Pub Date : 2023-01-05DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000125
Amina Saadi, Asra Mahmood, Jack Sweeney, R. Webster
Abstract. Background: Positively framing side-effect risk in patient information leaflets (PILs) can reduce side-effect expectations and resulting nocebo effects (nonspecific medication side effects unrelated to the drug’s pharmacological action). There is scope to educate patients about nocebo effects in PILs to minimize their occurrence further. Aims: To investigate if incorporating information on placebo-reported side effects reduces side-effect expectations compared to a positively framed-only or standard PIL. Methods: Participants ( N = 443) completed an online study and were randomized to read one of three PILs for a hypothetical antibiotic: standard PIL ( n = 140), positively framed PIL ( n = 151), or positively framed PIL with placebo side-effect information ( n = 152). Participants’ side-effect expectations, absolute risk perceptions, and intended adherence were recorded. Results: The standard PIL resulted in significantly higher side-effect expectations compared to the positively framed + placebo side-effect information PIL. Including the placebo side-effect results had no effect on side-effect expectations compared to the positive framing only PIL, however, there was a significant interaction between health literacy and PIL condition on side-effect expectations. Both positively framed PILs produced more accurate risk estimates for the more common side effects. There was no difference in intended adherence between the three PILs. Limitations: Our findings are limited by the highly educated sample and hypothetical context. Conclusions: There was no benefit of adding placebo side-effect information, however alternative ways of explaining nocebo effects in PILs should be explored utilizing clinical contexts and samples with a wider range of participant ages, and health literacy.
{"title":"What Is the Benefit of Adding Placebo Side-Effect Information to Positively Framed Patient Leaflets?","authors":"Amina Saadi, Asra Mahmood, Jack Sweeney, R. Webster","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000125","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000125","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Background: Positively framing side-effect risk in patient information leaflets (PILs) can reduce side-effect expectations and resulting nocebo effects (nonspecific medication side effects unrelated to the drug’s pharmacological action). There is scope to educate patients about nocebo effects in PILs to minimize their occurrence further. Aims: To investigate if incorporating information on placebo-reported side effects reduces side-effect expectations compared to a positively framed-only or standard PIL. Methods: Participants ( N = 443) completed an online study and were randomized to read one of three PILs for a hypothetical antibiotic: standard PIL ( n = 140), positively framed PIL ( n = 151), or positively framed PIL with placebo side-effect information ( n = 152). Participants’ side-effect expectations, absolute risk perceptions, and intended adherence were recorded. Results: The standard PIL resulted in significantly higher side-effect expectations compared to the positively framed + placebo side-effect information PIL. Including the placebo side-effect results had no effect on side-effect expectations compared to the positive framing only PIL, however, there was a significant interaction between health literacy and PIL condition on side-effect expectations. Both positively framed PILs produced more accurate risk estimates for the more common side effects. There was no difference in intended adherence between the three PILs. Limitations: Our findings are limited by the highly educated sample and hypothetical context. Conclusions: There was no benefit of adding placebo side-effect information, however alternative ways of explaining nocebo effects in PILs should be explored utilizing clinical contexts and samples with a wider range of participant ages, and health literacy.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83246748","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000129
H. Spaderna
{"title":"Distinguished Reviewers in 2022","authors":"H. Spaderna","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000129","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000129","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78201417","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-29DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000122
Maysa DeSousa, Kaitlyn Rego
Abstract. Background: Perceived scarcity shows promise as an indicator of physical and mental health and a possible predictor of health disparities; however, a systematic investigation of how perceived scarcity is experienced across racial and ethnic, gender, and socioeconomic groups is imperative. Moreover, it is necessary to unpack the unique predictive power of each scarcity domain. Aims: First, differences in the experience of perceived scarcity by various sociodemographic groups in overall perceived scarcity and each of its three dimensions were explored using a cross-sectional sample. Next, using self-reported health outcome data collected from participants at a second time point, the direct and mediating role of perceived scarcity in the relationship between sociodemographic indicators and self-reported health was examined. Method: Participants included a racially and socioeconomically diverse online sample. One-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs) and t-tests were used to assess whether perceived scarcity, overall and by domain, varied by sociodemographic factors. PROCESS macro for SPSS v 3.5 was used to analyze the proposed direct effects and mediations. Results: Results indicate that sociodemographic differences do exist in perceived scarcity and in a variety of ways that may not be reflected when solely examining overall perceived scarcity. Dimensions of perceived scarcity were found to mediate the relationship between some sociodemographic factors and self-reported health. Limitations: Future research should address the limitations of the current study’s sample insofar as recruiting a wider sample of participants to include those experiencing the most extreme forms of scarcity. Conclusion: Findings support the importance of considering the unique experience of perceived scarcity by domain across sociodemographic groups when using it as a predictor or mediator of health.
