rd edn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002: 240-264.
12. Lewis MA, McBride CM, Pollak KI, Puleo E, Butterfield RM, Emmons KM. Understanding health behavior change among couples: An interdependence and communal coping approach. Soc Sci Med. 2006; 62: 1369-1380. (Pubitemid 43197822)
13. Kelley HH, Berscheid E, Christensen A, Harvey JH, Huston TL, Levinger G, et al. Analyzing close relationships. In Kelley HH, Berscheid E, Christensen A, Harvey J, Huston TL, Levinger G, et al eds. Close relationships. San Francisco, CA: Freeman; 1983; 20-67.
14. Kelley HH, Thibaut TW. Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York; Wiley; 1978.
15. Rusbult CE, Van Lange PAM. Interdependence processes. In Higgins ET, Kruglanski AW eds. Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles New York: The Guilford Press; 1996: 564-596.
16. Lewis MA, Butterfield R, Darbes L, Johnston-Brooks CH. The conceptualization and assessment of health-related social control. J Soc Pers Rel. 2004; 21: 669-687. (Pubitemid 39443453)
17. Franks MM, Rook KS, Keteyian SJ, Stephens MA, Franklin BA, Artinian NT. Spouses' provision of health-related support and control to patients participating in cardiac rehabilitation. J Fam Psychol. 2006; 20: 311-318. (Pubitemid 44022503)
18. Butterfield R, Lewis M. Health-related social influence: A social ecological perspective on tactic use. J Soc Pers Rel. 2002; 19: 505-626.
19. Lewis MA. Butterfield R. Antecedents and reactions to healthrelated social control. Pers Soc Psych Bull. 2005; 31: 416-427. (Pubitemid 40687383)
20. Lewis MA, Rook KS. Social control in personal relationships: Impact on health behaviors and psychological distress. Health Psychol. 1991; 18: 63-71.
21. Rakowski W, Ehrich B, Dube CE. Screening mammography and constructs from the transtheoretical model: Associations using two definitions of stage of adoption. Ann Behav Med. 1996; 18: 91-100. (Pubitemid 26403676)
22. Sharpley CE., Rogers HJ. Preliminary validation of the Abbreviated Spanier Dyadic Adjustment scale: Some psychometric data regarding a screening test of marital adjustment. Educ Psych Meas. 1984; 44: 1045-1050.
23. Kenny DA, Kashy DA, Cook WL. Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford Press: 2006.
24. Miller GR, Bostner F. Persuasion in personal relationships. In: S. Duck, ed. A handbook of personal relationships New York: Wiley; 1988: 275-288.
25. Cutrona C. Social support in couples. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1996.
26. Gregory TA,Wilson C, Duncan A, Turnbull D, Cole SR, Young G. Demographic, social cognitive and social ecological predictors of intention and participation in screening for colorectal cancer. BMC Pub Health. 2011; 11: 38.
27. Power E, Van Jaarsveld C, McCaffery K, Miles A, Atkin W, Wardle J. Understanding intentions and action in colorectal cancer screening. Ann Beh Med. 2008; 35: 285-294.
28. Ajzen I., Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1980.
29. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.
30. Krosnick, J, Chang, L. A comparison of the random digit dialing telephone survey methodology with internet survey methodology as implemented by Knowledge Networks and Harris Interactive. In: Conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. 2001: Montreal, Canada.
31. Dennis, M. Are internet panels creating professional respondents? The benefits of online panels far outweigh the potential for panel effects. Marketing Research. 2001; 13(Summer): 34-38.