Exploring dispositional tendencies to seek online information about direct-to-consumer genetic testing

Translational Behavioral Medicine

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 392-400

  Paquin, Ryan S ^a,b   Richards, Adam S ^a,c   Koehly, Laura M ^a   McBride, Colleen M ^a  

^a NATIONAL HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Direct to consumer genetic tests; Individual differences; Information seeking; Perceived risk

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIRECT TO CONSUMER GENETIC TESTING; FEMALE; GENETIC DISORDER; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; HUMAN; INFORMATION SEEKING; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; NEUROSIS; NORMAL HUMAN; ONLINE SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

EID: 84871514411     PISSN: 18696716     EISSN: 16139860     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13142-012-0159-y     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Caulfield T, Ries NM, Ray PN, Shuman C, Wilson B. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: good, bad or benign? Clin Genet. 2010; 77: 101-105.
2. Hogarth S, Javitt G, Melzer D. The current landscape for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: legal, ethical, and policy issues. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2008; 9: 161-182.
3. Gollust SE, Hull SC, Wilfond BS. Limitations of direct-to-consumer advertising for clinical genetic testing. JAMA. 2002; 288: 1762-1767.
4. Hudson K, Javitt G, Burke W, Byers P. ASHG Social Issues Committee ASHG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the United States. Am J Hum Genet. 2007; 81: 635-637.
5. Lerman C, Narod S, Shulman K, et al. BRCA1 testing in families with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer: a prospective study of patient decision making and outcomes. JAMA. 1996; 275: 1885-1892.
6. McBride CM, Wade CH, Kaphingst KA. Consumers' views of direct-to-consumer genetic information. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2010; 11: 427-446.
7. Berg C, Fryer-Edwards K. The ethical challenges of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. J Bus Ethics. 2008; 77: 17-31.
8. Marteau TM, Croyle RT. The new genetics: psychological responses to genetic testing. Br Med J. 1998; 316: 693-696.
9. Claes E, Denayer L, Evers-Kiebooms G, Boogaerts A, Legius E. Predictive testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: motivation, illness representations and short-term psychological impact. Patient Educ Couns. 2004; 55: 265-274.
10. Heshka JT, Palleschi C, Howley H, Wilson B, Wells PS. A systematic review of perceived risks, psychological and behavioral impacts of genetic testing. Genet Med. 2008; 10: 19-32.
11. Genetics and Public Policy Center. Categorized DTC genetic testing companies. http://www. dnapolicy. org/resources/CategorizedDTCGeneticTestingCompanies. pdf. Updated May 28, 2010. Accessed 17 Aug 2010.
12. McBride CM, Alford SH, Reid RJ, Larson EB, Baxevanis AD, Brody LC. Putting science over supposition in the arena of personalized genomics. Nat Genet. 2008; 40: 939-942.
13. Kahlor L. PRISM: a planned risk information seeking model. Health Commun. 2010; 25: 345-356.
14. Bernhardt JM, McClain J, Parrott RL. Online health communication about human genetics: perceptions and preferences of internet users. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2004; 7: 728-733.
15. Griffin R, Dunwoody S, Neuwirth K. Proposed model of the relationship of risk information seeking and processing to the development of preventive behaviors. Environ Res. 1999; 80: 230-245.
16. Eysenck H, Eysenck MW. Personality and Individual Differences: A Natural Science Approach. New York: Plenum; 1985.
17. Costa PT, McCrae RR. Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: the NEO personality inventory. Psychol Assess. 1992; 4: 5-13.
18. Heinström J. Five personality dimensions and their influence on information behaviour. Inf Res. 2003; 9(1). http://InformationR. net/ir/9-1/paper165. html. Accessed 1 Aug 2011.
19. Wallston KA, Maides S, Wallston BS. Health-related information-seeking as a function of health-related locus of control and health value. J Res Pers. 1976; 10: 215-222.
20. Rusting CL. Personality, mood, and cognitive processing of emotional information: three conceptual frameworks. Psychol Bull. 1998; 124: 165-196.