摘要背景:感知匮乏有望作为身心健康的指标和健康差异的可能预测指标;然而，对不同种族、民族、性别和社会经济群体如何体验感知到的稀缺性进行系统调查是必要的。此外，有必要解开每个稀缺域的独特预测能力。目的:首先，利用横断面样本探讨了不同社会人口群体在总体感知稀缺性及其三个维度上的感知稀缺性体验差异。接下来，利用从参与者在第二个时间点收集的自我报告健康结果数据，研究了感知稀缺性在社会人口指标和自我报告健康之间关系中的直接和中介作用。方法:参与者包括一个种族和社会经济多样化的在线样本。使用单因素方差分析(ANOVAs)和t检验来评估感知稀缺性是否因社会人口因素而异。使用SPSS v 3.5的PROCESS宏分析提出的直接影响和中介。结果:结果表明，社会人口统计学差异确实存在于感知稀缺性中，并且以各种方式存在，当单独检查总体感知稀缺性时可能不会反映出来。感知稀缺的维度被发现调解一些社会人口因素和自我报告的健康之间的关系。局限性:未来的研究应该解决当前研究样本的局限性，招募更广泛的参与者样本，包括那些经历最极端形式的稀缺的人。结论:研究结果支持在将感知稀缺性作为健康的预测因子或中介因子时，考虑跨社会人口群体领域的独特体验的重要性。
{"title":"Perceived Scarcity Across Sociodemographic Backgrounds Predicts Self-Reported Health","authors":"Maysa DeSousa, Kaitlyn Rego","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000122","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000122","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Background: Perceived scarcity shows promise as an indicator of physical and mental health and a possible predictor of health disparities; however, a systematic investigation of how perceived scarcity is experienced across racial and ethnic, gender, and socioeconomic groups is imperative. Moreover, it is necessary to unpack the unique predictive power of each scarcity domain. Aims: First, differences in the experience of perceived scarcity by various sociodemographic groups in overall perceived scarcity and each of its three dimensions were explored using a cross-sectional sample. Next, using self-reported health outcome data collected from participants at a second time point, the direct and mediating role of perceived scarcity in the relationship between sociodemographic indicators and self-reported health was examined. Method: Participants included a racially and socioeconomically diverse online sample. One-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs) and t-tests were used to assess whether perceived scarcity, overall and by domain, varied by sociodemographic factors. PROCESS macro for SPSS v 3.5 was used to analyze the proposed direct effects and mediations. Results: Results indicate that sociodemographic differences do exist in perceived scarcity and in a variety of ways that may not be reflected when solely examining overall perceived scarcity. Dimensions of perceived scarcity were found to mediate the relationship between some sociodemographic factors and self-reported health. Limitations: Future research should address the limitations of the current study’s sample insofar as recruiting a wider sample of participants to include those experiencing the most extreme forms of scarcity. Conclusion: Findings support the importance of considering the unique experience of perceived scarcity by domain across sociodemographic groups when using it as a predictor or mediator of health.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85016219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-14DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000123
N. André, R. Baumeister
Abstract. Many disturbances of physical, social, and mental health have conditions involving lack of energy, difficulty in making decisions, and low interest or motivation. Laboratory studies of willpower depletion have produced similar states in a temporary fashion. The present review uses extant literature to develop and test three theories about how temporary states of low willpower could become chronic. The first is ongoing and repeated exposure to depleting circumstances, such as caregiver fatigue, burdensome financial debts, and high-stress jobs. The second focuses on inadequate recoveries, such as poor sleep, insufficient nutrition, or unsatisfying vacations. The third invokes dispositional vulnerabilities that predispose some people to become depleted more frequently than others. A wide-ranging search for evidence concluded that the first two theories have more support than the third, though all further merit research. Additional possible contributions to chronicity are discussed, such as the emergence of vicious circles.
