Why are Tailored Messages More Effective? A Multiple Mediation Analysis of a Breast Cancer Screening Intervention

Journal of Communication

Volumn 62, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 851-868

  Jensen, Jakob D ^a   King, Andy J ^b   Carcioppolo, Nick ^c   Davis, Lashara ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^c MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER; COMMUNICATION; HEALTH RISK; RESEARCH; SOFTWARE; WOMENS HEALTH;

EID: 84867311092     PISSN: 00219916     EISSN: 14602466     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01668.x     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-500. doi: 10.1348/014466601164939
2. Armstrong, K., Weber, B., Ubel, P. A., Peters, N., Holmes, J., & Schwartz, J. S. (2005). Individualized survival curves improve satisfaction with cancer risk management decisions in women with BRCA1/2 mutations. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23, 9319-9328. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.119
3. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
4. Booth-Butterfield, S., & Welbourne, J. (2002). The elaboration likelihood model: It's impact on persuasion theory and research. In J. P. Dilliard & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 155-173). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Bull, F. C., Holt, C. L., Kreuter, M. W., Clark, E. M., & Scharff, D. (2001). Understanding the effects of printed health education materials: Which features lead to which outcomes? Journal of Health Communication, 6, 265-279. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.5.598
6. Campbell, D. E., & Wright, R. T. (2008). Shut-up I don't care: Understanding the role of relevance and interactivity on customer attitudes toward repetitive online advertising. Journal of Electronic Consumer Research, 9, 62-76.
7. Champion, V. (1999). Revised susceptibility, benefits, and barriers scale for mammography screening. Research in Nursing & Health, 22, 341-348. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X
8. Champion, V., Skinner, C. S., Hui, S., Monahan, P., Juliar, B., Daggy, J., & Menon, U. (2007). The effect of telephone versus print tailoring for mammography adherence. Patient Education & Counseling, 65(3), 416-423. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.09.014
9. Champion, V., Skinner, C. S., & Menon, U. (2005). Development of a self-efficacy scale for mammography. Research in Nursing & Health, 28, 329-336. doi: 10.1002/nur.20088
10. Cho, H., & Boster, F. J. (2008). First and third person perceptions on anti-drug ads among adolescents. Communication Research, 35, 169-189. doi: 10.1177/0093650207313158
11. Davis, R. E., & Resnicow, K. (2011). The cultural variance framework for tailoring health messages. In H. Cho (Ed.), Health communication message design: Theory and practice (pp. 115-136). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
12. DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13. Dijkstra, A. (2008). The psychology of tailoring-ingredients in computer-tailored persuasion. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 765-784. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00081.x
14. Doubeni, C. A., Field, T. S., Ulcickas, Y. M., Yood, M., Quessenberry, C. P., Fouayzi, H., et al. (2006). Patterns and predictors of mammography utilization among breast cancer survivors. Cancer, 106, 2482-2488. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21893
15. Fishbein, M., Hall-Jamieson, K., Zimmer, E., von Haeften, I., & Nabi, R. (2002). Avoiding the boomerang: The need for experimental tests of the relative effectiveness of anti-drug public service announcements prior to their use in a national campaign. American Journal of Public Health, 92, 238-245. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.92.2.238
16. Gail, M. H., Brinton, L. A., Byar, D. P., Corle, D. K., Green, S. B., Shairer, C., et al. (1989). Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 81, 1879-1886. doi: 10.1093/jnci/81.24.1879
17. Gail, M. H., Constantino, J. P., Pee, D., Bondy, M., Newman, L., Selvan, M., et al. (2007). Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in African American women. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 99, 1782-1792. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djm223
18. Haugh, S., Meyer, C., Ulbricht, S., Gross, B., Rumpf, H., & John, U. (2010). Need for cognition as a predictor and a moderator of outcome in a tailored letters smoking intervention. Health Psychology, 29, 367-373. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.5.598
19. Hawkins, R. P., Kreuter, M., Resnicow, K., Fishbein, M., & Dijkstra, A. (2008). Understanding tailoring in communicating about health. Health Education Research, 23, 454-466.
20. Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76, 408-420. doi: 10.1080/03637750903310360
21. Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/.
22. Hesse, B. W., Ahern, D. K., & Woods, S. S. (2011). Nudging best practice: the HITECH act and behavioral medicine. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 1, 175-181. doi: 10.1007/s13142-010-0001-3
23. Jemal, A., Siegel, R., Xu, J., & Ward, E. (2010). Cancer statistics, 2010. CA: A Journal for Clinicians. doi: 10.3322/caac.20073
24. Kim, N. Y., & Sundar, S. S. (2010). Relevance to the rescue: Can "smart ads" reduce negative response to online ad clutter? Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 87, 346-362. doi: 10.1177/107769901008700208
25. King, A. J., Jensen, J. D., Davis, L. A., & Carcioppolo, N. (in press). Perceived visual informativeness (PVI): Construct and scale development to assess visual health information in printed materials. Journal of Health Communication.
26. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Alter, S. (2007). Sex-segregated news consumption: Origins of gender-typed patterns of Americans' selective exposure to news topics. Journal of Communication, 57, 739-758. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00366.x
27. Ko, L. K., Campbell, M. K., Lewis, M. A., Earp, J. A., & DeVellis, B. (2011). Information processes mediate the effect of a health communication intervention on fruit and vegetable consumption. Journal of Health Communication, 16, 282-299. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2010.532294
28. Krebs, P., Prochaska, J. O., & Rossi, J. S. (2010). A meta-analysis of computer-tailored interventions for health behavior change. Preventive Medicine, 51, 214-221. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.06.004
29. Kreuter, M. W., Farrell, D., Olevitch, L., & Brennan, L. (2000). Tailoring health messages: Customizing communication with computer technology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Kreuter, M. W., Strecher, V. J., & Glassman, B. (1999). One size does not fit all: The case for tailoring print materials. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 21, 276-283.
31. Kreuter, M. W., & Wray, R. J. (2003). Tailored and targeted health communication: Strategies for enhancing information relevance. American Journal of Health Behavior, 27, S227-S232. doi: 10.1177/1090198102251021
32. Lipkus, I. M. (2007). Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: Suggested best practices and future recommendations. Medical Decision Making, 27, 696-713. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07307271
33. Manne, S., Jacobsen, P. B., Ming, M. E., Winkel, G., Dessureault, S., & Lessin, S. R. (2010). Tailored versus generic interventions for skin cancer risk reduction for family members of melanoma patients. Health Psychology, 29, 583-593. doi: 10.1037/a0021387
34. National Cancer Institute. (2011). Breast cancer risk assessment tool. National Cancer Institute. Retrieved from http://www.cancer.gov/bcrisktool/.
35. Noar, S. M., Benac, C. N., & Harris, M. S. (2007). Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychological Bulletin, 133(4), 673-693. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.673
36. Noar, S. M., Harrington, N. G., & Aldrich, R. A. (2009). The role of message tailoring in the development of persuasive health communication messages. Communication Yearbook, 33, 72-133.
37. Noar, S. M., Pierce, L. B., & Black, H. G. (2010). Can computer-mediated interventions change theoretical mediators of safer sex? A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 36, 261-297. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01376.x
38. O'Keefe, D. J. (2003). Message properties, mediating states, and manipulation checks: Claims, evidence, and data analysis in experimental persuasive message effects research. Communication Theory, 13, 251-274. doi: 10.1093/ct/13.3.251
39. Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1999). The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 41-72). New York: Guilford.
40. Rakowski, W., Dube, C. E., Marcus, B. H., Prochaska, J. O., Velicer, W. F., & Abrams, D. A. (1992). Assessing elements of women's decisions about mammography. Health Psychology, 11, 111-118.
41. Resnicow, K., Davis, R., Zhang, N., Strecher, V., Tolsma, D., Calvi, J., et al. (2009). Tailoring a fruit and vegetable intervention on ethnic identity: Results of a randomized study. Health Psychology, 28, 394-403. doi: 10.1037/a0015217
42. Rimer, B. K., & Kreuter, M. W. (2006). Advancing tailored health communication: A persuasion and message effects perspective. Journal of Communication, 56, S184-S201. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00289.x
43. Rockhill, B., Spiegelman, D., Byrne, C., Hunter, D. J., & Colditz, G. (2001). Validation of the Gail et al. model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 93, 358-366. doi: 10.1093/jnci/93.5.358
44. Sheeran, P., & Abraham, C. (2003). Mediator of moderators: Temporal stability of intention and intention-behavior relation. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 205-215. doi: 10.1177/0146167202239046
45. Skinner, C. S., Strecher, V. J., & Hospers, H. (1994). Physicians' recommendations for mammography: Do tailored messages make a difference? American Journal of Public Health, 84, 43-49. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.84.1.43
46. Sohl, S. J., & Moyer, A. (2007). Tailored interventions to promote mammography screening: A meta-analytic review. Preventive Medicine, 45, 252-261. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.06.009
47. Stewart, S. L., Rakowski, W., & Pasick, R. J. (2009). Behavioral constructs and mammography in five ethnic groups. Health Education & Behavior, 36(Suppl. 5), 36S-54S. doi: 10.1177/1090198109338918
48. Strecher, V. J., Shiffman, S., & West, R. (2006). Moderators and mediators of a Web-based computer-tailored smoking cessation program among nicotine patch users. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 8, S95-S101. doi: 10.1080/14622200601039444
49. Sundar, S. S., & Marathe, S. S. (2010). Personalization versus customization: The importance of agency, privacy, and power usage. Human Communication Research, 36, 298-322. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01377.x
50. Tam, K. Y., & Ho, S. Y. (2006). Understanding the impact of web personalization on user information processing and decision outcomes. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 30, 865-890.
51. Updegraff, J. A., Sherman, D. K., Luyster, F. S., & Mann, T. L. (2007). The effects of message quality and congruency on perceptions of tailored health communications. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 249-257. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.01.007
52. Webb, T. L., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 249-268. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.132.2.249