21. Soane E, Chmiel N. Are risk preferences consistent? The influence of decision domain and personality. Pers Individ Dif. 2005; 38: 1781-1791.
22. Watson D, Clark LA. Negative affectivity: the disposition to experience aversive emotional states. Psychol Bull. 1984; 96: 465-490.
23. Flynn KE, Smith MA, Freese J. When do older adults turn to the Internet for health information? Findings from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2006; 21: 1295-1301.
24. MacDonald KB. Effortful control, explicit processing, and the regulation of human evolved predispositions. Psychol Rev. 2008; 115: 1012-1031.
25. Trobst KK, Wiggins JS, Costa PT Jr, Herbst JH, McCrae RR, Masters HL. Personality psychology and problem behaviors: HIV risk and the five-factor model. J Pers. 2000; 68: 1233-1252.
26. Vollrath M, Knowch D, Cassano L. Personality, risky health behaviour, and perceived susceptibility to health risks. Eur J Pers. 1999; 13: 39-50.
27. Kernan JB, Mojena R. Information utilization and personality. J Commun. 1973; 23: 315-327.
28. Finlay K, Finlay T. The relative role of knowledge and innovativeness in determining librarians' attitudes toward and use of the Internet: a structural equation modeling approach. Libr Q. 1996; 66: 59-83.
29. Hashimoto H, Fukuhara S. The influence of locus of control on preferences for information and decision making. Patient Educ Couns. 2004; 55: 236-240.
30. van Zuuren FJ, Wolfs HM. Styles of information seeking under threat: personal and situational aspects of monitoring and blunting. Pers Individ Dif. 1991; 12: 141-149.
31. Wallston KA, Wallston BS, DeVellis R. Development of the multidimensional health locus of control (MHLC) scales. Health Educ Behav. 1978; 6: 160-170.
32. Case D, Andrews JE, Johnson JD, Allard SL. Avoiding versus seeking: the relationship of information seeking to avoidance, blunting, coping, dissonance, and related concepts. J Med Libr Assoc. 2005; 93: 353-362.
33. Hoorens V, Buunk BP. Social comparison of health risks: locus of control, the person-positivity bias, and unrealistic optimism. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1993; 23: 291-302.
34. Abele A, Hermer P. Mood influences on health-related judgments: appraisal of own health versus appraisal of unhealthy behaviours. Eur J Soc Psychol. 1993; 23: 613-625.
35. Johnson JD, Case DO, Andrews JE, Allard SL. Genomics-the perfect information-seeking research problem. J Health Commun. 2005; 10: 323-329.
36. Alford SH, McBride CM, Reid RJ, Larson EB, Baxevanis AD, Brody LC. Participation in genetic testing research varies by social group. Public Health Genomics. 2011; 14: 85-93.
37. McBride CM, Alford SH, Reid RJ, Larson EB, Baxevanis AD, Brody LC. Characteristics of users of online personalized genomic risk assessments: implications for physician-patient interactions. Genet Med. 2009; 11: 582-587.
38. Goldberg LR. A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In: Mervielde I, Deary I, De Fruyt F, Ostendorf F, eds. Personality Psychology in Europe, vol. 7. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press; 1999: 7-28.
39. International Personality Item Pool. The items in each of the preliminary IPIP scales measuring constructs similar to those in the 30 NEO-PI-R facet scales. http://ipip. ori. org/newNEOFacetsKey. htm. Updated January 15, 2007. Accessed 10 Jun 2010.
40. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Erlbaum; 1988.
41. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods. 2008; 40: 879-891.
42. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Indirect: SPSS macro for multiple mediation [Software]. Columbus (OH): The Ohio State University; c2008 [cited 2012 May 27]. Available from: http://www. afhayes. com/public/indirect. sps/.
43. ter Huurne EFJ, Griffin RJ, Gutteling JM. Risk information seeking among US and Dutch residents: an application of the model of risk information seeking and processing. Sci Commun. 2009; 31: 215-237.
44. Case D, Johnson JD, Andrews JE, Allard S, Kelly KM. From two-step flow to the Internet: the changing array of sources for genetics information seeking. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2005; 55: 660-669.
45. DeVellis RF. Scale Development Theory and Applications. London: Sage; 1991.