{"title":"Three Pathways Into Chronic Lack of Energy as a Mental Health Complaint","authors":"N. André, R. Baumeister","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000123","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000123","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Many disturbances of physical, social, and mental health have conditions involving lack of energy, difficulty in making decisions, and low interest or motivation. Laboratory studies of willpower depletion have produced similar states in a temporary fashion. The present review uses extant literature to develop and test three theories about how temporary states of low willpower could become chronic. The first is ongoing and repeated exposure to depleting circumstances, such as caregiver fatigue, burdensome financial debts, and high-stress jobs. The second focuses on inadequate recoveries, such as poor sleep, insufficient nutrition, or unsatisfying vacations. The third invokes dispositional vulnerabilities that predispose some people to become depleted more frequently than others. A wide-ranging search for evidence concluded that the first two theories have more support than the third, though all further merit research. Additional possible contributions to chronicity are discussed, such as the emergence of vicious circles.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87291729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-01DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000124
{"title":"Correction to Madden et al., 2022","authors":"","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000124","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79520659","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-17DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000118
Stefano Ruggieri, S. Boca, S. Ingoglia
Abstract. Background: Despite the growing number of organ transplants, there is still a significant difference between the number of donated organs and the number of people waiting for them. Knowing the reason people decide to donate is the first step to increasing organ donation rates. Aims: The main aim of the present study was to develop and validate a new scale for organ donation. Method: In three studies, 3,585 participants ranging in age between 14 and 89 years were selected through systematic random sampling. In the first study, we created a scale following the organ donation model theoretical framework and submitted the scale to exploratory factor analysis. In the second study, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis to cross-validate the hypothesized factor structure. In the third study, the scale was related to some important variables involved in organ donation. Results: Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis with a good fit index and acceptable levels of validity and reliability guarantee the quality of the scale and stable factor solution. Limitations: The main limitations are connected to social desirability, the presence of systematic bias of the population that refused to take part in the study, and the use of the Caucasian population. Conclusion: The resulting scale consists of 21 items in a seven-factor model (bodily integrity, fear of death, familial beliefs, altruism, medical mistrust, trust in the health institution, and emotional support). We also observed the relationship between scale factors, religiosity, and knowledge of organ donation with the willingness to donate organs.
