Literature DB >> 30596830

Effects of Media Exposure to Conflicting Information About Mammography: Results From a Population-based Survey Experiment.

Rebekah H Nagler1, Marco C Yzer1, Alexander J Rothman2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although there is growing theoretical and empirical support for the proposition that media exposure to conflicting health information negatively influences public understanding and behavior, few studies have causally linked exposure to conflict with undesirable outcomes. Such outcomes might be particularly likely in the context of mammography, given widespread media attention to conflicting recommendations about the age at and frequency with which average-risk women should be screened for breast cancer.
PURPOSE: The current study tests whether exposure to conflicting information about mammography negatively influences women's affective and cognitive responses and examines whether effects vary by socioeconomic position.
METHODS: We conducted an online survey experiment in 2016 with a population-based sample of U.S. women aged 35-55 (N = 1,474). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions that differed in the level of conflict about mammography presented in a news story (no, low, medium, or high conflict), stratifying by poverty level.
RESULTS: Greater exposure to conflict increased women's negative emotional responses to the story they read, their confusion about and backlash toward cancer prevention recommendations and research, and their ambivalence about mammography and other types of cancer screening, though ambivalence leveled off at high levels of exposure. There was little evidence that effects varied across socioeconomic position.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings add to the growing evidence base documenting undesirable outcomes of exposure to conflicting health information. Future research should examine whether the negative affective and cognitive responses observed translate into behavior, which could have implications for both health campaigns and patient-provider communication. © Society of Behavioral Medicine 2018. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Conflicting health information; Health communication; Mammography; Population-based survey experiment; Socioeconomic position

Year:  2019        PMID: 30596830      PMCID: PMC6735717          DOI: 10.1093/abm/kay098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Behav Med        ISSN: 0883-6612


  40 in total

1.  News media coverage of screening mammography for women in their 40s and tamoxifen for primary prevention of breast cancer.

Authors:  Lisa M Schwartz; Steven Woloshin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-06-19       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  The mammography screening controversy: who and what is heard in the press?

Authors:  Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Sonya Charles
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2003-09

3.  A meta-analysis of the effect of mediated health communication campaigns on behavior change in the United States.

Authors:  Leslie B Snyder; Mark A Hamilton; Elizabeth W Mitchell; James Kiwanuka-Tondo; Fran Fleming-Milici; Dwayne Proctor
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2004

4.  "Fundamental causes" of social inequalities in mortality: a test of the theory.

Authors:  Jo C Phelan; Bruce G Link; Ana Diez-Roux; Ichiro Kawachi; Bruce Levin
Journal:  J Health Soc Behav       Date:  2004-09

5.  A qualitative study of how women make meaning of contradictory media messages about the risks of eating fish.

Authors:  Jennifer E Vardeman; Linda Aldoory
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2008

6.  The public's response to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's 2009 recommendations on mammography screening.

Authors:  Linda B Squiers; Debra J Holden; Suzanne E Dolina; Annice E Kim; Carla M Bann; Jeanette M Renaud
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 5.043

7.  Perceived ambiguity about screening mammography recommendations: association with future mammography uptake and perceptions.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; Sarah C Kobrin; William M P Klein; William W Davis; Michael Stefanek; Steven H Taplin
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Perceived ambiguity about cancer prevention recommendations: associations with cancer-related perceptions and behaviours in a US population survey.

Authors:  Paul K J Han; Richard P Moser; William M P Klein
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Another round in the mammography controversy.

Authors:  Helen I Meissner; Barbara K Rimer; William W Davis; Ellen J Eisner; Ilene C Siegler
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.681

View more
  13 in total

1.  Healthy or not? The impact of conflicting health-related information on attentional resources.

Authors:  Patrick V Barnwell; Erick J Fedorenko; Richard J Contrada
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2021-09-18

2.  Effects of Prior Exposure to Conflicting Health Information on Responses to Subsequent Unrelated Health Messages: Results from a Population-Based Longitudinal Experiment.

Authors:  Rebekah H Nagler; Rachel I Vogel; Sarah E Gollust; Marco C Yzer; Alexander J Rothman
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2022-05-18

3.  The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation.

Authors:  Benoît Béchard; Joachim Kimmerle; Justin Lawarée; Pierre-Oliver Bédard; Sharon E Straus; Mathieu Ouimet
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-05-20       Impact factor: 4.614

4.  Willingness to decrease mammogram frequency among women at low risk for hereditary breast cancer.

Authors:  Yue Guan; Eric Nehl; Ioana Pencea; Celeste M Condit; Cam Escoffery; Cecelia A Bellcross; Colleen M McBride
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-07-03       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Caught in the Crossfire: How Contradictory Information and Norms on Social Media Influence Young Women's Intentions to Receive HPV Vaccination in the United States and China.

Authors:  Shuya Pan; Di Zhang; Jingwen Zhang
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-12-03

6.  Effects of politicized media coverage: Experimental evidence from the HPV vaccine and COVID-19.

Authors:  Erika Franklin Fowler; Rebekah H Nagler; Darshana Banka; Sarah E Gollust
Journal:  Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 3.622

7.  Prevalence and Potential Consequences of Exposure to Conflicting Information about Mammography: Results from Nationally-Representative Survey of U.S. Adults.

Authors:  Sarah E Gollust; Erika Franklin Fowler; Rebekah H Nagler
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2021-07-14

8.  Will E-Cigarette Modified Risk Messages with a Nicotine Warning Polarize Smokers' Beliefs about the Efficacy of Switching Completely to E-Cigarettes in Reducing Smoking-Related Risks?

Authors:  Bo Yang; Juliana L Barbati; Yunjin Choi
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-06-05       Impact factor: 3.390

9.  Public perceptions of conflicting information surrounding COVID-19: Results from a nationally representative survey of U.S. adults.

Authors:  Rebekah H Nagler; Rachel I Vogel; Sarah E Gollust; Alexander J Rothman; Erika Franklin Fowler; Marco C Yzer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-21       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Israeli news media coverage of COVID-19 and use of cannabis and tobacco: A case study of inconsistent risk communication.

Authors:  Sharon R Sznitman; Nehama Lewis
Journal:  Int J Drug Policy       Date:  2022-03-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.