Literature DB >> 18066920

What do people think about when answering questionnaires to assess unrealistic optimism about skin cancer? A think aloud study.

David P French1, David Hevey.   

Abstract

There is little information concerning what people think about when completing questionnaires that assess perceptions of risk, and even less for questionnaires assessing unrealistic optimism. The thoughts of 40 participants who displayed unrealistic optimism about risks of skin cancer were elicited using think aloud methods, when completing both direct and indirect ratings of unrealistic optimism. The most common thoughts overall concerned exposure to the sun, and features such as skin colouring. Thoughts concerning prevalence, reasons for risky behaviour and admissions of ignorance were more common for indirect measures of unrealistic optimism than for direct measures. The direct unrealistic optimism measures yielded more optimistic ratings for those participants who did not mention symptoms or signs of skin damage, and those who mentioned thoughts about prevalence. Participants seem to be drawing upon different sources of information when completing superficially similar direct and indirect measures of unrealistic optimism, which may explain why these measures are usually only modestly associated. People do not seem to think about numerical probabilities when estimating risk, but instead appear to focus on issues such as exposure to risk, and concrete bodily symptoms and signs. This may at least partially explain why attempts to influence behaviour by providing probabilistic information are generally unsuccessful.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18066920     DOI: 10.1080/13548500701243959

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Health Med        ISSN: 1354-8506            Impact factor:   2.423


  9 in total

1.  Personal attributions for melanoma risk in melanoma-affected patients and family members.

Authors:  Jennifer Hay; Marco DiBonaventura; Raymond Baser; Nancy Press; Jeanne Shoveller; Deborah Bowen
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2010-09-01

2.  Comparative Optimism: Relative Risk Perception and Behavioral Response to Lead Exposure.

Authors:  Bernabas Wolde; Pankaj Lal; Melissa Harclerode; Alessandra Rossi
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Specifying Future Behavior When Assessing Risk Perceptions: Implications for Measurement and Theory.

Authors:  Erika A Waters; Nicole Ackermann; Courtney S Wheeler
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Comparative optimism among patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) is associated with fewer adverse clinical events 12 months later.

Authors:  David Hevey; Hannah M McGee; John H Horgan
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2012-12-29

5.  Physical activity: the relative associations with cognitive and affective risk beliefs.

Authors:  Eva Janssen; Erika A Waters
Journal:  Psychol Health       Date:  2019-04-23

6.  Dismissing "Don't Know" Responses to Perceived Risk Survey Items Threatens the Validity of Theoretical and Empirical Behavior-Change Research.

Authors:  Erika A Waters; Marc T Kiviniemi; Jennifer L Hay; Heather Orom
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2021-11-23

7.  Don't know responses to cognitive and affective risk perception measures: Exploring prevalence and socio-demographic moderators.

Authors:  Eva Janssen; Philippe Verduyn; Erika A Waters
Journal:  Br J Health Psychol       Date:  2018-02-02

Review 8.  The assessment of depression in people with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review of psychometric validation studies.

Authors:  Daniel Hind; Daphne Kaklamanou; Dan Beever; Rosie Webster; Ellen Lee; Michael Barkham; Cindy Cooper
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2016-08-04       Impact factor: 3.630

9.  Insights into the Slow Uptake of Residential Lead Paint Remediation Funds: A Lancaster, Pennsylvania, Case Study.

Authors:  Margaret Cherney; Sarabeth Erdman; Madeline Kuon; Nicholas Shupin; Najeda Regis; Emma Fitzelle-Jones; Kylie Givler; Susan Baldrige; Harriet Okatch
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-01-14       Impact factor: 3.390

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.