Nicholson Robert A, Kreuter Matthew W, Lapka Christina, Wellborn Rachel, Clark Eddie M, Sanders-Thompson Vetta, Jacobsen Heather M, Casey Chris
Health Communication Research Laboratory, School of Public Health, Saint Louis University, 3545 Lafayette Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63104, USA.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008 Nov;17(11):2946-53. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0101.
Little is known about how minority groups react to public information that highlights racial disparities in cancer. This double-blind randomized study compared emotional and behavioral reactions to four versions of the same colon cancer (CRC) information presented in mock news articles to a community sample of African-American adults (n = 300). Participants read one of four articles that varied in their framing and interpretation of race-specific CRC mortality data, emphasizing impact (CRC is an important problem for African-Americans), two dimensions of disparity (Blacks are doing worse than Whites and Blacks are improving, but less than Whites), or progress (Blacks are improving over time). Participants exposed to disparity articles reported more negative emotional reactions to the information and were less likely to want to be screened for CRC than those in other groups (both P < 0.001). In contrast, progress articles elicited more positive emotional reactions and participants were more likely to want to be screened. Moreover, negative emotional reaction seemed to mediate the influence of message type on individuals wanting to be screened for CRC. Overall, these results suggest that the way in which disparity research is reported in the medium can influence public attitudes and intentions, with reports about progress yielding a more positive effect on intention. This seems especially important among those with high levels of medical mistrust who are least likely to use the health care system and are thus the primary target of health promotion advertising.
关于少数群体如何应对突出癌症种族差异的公共信息,人们知之甚少。这项双盲随机研究将模拟新闻文章中呈现的同一结肠癌(CRC)信息的四个版本对非裔美国成年人社区样本(n = 300)的情绪和行为反应进行了比较。参与者阅读了四篇文章中的一篇,这些文章在对特定种族的CRC死亡率数据的框架和解释上有所不同,分别强调影响(CRC对非裔美国人来说是一个重要问题)、差异的两个维度(黑人比白人情况更糟,且黑人虽在改善,但不如白人)或进展(黑人随着时间推移在改善)。与其他组相比,接触差异文章的参与者对信息报告了更多负面情绪反应,且更不愿意接受CRC筛查(两者P < 0.001)。相比之下,进展文章引发了更多积极情绪反应,参与者更愿意接受筛查。此外,负面情绪反应似乎介导了信息类型对想要接受CRC筛查的个体的影响。总体而言,这些结果表明,媒体报道差异研究的方式会影响公众态度和意图,关于进展的报道对意图产生更积极的影响。这在那些对医疗高度不信任的人群中似乎尤为重要,他们最不可能使用医疗保健系统,因此是健康促进广告的主要目标人群。