Keeley Bethany, Wright Lanelle, Condit Celeste M
Speech Communication, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602, USA.
Sociol Health Illn. 2009 Jul;31(5):734-47. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01164.x. Epub 2009 Apr 9.
Much research on fatalism assumes that fatalistic statements represent a global outlook that conflicts with belief in the efficacy of health behaviours. Other scholars have suggested a more contextual approach, suggesting that fatalism fulfils personal and social functions. This study analyses 96 in-depth lay interviews in the US, most with low-income members of the general public, about four diseases: heart disease, lung cancer, diabetes and depression. Within these interviews, fatalistic statements always occurred alongside statements endorsing the utility of behaviours for protecting health. This usage pattern suggests that these statements may have useful functions, rather than being simply a repudiation of the utility of health choices. We examine four functions that are suggested by previous researchers or by the participants' comments: stress relief, uncertainty management, sense making and (less strongly) face saving. As these themes indicate, individuals often make fatalistic statements to express an understanding of locally or broadly limiting factors for health efficacy, including genes, spiritual agents, prior behaviours, personality, and other factors.
许多关于宿命论的研究都假定,宿命论表述代表了一种与对健康行为功效的信念相冲突的整体世界观。其他学者则提出了一种更具情境性的方法,认为宿命论具有个人和社会功能。本研究分析了在美国进行的96次深度访谈,受访者大多是低收入普通民众,访谈内容围绕四种疾病展开:心脏病、肺癌、糖尿病和抑郁症。在这些访谈中,宿命论表述总是与认可保护健康行为效用的表述同时出现。这种使用模式表明,这些表述可能具有有用的功能,而不仅仅是对健康选择效用的否定。我们考察了先前研究人员或参与者评论中提出的四种功能:缓解压力、管理不确定性、理解意义以及(不太明显的)保全面子。正如这些主题所表明的,个体经常做出宿命论表述,以表达对影响健康功效的局部或广泛限制因素的理解,这些因素包括基因、精神因素、既往行为、个性以及其他因素。