Chao Xu Peh1, Ee Heok Kua1,2, Rathi Mahendran3,4,5. 1. Department of Psychological Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 2. Department of Psychological Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. 3. Department of Psychological Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. pcmrathi@nus.edu.sg. 4. Department of Psychological Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. pcmrathi@nus.edu.sg. 5. Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, Singapore. pcmrathi@nus.edu.sg.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Patients newly diagnosed with cancer are often confronted with feelings of uncertainty and life threat. A significant proportion may report impairments in psychosocial well-being. Previous studies examining protective psychological factors such as hope and emotion regulation (ER) have yet to investigate these processes concurrently within a common self-regulation framework and/or focus on newly diagnosed patients. The present study aimed to examine how hope and ER may relate to psychosocial outcomes of patients newly diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: The present study used a cross-sectional design with self-report questionnaires. Participants were newly diagnosed patients (N = 101) recruited from three cancer therapy clinics in a hospital. Patients completed measures of hope, ER (cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression), and psychosocial well-being (life satisfaction and negative affectivity). RESULTS: Findings showed that (1) hope and reappraisal, but not suppression, were associated with well-being and (2) the interaction between hope and reappraisal was associated with well-being; reappraisal was not associated with well-being in high hope patients, while high reappraisal was associated with better well-being in low hope patients. CONCLUSION: Individual differences in hope and reappraisal appeared to be associated with psychosocial outcomes in newly diagnosed cancer patients. Hopeful thinking appeared to benefit patients' psychosocial well-being. In addition, an interaction effect between hope and reappraisal suggested that reappraisal as an ER strategy may be particularly adaptive for patients with low hope.
PURPOSE: Patients newly diagnosed with cancer are often confronted with feelings of uncertainty and life threat. A significant proportion may report impairments in psychosocial well-being. Previous studies examining protective psychological factors such as hope and emotion regulation (ER) have yet to investigate these processes concurrently within a common self-regulation framework and/or focus on newly diagnosed patients. The present study aimed to examine how hope and ER may relate to psychosocial outcomes of patients newly diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: The present study used a cross-sectional design with self-report questionnaires. Participants were newly diagnosed patients (N = 101) recruited from three cancer therapy clinics in a hospital. Patients completed measures of hope, ER (cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression), and psychosocial well-being (life satisfaction and negative affectivity). RESULTS: Findings showed that (1) hope and reappraisal, but not suppression, were associated with well-being and (2) the interaction between hope and reappraisal was associated with well-being; reappraisal was not associated with well-being in high hope patients, while high reappraisal was associated with better well-being in low hope patients. CONCLUSION: Individual differences in hope and reappraisal appeared to be associated with psychosocial outcomes in newly diagnosed cancer patients. Hopeful thinking appeared to benefit patients' psychosocial well-being. In addition, an interaction effect between hope and reappraisal suggested that reappraisal as an ER strategy may be particularly adaptive for patients with low hope.
Authors: A L Stanton; S Danoff-Burg; C L Cameron; M Bishop; C A Collins; S B Kirk; L A Sworowski; R Twillman Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2000-10
Authors: Mark T Hegel; Caroline P Moore; E Dale Collins; Stephen Kearing; Karen L Gillock; Raine L Riggs; Kate F Clay; Tim A Ahles Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-12-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Lila Finney Rutten; Bradford W Hesse; Richard P Moser; Kevin D McCaul; Alexander J Rothman Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2009 Impact factor: 2.037