Literature DB >> 24718657

Mode Effects in Assessing Cancer Worry and Risk Perceptions: Is Social Desirability Bias at Play?

Alexander Persoskie1, Bryan Leyva1, Rebecca A Ferrer1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Risk perceptions and worry are important determinants of health behavior. Despite extensive research on these constructs, it is unknown whether people's self-reports of perceived risk and worry are biased by their concerns about being viewed negatively by others (social desirability).
METHODS: In this study, we examined whether reports of perceived risk and worry about cancer varied across survey modes differing in the salience of social desirability cues. We used data from the National Cancer Institute's 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey, which assessed perceived cancer risk and worry in 1 of 2 survey modes: an interviewer-administered telephone survey (higher likelihood of socially desirable responding; n = 3678) and a self-administered mail survey (lower likelihood of socially desirable responding; n = 3445). Data were analyzed by regressing perceived risk and worry on survey mode and demographic factors.
RESULTS: Analyses showed no effect of survey mode on cancer risk perceptions (B = 0.02, P = 0.55, d = 0.02). However, cancer worry was significantly higher in the self-administered mode than in the interviewer-administered mode (B = 0.24, P < 0.001, d = 0.26). Education moderated this effect, with respondents lower in education exhibiting a stronger mode effect. When cancer worry was dichotomized, the odds of reporting cancer worry were approximately twice as high in the self-administered mode compared with the interviewer-administered mode (OR = 2.13, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: These results bolster the veracity of self-reported cancer risk perceptions. They also suggest that interviewer-administered surveys may underestimate the frequency of cancer worry, particularly for samples lower in socioeconomic status. Studies are needed to test for this effect in clinical contexts.
© The Author(s) 2014.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cancer; perceived risk; social desirability; survey mode; worry

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24718657      PMCID: PMC4192106          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14527173

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  41 in total

1.  Overreporting voting: why it happens and why it matters.

Authors:  R Bernstein; A Chadha; R Montjoy
Journal:  Public Opin Q       Date:  2001

2.  Risk as feelings.

Authors:  G F Loewenstein; E U Weber; C K Hsee; N Welch
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  Associations of perceived risk and worry with cancer health-protective actions: data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS).

Authors:  Richard P Moser; Kevin McCaul; Ellen Peters; Wendy Nelson; Stephen E Marcus
Journal:  J Health Psychol       Date:  2007-01

4.  Women's perceptions of breast cancer risk: how you ask matters.

Authors:  S Woloshin; L M Schwartz; W C Black; H G Welch
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1999 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Influence of social desirability on age differences in self-reports of mood and personality.

Authors:  Andrea Soubelet; Timothy A Salthouse
Journal:  J Pers       Date:  2011-06-20

6.  Relationships among health perceptions vary depending on stage of readiness for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Rebecca A Ferrer; Kara L Hall; David B Portnoy; Bruce S Ling; Paul K J Han; William M P Klein
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.267

Review 7.  The role of cancer worry in cancer screening: a theoretical and empirical review of the literature.

Authors:  Jennifer L Hay; Tamara R Buckley; Jamie S Ostroff
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.894

8.  The Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS): development, design, and dissemination.

Authors:  David E Nelson; Gary L Kreps; Bradford W Hesse; Robert T Croyle; Gordon Willis; Neeraj K Arora; Barbara K Rimer; K V Viswanath; Neil Weinstein; Sara Alden
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct

9.  Perceived cancer risk: why is it lower among nonwhites than whites?

Authors:  Heather Orom; Marc T Kiviniemi; Willie Underwood; Levi Ross; Vickie L Shavers
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-02-16       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Can female adolescents tell whether they will test positive for Chlamydia infection?

Authors:  Wändi Bruine de Bruin; Julie S Downs; Pamela Murray; Baruch Fischhoff
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 2.583

View more
  3 in total

1.  Stability of Organ Donor Designations on Driver's Licenses.

Authors:  N K R Sehgal; C Sullivan; M Figueroa; J A Pencak; J D Thornton
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.066

2.  A Comparison of Web and Telephone Responses From a National HIV and AIDS Survey.

Authors:  Marcella K Jones; Liviana Calzavara; Dan Allman; Catherine A Worthington; Mark Tyndall; James Iveniuk
Journal:  JMIR Public Health Surveill       Date:  2016-07-29

3.  Factors Associated With Cancer Worry Among People Aged 50 or Older, Spain, 2012-2014.

Authors:  Jesús López-Torres Hidalgo; Joseba Rabanales Sotos; María José Simarro Herráez; Monchi Campos Rosa; Jaime López-Torres López; María Pilar Sánchez Ortiz
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2015-12-24       Impact factor: 2.830

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.