Perceived risk of developing breast cancer: how we phrase the question determines the answer. / Gibbons, Andrea; Groarke, AnnMarie; Curtis, Ruth; Keane, Anne Marie.

In: Psychology and Health, Vol. 25, No. Suppl 1, 2010, p. 37.

Research output: Contribution to journalMeeting abstract

Published

Standard

Perceived risk of developing breast cancer: how we phrase the question determines the answer. / Gibbons, Andrea; Groarke, AnnMarie; Curtis, Ruth; Keane, Anne Marie.

In: Psychology and Health, Vol. 25, No. Suppl 1, 2010, p. 37.

Research output: Contribution to journalMeeting abstract

Harvard

Gibbons, A, Groarke, A, Curtis, R & Keane, AM 2010, 'Perceived risk of developing breast cancer: how we phrase the question determines the answer.', Psychology and Health, vol. 25, no. Suppl 1, pp. 37.

APA

Gibbons, A., Groarke, A., Curtis, R., & Keane, A. M. (2010). Perceived risk of developing breast cancer: how we phrase the question determines the answer. Psychology and Health, 25(Suppl 1), 37.

Vancouver

Gibbons A, Groarke A, Curtis R, Keane AM. Perceived risk of developing breast cancer: how we phrase the question determines the answer. Psychology and Health. 2010;25(Suppl 1):37.

Author

Gibbons, Andrea ; Groarke, AnnMarie ; Curtis, Ruth ; Keane, Anne Marie. / Perceived risk of developing breast cancer: how we phrase the question determines the answer. In: Psychology and Health. 2010 ; Vol. 25, No. Suppl 1. pp. 37.

BibTeX

@article{96149e70865d4cb5a553fd5908d43263,
title = "Perceived risk of developing breast cancer: how we phrase the question determines the answer.",
abstract = "This study assesses how the measurement of risk perceptions regarding breast cancer can influence the accuracy of perceived risk. Women from the general population (N = 580) completed estimates of absolute risk of breast cancer in numerical terms (0 to 100%) and verbal descriptors (very low to very high). Comparative risk was assessed by asking women to rate their risk compared to an average woman (much lower to much higher). Objective medical risk was computed from medical information regarding family history of breast cancer, age of menarche, number of children, age and ethnicity using the Gail Model (Gail et al., 1989). A series of ANOVAs indicate that, relative to Gail scores, women hold a strong pessimistic bias regarding risk of developing breast cancer when risk is measured numerically. Women estimated their risk as much higher than their objective medical risk. In contrast, a strong optimistic bias is evident in comparative risk estimates, whilst perceptions of risk are more accurate when rated on verbal descriptors. These findings have implications for the type of measurement used; results may simply reflect measurement differences rather than variations in perceived risk. Researchers need to take these disparities into account when choosing which method to use.",
author = "Andrea Gibbons and AnnMarie Groarke and Ruth Curtis and Keane, {Anne Marie}",
year = "2010",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "37",
journal = "Psychology and Health",
issn = "0887-0446",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "Suppl 1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Perceived risk of developing breast cancer: how we phrase the question determines the answer.

AU - Gibbons, Andrea

AU - Groarke, AnnMarie

AU - Curtis, Ruth

AU - Keane, Anne Marie

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - This study assesses how the measurement of risk perceptions regarding breast cancer can influence the accuracy of perceived risk. Women from the general population (N = 580) completed estimates of absolute risk of breast cancer in numerical terms (0 to 100%) and verbal descriptors (very low to very high). Comparative risk was assessed by asking women to rate their risk compared to an average woman (much lower to much higher). Objective medical risk was computed from medical information regarding family history of breast cancer, age of menarche, number of children, age and ethnicity using the Gail Model (Gail et al., 1989). A series of ANOVAs indicate that, relative to Gail scores, women hold a strong pessimistic bias regarding risk of developing breast cancer when risk is measured numerically. Women estimated their risk as much higher than their objective medical risk. In contrast, a strong optimistic bias is evident in comparative risk estimates, whilst perceptions of risk are more accurate when rated on verbal descriptors. These findings have implications for the type of measurement used; results may simply reflect measurement differences rather than variations in perceived risk. Researchers need to take these disparities into account when choosing which method to use.

AB - This study assesses how the measurement of risk perceptions regarding breast cancer can influence the accuracy of perceived risk. Women from the general population (N = 580) completed estimates of absolute risk of breast cancer in numerical terms (0 to 100%) and verbal descriptors (very low to very high). Comparative risk was assessed by asking women to rate their risk compared to an average woman (much lower to much higher). Objective medical risk was computed from medical information regarding family history of breast cancer, age of menarche, number of children, age and ethnicity using the Gail Model (Gail et al., 1989). A series of ANOVAs indicate that, relative to Gail scores, women hold a strong pessimistic bias regarding risk of developing breast cancer when risk is measured numerically. Women estimated their risk as much higher than their objective medical risk. In contrast, a strong optimistic bias is evident in comparative risk estimates, whilst perceptions of risk are more accurate when rated on verbal descriptors. These findings have implications for the type of measurement used; results may simply reflect measurement differences rather than variations in perceived risk. Researchers need to take these disparities into account when choosing which method to use.

M3 - Meeting abstract

VL - 25

SP - 37

JO - Psychology and Health

JF - Psychology and Health

SN - 0887-0446

IS - Suppl 1

ER -