A heuristics approach to understanding cancer risk perception: Contributions from judgment and decision-making research

Annals of Behavioral Medicine - 2006
Ellen Peters1, Kevin D. McCaul2, Michael Stefanek3, Wendy Nelson3
1Decision Research, Eugene
2North Dakota State University USA
3National Cancer Institute, USA

Tóm tắt

Background: The likelihood judgments that people make about their risks for cancer have important implications. At the individual level, risk estimates guide protective actions, such as cancer screening. However, at the extremes, exaggerated risk judgments can also lead to anxiety that degrades quality of life or to aggressive self-protective actions that are unwarranted given the objective risks. At the policy level, risk judgments may serve as an indicator of societal perceptions of the “war” against cancer. Using risk judgments, the public expresses its belief about whether we are winning.Purpose: We present theoretical perspectives from judgment and decision making, illustrate how they can explain some of the existing empirical findings in the cancer risk literature, and describe additional predictions that have not yet been tested.Conclusions: Overall, we suggest that theories from the judgment and decision-making perspective offer a potentially powerful view for understanding and improving risk judgments for cancer and other diseases.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

McCaul KD, Tulloch HE: Cancer screening decisions. Cancer risk communication: What we know and what we need to learn.Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs. 1999,25:52–58.

Weinstein ND: The precaution adoption process.Health Psychology. 1988,7:355–386.

Edwards A, Unigwe S, Elwyn G, Hood K: Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about entering screening programs.The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2003, Art No. CD001865. DOI: 10.1002/14651858. CD001865.

Gattellari M, Butow P, Tattersal MH: Sharing decisions in cancer care.Social Science & Medicine. 2001,52:1865–1878.

Parascandola M, Hawkins J, Danis M: Patient autonomy and the challenge of clinical uncertainty.Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. 2001,12:245–264.

Trumbo CW: Public requests for cancer cluster investigations: A survey of state health departments.American Journal of Public Health. 2000,90:1300–1302.

National Cancer Institute:How the Public Perceives, Processes, and Interprets Risk Information: Findings From Focus Group Research With the General Public. Bethesda, MD: Office of Cancer Communications, 1998.

Croyle RT, Lerman C: Risk communication in genetic testing for cancer susceptibility.Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs. 1999,25:59–66.

Reyna VF, Lloyd FJ, Whalen P: Genetic testing and medical decision making.Archives of Internal Medicine. 2001,161:2406–2408.

Kash KM, Holland JD, Halper MS, Miller DG: Psychological distress and surveillance behaviors of women with a family history of breast cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1992,84:24–30.

Erblich J, Bovbjerg DH, Valdimarsdottir HB: Psychological distress, health beliefs, and frequency of breast self-examination.Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 2000,23:277–292.

Slovic P: The construction of preference.American Psychologist. 1995,50:364–371.

Epstein S: Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious.American Psychologist. 1994,49:709–724.

Kahneman D: A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality.American Psychologist. 2003,58:697–720.

Loewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch ES: Risk as feelings.Psychological Bulletin. 2001,127:267–286.

Reventlow S, Hvas AC, Tulinius C: “In really great danger …”: The concept of risk in general practice.Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care. 2001,19:71–75.

Wilson TD, Dunn DS, Kraft D, Lisle DJ: Introspection, attitude change, and attitude-behavior consistency: The disruptive effects of explaining why we feel the way we do.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 1989,22:287–343.

Peters E, Finucane ML, MacGregor DG, Slovic P: The bearable lightness of aging: Judgment and decision processes in older adults. In National Research Council, Committee on Future Directions for Cognitive Research on Aging, Stern PC, Carstensen LL (eds),The Aging Mind: Opportunities in Cognitive Research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000, 144–165.

Murphy ST, Zajonc RB: Affect, cognition, and awareness: Affective priming with optimal and suboptimal stimulus exposures.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1993,64:723–739.

Damasio AR:Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Avon, 1994.

Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG: Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality.Risk Analysis. 2004,24:1–12.

Fiandt K, Pullen CH, Walker SN: Actual and perceived risk for chronic illness in rural older women.Clinical Excellence for Nurse Practitioners. 1999,3:105–115.

Rottenstreich Y, Hsee CK: Money, kisses, and electric shocks: On the affective psychology of risk.Psychological Science. 2001,12:185–190.

Watson M, Lloyd S, Davidson J, et al.: The impact of genetic counseling on risk perception and mental health in women with a family history of breast cancer.British Journal of Cancer. 1999,79:868–874.

Kraus N, Malmfors T, Slovic P: Intuitive toxicology: Expert and lay judgments of chemical risks.Risk Analysis. 1992,12:215–232.

Slovic P, Monahan J, MacGregor DG: Violence risk assessment and risk communication: The effects of using actual cases, providing instructions, and employing probability vs. frequency formats.Law and Human Behavior. 2000,24:271–296.

Dillard AJ, McCaul KD, Kelso PD, Klein WMP: Resisting good news: Reactions to breast cancer risk communication.Health Communication (in press).

Hopwood P: Breast cancer risk perception: What do we know and understand?Breast Cancer Research. 2000,2:387–391.