{"title":"Willingness to Donate Organs After Death","authors":"Stefano Ruggieri, S. Boca, S. Ingoglia","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000118","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000118","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Background: Despite the growing number of organ transplants, there is still a significant difference between the number of donated organs and the number of people waiting for them. Knowing the reason people decide to donate is the first step to increasing organ donation rates. Aims: The main aim of the present study was to develop and validate a new scale for organ donation. Method: In three studies, 3,585 participants ranging in age between 14 and 89 years were selected through systematic random sampling. In the first study, we created a scale following the organ donation model theoretical framework and submitted the scale to exploratory factor analysis. In the second study, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis to cross-validate the hypothesized factor structure. In the third study, the scale was related to some important variables involved in organ donation. Results: Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis with a good fit index and acceptable levels of validity and reliability guarantee the quality of the scale and stable factor solution. Limitations: The main limitations are connected to social desirability, the presence of systematic bias of the population that refused to take part in the study, and the use of the Caucasian population. Conclusion: The resulting scale consists of 21 items in a seven-factor model (bodily integrity, fear of death, familial beliefs, altruism, medical mistrust, trust in the health institution, and emotional support). We also observed the relationship between scale factors, religiosity, and knowledge of organ donation with the willingness to donate organs.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77874632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-17DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000119
D. Yagil, Miri Cohen
Abstract. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic involved many uncertainties, including financial uncertainty due to the global financial crisis. Previous research indicates that financial uncertainty is negatively related to mental health and wellbeing. Aims: We tested a model suggesting that the negative impact of financial uncertainty is explained by a restriction of individuals’ view of their future possibilities. Specifically, this longitudinal study explored the relationship of financial uncertainty and anxiety, considering the mediating role of future orientation. Method: Data were collected with questionnaires administered to Israeli citizens in April, June and August 2020. Data analysis comprised 379 respondents who participated in all three times. Results: Future orientation mediated the relationship of financial uncertainty and anxiety over time. Tests of changes across time show that changes in financial uncertainty were related to changes in anxiety levels over time. Limitations: Our sample was biased toward younger ages and the measurement of future orientation referred to a general view of the future rather than specific areas. Conclusion: The results suggest that the stressor of financial uncertainty is generalized to a negative view of future possibilities, thereby increasing anxiety.
{"title":"Financial Uncertainty and Anxiety During the COVID-19 Pandemic","authors":"D. Yagil, Miri Cohen","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000119","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000119","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic involved many uncertainties, including financial uncertainty due to the global financial crisis. Previous research indicates that financial uncertainty is negatively related to mental health and wellbeing. Aims: We tested a model suggesting that the negative impact of financial uncertainty is explained by a restriction of individuals’ view of their future possibilities. Specifically, this longitudinal study explored the relationship of financial uncertainty and anxiety, considering the mediating role of future orientation. Method: Data were collected with questionnaires administered to Israeli citizens in April, June and August 2020. Data analysis comprised 379 respondents who participated in all three times. Results: Future orientation mediated the relationship of financial uncertainty and anxiety over time. Tests of changes across time show that changes in financial uncertainty were related to changes in anxiety levels over time. Limitations: Our sample was biased toward younger ages and the measurement of future orientation referred to a general view of the future rather than specific areas. Conclusion: The results suggest that the stressor of financial uncertainty is generalized to a negative view of future possibilities, thereby increasing anxiety.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78664457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-18DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000115
Federica Galli, A. Chirico, L. Mallia, Fabio Alivernini, S. Manganelli, A. Zelli, M. Hagger, F. Lucidi
Abstract. Background: Use of Neuro-Enhancement Substances (NES) such as prescription drugs, illicit drugs, or alcohol to improve cognition, prosocial behavior, and performance is increasing among students. Aims: The study applied a multi-theory, integrated theoretical model to identify motivational and social cognition determinants of NES use among students. Methods: A prospective longitudinal design was adopted with 306 high school (66.8% female; Mage = 17.31 years, SD = 0.93) and 692 university (70.5% female; Mage = 24.97 years, SD = 6.64) students. They completed measures of motivation, social cognition constructs, and planning with respect to studying behavior and NES use. Results: Well-fitting structural equation models indicated the pervasive influence of autonomous motivation, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control for studying, as well as of attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control for NES use. Inclusion of past NES use increased explained variance in NES use and attenuated model effects, but the pattern of effects remained. Multi-group analyses indicated consistency in the pattern model effects across high school and university students. Limitations: The study findings might not be generalizable, as student samples were not randomly recruited. Furthermore, NES use only relied on self-report, and its assessment did not consider different NES substances. Finally, there was no assessment of implicit attitudes and habits toward studying and NES use. Conclusions: Findings extend prior literature by demonstrating the integrated guiding view that students’ motivation and beliefs about studying influence their beliefs about and use of NES. Furthermore, the findings provide starting points for interventions targeting the reduction in NES use.
