Suchergebnisse

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Previous studies found genetic counseling increased participants' knowledge about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). However, most explored knowledge gain in unaffected women and the scale most commonly used does not include items that may be more pertinent to breast cancer (BC) survivors. <b><i>Aims:</i></b> To explore whether genetic counseling impacts BC survivors' knowledge about HBOC and BC survivor-specific information. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The National Center for Human Genome Research Knowledge Scale and 5 additional items specific to BC survivors were tested among BC survivors; before genetic counseling (time 1), 2-3 weeks after genetic counseling (time 2), and 6 months following genetic counseling (time 3). <b><i>Results:</i></b> A statistically significant change in knowledge over time was found. Post hoc analyses revealed statistically significant increases in knowledge between time 1 (median = 7.00) and time 2 (median = 10.00; p < 0.005), and between time 1 and time 3 (median = 9.00; p < 0.005). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Knowledge increased following genetic counseling, but the highest total average score at any time was <70% out of 100%. Additional analyses revealed items with low rates of correct response at all three time points, raising several concerns and the consideration of alternative approaches to measuring knowledge.

Objective. The objective is to examine the scope of health communication media campaign process evaluation methods, findings, and dissemination practices. Data Source. A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature was conducted using database searches. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria. Published studies on process and implementation evaluation of health campaigns with a media component were included. Exclusion criteria included not health, non-empirical, no media campaign, or a focus on other evaluation types. Data Extraction. Articles were assessed for general campaign information, theory use, and details about process evaluation plan and procedures. Data Synthesis. A coding scheme based on 9 process evaluation best practice elements (e.g., fidelity and context) was applied. Process evaluation methods, measures, and reporting themes were synthesized. Results. Among 691 unique records, 46 articles were included. Process evaluation was the main focus for 71.7% of articles, yet only 39.1% reported how process evaluation informed campaign implementation strategy. Articles reported 4.39 elements on average ( SD = 1.99; range 1–9), with reach (87.0%) and recruitment (73.9%) described most frequently, yet reporting was inconsistent. Further, the level of detail in reporting methods, theory, and analysis varied. Conclusions. Process evaluation provides insight about mechanisms and intervening variables that could meaningfully impact interpretations of outcome evaluations; however, process evaluations are less often included in literature. Recommendations for evidence-based process evaluation components to guide evaluation are discussed.

AbstractWhether a loss or gain frame has a persuasive advantage in communicating health risks is a matter of ongoing debate. Findings reported in the literature are mixed, suggesting that framing effects are likely complex and may be influenced by a combination of factors. This study examined reactance as a mediator and dose as a moderator of loss/gain framing effects. Adults (N = 1,039) read framed messages about the health consequences of physical (in)activity in varying message doses (i.e., number of framed statements). Compared to loss frames, gain frames generated more threat to freedom and reactance. Dosage exerted significant influence at the extremes; the one‐dose messages invoked less intentions to exercise compared to the four‐dose messages. Planned contrasts revealed significant frame × dose interactions. Notably, the one‐dose gain‐framed messages triggered significantly more freedom threat and less intentions to engage in physical activity—a situation that changed when the information was loss‐framed or when the dosage was increased.

AbstractPsychological reactance theory posits individuals seek to restore freedom when threatened. Communication scholars have hypothesized persuasive messages can constitute threats to freedom. The current study engages questions about the potential for different forms of narratives in public service announcements (PSAs) to trigger freedom threats by examining responses to a PSA campaign that utilized three forms of narrative (celebrity testimonials, peer testimonials, and accident stories) to decrease adolescent texting and driving intentions. Participants (N = 214) watched anti‐texting and driving narratives, and completed measures of threat to freedom, anger, negative cognition, and attitudes/intentions toward texting/driving. Compared to celebrity/peer testimonial PSAs, accident stories triggered increased anger and, indirectly, decreased intentions to drive safely. The results also suggest the need for continued examination of the best way to model psychological reactance theory, and the value of further research explicating anger as a mechanism of message effects.

Public dissemination of scientific research often focuses on the finding (e.g., nanobombs kill lung cancer) rather than the uncertainty/limitations (e.g., in mice). Adults (n = 880) participated in an experiment where they read a manipulated news report about cancer research (a) that contained either low or high uncertainty (b) that was attributed to the scientists responsible for the research (disclosure condition) or an unaffiliated scientist (dueling condition). Compared to the dueling condition, the disclosure condition triggered less prevention‐focused cancer fatalism and nutritional backlash.