Department of Psychology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Psychol Health Med. 2011 Aug;16(4):475-83. doi: 10.1080/13548506.2011.555772.
The goal of the current research was to test whether direct versus indirect measures of comparative optimism yield different results as a function of health risk severity and prevalence. A random-digit sample of community residents (N = 259) responded to interview questions about perceived vulnerability using both direct (i.e. self-to-peer risk) and indirect comparison measures (i.e. separate questions about self and peer risk). Responses to direct comparison measures were more affected by prevalence, whereas indirect comparison measures were more affected by severity. These results may offer guidance to researchers and practitioners about when it may be more appropriate to use direct versus indirect measures of comparative health risk.
本研究旨在检验在健康风险严重程度和流行率的影响下，直接和间接比较乐观主义测量结果是否会有所不同。采用随机数字抽样法，对社区居民（N=259）进行了访谈，询问了他们对自身和同伴风险的直接（即自我与同伴风险）和间接比较测量（即自我和同伴风险的单独问题）感知易感性的问题。直接比较测量结果受流行率的影响更大，而间接比较测量结果则受严重程度的影响更大。这些结果可能为研究人员和实践者提供指导，说明在何种情况下使用直接或间接的健康风险比较测量更为合适。