{"title":"Identifying Determinants of Neuro-Enchancement Substance Use in Students","authors":"Federica Galli, A. Chirico, L. Mallia, Fabio Alivernini, S. Manganelli, A. Zelli, M. Hagger, F. Lucidi","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000115","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Background: Use of Neuro-Enhancement Substances (NES) such as prescription drugs, illicit drugs, or alcohol to improve cognition, prosocial behavior, and performance is increasing among students. Aims: The study applied a multi-theory, integrated theoretical model to identify motivational and social cognition determinants of NES use among students. Methods: A prospective longitudinal design was adopted with 306 high school (66.8% female; Mage = 17.31 years, SD = 0.93) and 692 university (70.5% female; Mage = 24.97 years, SD = 6.64) students. They completed measures of motivation, social cognition constructs, and planning with respect to studying behavior and NES use. Results: Well-fitting structural equation models indicated the pervasive influence of autonomous motivation, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control for studying, as well as of attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control for NES use. Inclusion of past NES use increased explained variance in NES use and attenuated model effects, but the pattern of effects remained. Multi-group analyses indicated consistency in the pattern model effects across high school and university students. Limitations: The study findings might not be generalizable, as student samples were not randomly recruited. Furthermore, NES use only relied on self-report, and its assessment did not consider different NES substances. Finally, there was no assessment of implicit attitudes and habits toward studying and NES use. Conclusions: Findings extend prior literature by demonstrating the integrated guiding view that students’ motivation and beliefs about studying influence their beliefs about and use of NES. Furthermore, the findings provide starting points for interventions targeting the reduction in NES use.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88450028","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000116
Courtney M. Lappas, N. Coyne, Amanda J. Dillard, Brian P. Meier
Abstract. Background: There is a bias for natural versus synthetic drugs in general populations. Aims: We investigated whether physicians who have advanced medical and scientific training and routinely prescribe drugs exhibit this bias. Methods: Physicians and non-physicians were presented with a hypothetical medical situation in which pharmacological therapy was required. Participants were asked if they would prefer a natural or synthetic drug for treatment. Physicians were also asked which drug they would prescribe to a patient. Results: In a forced-choice paradigm, non-physicians (87.5%) and physicians (79.2%) had an equally strong bias for the natural drug, with physicians (74.3%) also preferring the natural drug for patients. When a 9-point drug choice scale was used, including a “no preference” choice (5), non-physicians ( M = 6.91) and physicians ( M = 5.41) again showed a preference for the natural drug compared to the mid-point of the scale, but the non-physicians’ bias was stronger. Physicians no longer preferred the natural drug for patients ( M = 5.15). Limitations: The participants do not represent a random sample and therefore may not represent physicians/non-physicians in general. Additionally, the responses were hypothetical and may not represent behavior in actual medical contexts. Conclusion: These data indicate that physicians and non-physicians exhibit a bias for natural drugs, with physicians also demonstrating a bias for prescribing natural drugs. However, the bias is reduced in physicians compared to non-physicians when a “no preference” option is available, suggesting that advanced medical and/or scientific training may be beneficial in minimizing this bias.
