Cultural Worldviews and Perceived Risk of Colon Cancer and Diabetes.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Risk & Society Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1080/13698575.2020.1827142
Xuewei Chen, Heather Orom, Marc T Kiviniemi, Erika A Waters, Elizabeth Schofield, Yuelin Li, Jennifer L Hay
{"title":"Cultural Worldviews and Perceived Risk of Colon Cancer and Diabetes.","authors":"Xuewei Chen,&nbsp;Heather Orom,&nbsp;Marc T Kiviniemi,&nbsp;Erika A Waters,&nbsp;Elizabeth Schofield,&nbsp;Yuelin Li,&nbsp;Jennifer L Hay","doi":"10.1080/13698575.2020.1827142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Individuals with different cultural worldviews conceptualize risks in distinct ways, yet this work has not extended to personal illness risk perception. The purpose of this study was to 1) examine the relationships between two types of cultural worldviews (Hierarchy-Egalitarian; Individualism-Communitarianism) and perceived risk (perceived severity and susceptibility) for diabetes and colon cancer, 2) test whether health literacy modifies the above relationships, and 3) investigate whether trust in government health information functions as a putative mediator of the relations between cultural worldviews and disease perceived risk. We recruited (N=600) participants from a nationally-representative Internet survey panel. Results were weighted so the findings are representative of the general United States population. People with a more hierarchical worldview expressed lower perceived susceptibility to developing both diabetes and colon cancer, and perceived these diseases to be less severe, relative to those with a less hierarchical (more egalitarian) worldview. There was no significant association between individualistic worldview and perceived risk. Health literacy modified the relationships between hierarchical worldview and perceived risk; the associations between hierarchical worldview and lower perceived severity were stronger for those with limited health literacy. We did not observe indirect effects of cultural worldviews on perceived risk through trust in health information from government sources. It may be useful to identify specifically tailored risk communication strategies for people with hierarchical and individualistic worldviews, especially those with limited health literacy, that emphasize their important cultural values. Further research examining cultural components of illness risk perceptions may enhance our understanding of risk-protective behaviors.</p>","PeriodicalId":47341,"journal":{"name":"Health Risk & Society","volume":"22 5-6","pages":"324-345"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13698575.2020.1827142","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Risk & Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2020.1827142","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Individuals with different cultural worldviews conceptualize risks in distinct ways, yet this work has not extended to personal illness risk perception. The purpose of this study was to 1) examine the relationships between two types of cultural worldviews (Hierarchy-Egalitarian; Individualism-Communitarianism) and perceived risk (perceived severity and susceptibility) for diabetes and colon cancer, 2) test whether health literacy modifies the above relationships, and 3) investigate whether trust in government health information functions as a putative mediator of the relations between cultural worldviews and disease perceived risk. We recruited (N=600) participants from a nationally-representative Internet survey panel. Results were weighted so the findings are representative of the general United States population. People with a more hierarchical worldview expressed lower perceived susceptibility to developing both diabetes and colon cancer, and perceived these diseases to be less severe, relative to those with a less hierarchical (more egalitarian) worldview. There was no significant association between individualistic worldview and perceived risk. Health literacy modified the relationships between hierarchical worldview and perceived risk; the associations between hierarchical worldview and lower perceived severity were stronger for those with limited health literacy. We did not observe indirect effects of cultural worldviews on perceived risk through trust in health information from government sources. It may be useful to identify specifically tailored risk communication strategies for people with hierarchical and individualistic worldviews, especially those with limited health literacy, that emphasize their important cultural values. Further research examining cultural components of illness risk perceptions may enhance our understanding of risk-protective behaviors.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
文化世界观与结肠癌和糖尿病的认知风险。
具有不同文化世界观的个体以不同的方式概念化风险,但这项工作尚未扩展到个人疾病风险感知。本研究的目的是:1)检验两种文化世界观(等级平等主义;2)检验健康素养是否改变了上述关系,以及3)调查对政府卫生信息的信任是否作为文化世界观与疾病感知风险之间关系的假定中介。我们从具有全国代表性的网络调查小组中招募(N=600)参与者。结果经过加权处理,因此这些发现能够代表美国的一般人群。与那些等级观念较弱(更平等)的人相比,等级观念较强的人对糖尿病和结肠癌的易感性较低,并且认为这些疾病不那么严重。个人主义世界观与感知风险之间无显著关联。健康素养改变了等级世界观与感知风险之间的关系;等级世界观与较低感知严重性之间的关联在健康素养有限的人群中更为强烈。我们没有观察到文化世界观通过对政府来源的健康信息的信任对感知风险的间接影响。为具有等级和个人主义世界观的人,特别是卫生知识普及程度有限的人,确定特别定制的强调其重要文化价值的风险沟通策略,可能是有用的。进一步研究疾病风险认知的文化成分可能会增强我们对风险保护行为的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
相关文献
An in vitro comparison of quantitative percussion diagnostics with a standard technique for determining the presence of cracks in natural teeth
IF 4.6 2区 医学Journal of Prosthetic DentistryPub Date : 2014-08-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.02.020
Cherilyn G. Sheets DDS , Devin L. Stewart DDS , Jean C. Wu DDS , James C. Earthman PhD
Evaluation of sweating responses in patients with collagen disease using the quantitative sudomotor axon reflex test (QSART): a study protocol for an investigator-initiated, prospective, observational clinical study.
IF 2.9 ACS Applied Bio MaterialsPub Date : 2021-10-27 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050690
Miwa Ashida, Tomohiro Koga, Shimpei Morimoto, Mariko Yozaki, Daisuke Ehara, Yuta Koike, H Murota
AB0199 GENES PREDICTIVE ON THE EFFICACY OF INFLIXIMAB IN THE TREATMENT OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: A PROSPECTIVE, MULTI-CENTRE, CLINICAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION STUDY FOR AN IN-VITRO DIAGNOSTICS MEDICAL DEVICE
IF 27.4 1区 医学Annals of the Rheumatic DiseasesPub Date : 2020-06-01 DOI: 10.1136/ANNRHEUMDIS-2020-EULAR.5849
E. Kiss, G. Poór, G. Zahuczky, K. Jakab, M. Sebeszta, T. Ponyi, Z. Holló
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Health Risk & Society is an international scholarly journal devoted to a theoretical and empirical understanding of the social processes which influence the ways in which health risks are taken, communicated, assessed and managed. Public awareness of risk is associated with the development of high profile media debates about specific risks. Although risk issues arise in a variety of areas, such as technological usage and the environment, they are particularly evident in health. Not only is health a major issue of personal and collective concern, but failure to effectively assess and manage risk is likely to result in health problems.
期刊最新文献
Risk factors for mental health and wellness: children’s perspectives from five Majority World Countries The role of trust in government and risk perception in adherence to COVID-19 prevention measures: survey findings among young people in Luxembourg Reassessing social trust: gossip, self-policing, and Covid-19 risk communication in Norway Organisational learning, or organised irresponsibility? Risk, opacity and lesson learning about mental health related deaths The “risk object” of cannabis edibles: perspectives from young adults in Canada
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1