Lipkus IM, Biradavolu M, Fenn K, Keller P, Rimer BK: Informing women about their breast cancer risks: Truth and consequences.Health Communication. 2001,13:205–226.

Edwards W: Conservatism in human information processing. In Kleinmuntz B (ed),Formal Representation of Human Judgment. New York: Wiley, 1968, 17–52.

Millar MG, Tesser A: The effects of affective-cognitive consistency and thought on the attitude-behavior relation.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1989,25:189–202.

Johnson EJ, Tversky A: Representations of perceptions of risk.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 1984,113:55–70.

Loewenstein GF, Schkade D: Wouldn’t it be nice? Predicting future feelings. In Diener E, Schwartz N, Kahneman D (eds),Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1999, 85–105.

Tversky A, Kahneman D: Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment.Psychological Review. 1983,90:293–315.

Gerend MA, Aiken LS, West SG, Erchull MJ: Beyond medical risk: Investigating the psychological factors underlying women’s perceptions of susceptibility to breast cancer, heart disease, and osteoporosis.Health Psychology. 2004,23:247–258.

Viscusi WK:Smoking: Making the Risky Decision. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Strecher VJ, Kreuter MW, Kobrin SC: Do cigarette smokers have unrealistic perceptions of their heart attack, cancer, and stroke risks?Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 1995,18:45–54.

Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Black WC, Welch HG: Women’s perceptions of breast cancer risk: How you ask matters.Medical Decision Making. 1999,19:221–229.

Slovic P: What does it mean to know a cumulative risk? Adolescents’ perceptions of short-term and long-term consequences of smoking.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 2000,13:259–266.

Tversky A, Kahneman D: Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases.Science. 1974,185:1124–1131.

O’Connor A: Finding the fact: Myth about lung cancer can be deadly.New York Times. 2003, October 7, p. F5.

Lerman C, Lustbader E, Rimer BK, et al.: Effects of individualized breast cancer risk counseling: A randomized trial.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1995,87:286–292.

McCaul KD, Branstetter AD, O’Donnell SM, Jacobson K, Quinlan KB: A descriptive study of breast cancer worry.Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 1998,21:565–579.

Christie T: The health files: Doctor’s office: Men’s last stop on ride of pain.The Register-Guard. 2003, December 15, p. B1.

Cram P, Fendrick AM, Inadomi J, et al.: The impact of a celebrity promotional campaign on the use of colon cancer screening.Archives of Internal Medicine. 2003,163:1601–1605.

Borgida E, Nisbett RE: The differential impact of abstract vs. concrete information on decisions.Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1977,7:258–271.

Rottenstreich Y, Tversky A: Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: Advances in support theory.Psychological Review. 1997,104:406–415.

Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S: Fault trees: Sensitivity of estimated failure probabilities to problem representation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1978,4:330–344.

Slovic P: Rejoinder: The perils of Viscusi’s analyses of smoking risk perceptions.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 2000,13:273–276.

Windschitl PD: Judging the accuracy of a likelihood judgment: The case of smoking risk.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 2002,15:19–35.

Reyna VF, Adam MB: Fuzzy-trace theory, risk communication, and product labeling in sexually transmitted diseases.Risk Analysis. 2003,23:325–341.

Strack F, Mussweiler T: Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1997,73:437–446.

Wilson TD, Houston C, Etling KM, Brekke N: A new look at anchoring effects: Basic anchoring and its antecedents.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 1996,125:387–402.

Northcraft GB, Neal MA: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions.Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes. 1987,39:84–97.

Fischhoff B, Bruine de Bruin W: Fifty-fifty = 50%?Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 1999,12:149–163.

Weinstein ND: What does it mean to understand a risk? Evaluating risk comprehension.Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs. 1999,25:15–20.

Peters E, Slovic P, Hibbard J, Tusler M: Why worry? Worry, risk perceptions, and willingness to act to reduce errors.Health Psychology (in press).

Kreuter MW: Dealing with competing and conflicting risks in cancer communication.Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs. 1999,25:27–35.

Kreuter MW, Strecher VJ: Changing inaccurate perceptions of health risk: Results from a randomized trial.Health Psychology. 1995,14:56–63.

Strecher VJ, Champion VL, Rosenstock IW: The health belief model and health behavior. In Gochman DS (ed),Handbook of Health Behavior Research I: Personal and Social Determinants. New York: Plenum, 1997, 71–91.

Lipkus IM, Green LG, Marcus A: Manipulating perceptions of colorectal cancer threat: Implications for screening intentions and behavior.Journal of Health Communication. 2003,8:213–228.

Slovic P: Perception of risk.Science. 1987,236:280–285.

Hibbard JH, Peters E: Supporting informed consumer health care decisions: Data presentation approaches that facilitate the use of information in choice.Annual Review of Public Health. 2003,24:413–433.

Stefanek M, Helzlsouer K, Wilcox P: Predictors of and satisfaction with bilateral prophylactic mastectomy.Preventive Medicine. 1995, 24:412–419.

Stefanek M, Hartmann L, Nelson W: Risk-reduction mastectomy: Clinical issues and research needs.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2001,93:1297–1306.

Hartmann L, Schaid DJ, Woods JE, et al.: Efficacy of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with a family history of breast cancer.New England Journal of Medicine. 1999,340:77–84.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Thông tin tác giả