{"title":"Do Physicians Prefer Natural Drugs?","authors":"Courtney M. Lappas, N. Coyne, Amanda J. Dillard, Brian P. Meier","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000116","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000116","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Background: There is a bias for natural versus synthetic drugs in general populations. Aims: We investigated whether physicians who have advanced medical and scientific training and routinely prescribe drugs exhibit this bias. Methods: Physicians and non-physicians were presented with a hypothetical medical situation in which pharmacological therapy was required. Participants were asked if they would prefer a natural or synthetic drug for treatment. Physicians were also asked which drug they would prescribe to a patient. Results: In a forced-choice paradigm, non-physicians (87.5%) and physicians (79.2%) had an equally strong bias for the natural drug, with physicians (74.3%) also preferring the natural drug for patients. When a 9-point drug choice scale was used, including a “no preference” choice (5), non-physicians ( M = 6.91) and physicians ( M = 5.41) again showed a preference for the natural drug compared to the mid-point of the scale, but the non-physicians’ bias was stronger. Physicians no longer preferred the natural drug for patients ( M = 5.15). Limitations: The participants do not represent a random sample and therefore may not represent physicians/non-physicians in general. Additionally, the responses were hypothetical and may not represent behavior in actual medical contexts. Conclusion: These data indicate that physicians and non-physicians exhibit a bias for natural drugs, with physicians also demonstrating a bias for prescribing natural drugs. However, the bias is reduced in physicians compared to non-physicians when a “no preference” option is available, suggesting that advanced medical and/or scientific training may be beneficial in minimizing this bias.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83828646","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-09DOI: 10.1027/2512-8442/a000114
J. Waterschoot, S. Morbée, O. Van den Bergh, M. Vansteenkiste
Abstract. Background: In November 2020, many European governments imposed severe limitations on social contacts and festive gatherings to avoid a further outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Aims: At the moment when it was still unclear whether Christmas gatherings would be allowed, the present vignette study was conducted to evaluate four hypothetical scenarios varying in restrictiveness (i.e., 1, 2, 4, or an unlimited number of visitors). Method: In total, 5,756 Belgian participants (65.7% female; Mage = 45.6, range: 18–89) evaluated each scenario in terms of the perceived strictness, probability of adherence, and expected psychological advantages (i.e., autonomy, relatedness, pleasure) and disadvantages (i.e., concerns). Results: Evidence for a curvilinear pattern was found, such that the expected psychological benefits increased with an increasing number of allowed visitors till 4, with this effect being reversed in case of an unlimited gathering. Yet, these main effects were qualified: Older adults, those living together, and those scoring high on risk perception and autonomous motivation to adhere to the corona measures expected the more restrictive scenarios to be equally beneficial compared to the more relaxed scenarios. Limitations: Limitations are self-selection of the sample, no counterbalancing of the scenario’s and the vignette-based methodology. Conclusion: The present findings suggest that people’s risk perception and autonomous motivation are key to secure and stimulate the acceptance of life-restricting measures.
{"title":"Merry Christmas and a “Healthy” New Year","authors":"J. Waterschoot, S. Morbée, O. Van den Bergh, M. Vansteenkiste","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000114","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000114","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Background: In November 2020, many European governments imposed severe limitations on social contacts and festive gatherings to avoid a further outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Aims: At the moment when it was still unclear whether Christmas gatherings would be allowed, the present vignette study was conducted to evaluate four hypothetical scenarios varying in restrictiveness (i.e., 1, 2, 4, or an unlimited number of visitors). Method: In total, 5,756 Belgian participants (65.7% female; Mage = 45.6, range: 18–89) evaluated each scenario in terms of the perceived strictness, probability of adherence, and expected psychological advantages (i.e., autonomy, relatedness, pleasure) and disadvantages (i.e., concerns). Results: Evidence for a curvilinear pattern was found, such that the expected psychological benefits increased with an increasing number of allowed visitors till 4, with this effect being reversed in case of an unlimited gathering. Yet, these main effects were qualified: Older adults, those living together, and those scoring high on risk perception and autonomous motivation to adhere to the corona measures expected the more restrictive scenarios to be equally beneficial compared to the more relaxed scenarios. Limitations: Limitations are self-selection of the sample, no counterbalancing of the scenario’s and the vignette-based methodology. Conclusion: The present findings suggest that people’s risk perception and autonomous motivation are key to secure and stimulate the acceptance of life-restricting measures.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2022-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88251985","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：