Department of Clinical Genomics, Mayo Clinic Health System, Eau Claire, WI, USA.
Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
J Genet Couns. 2021 Feb;30(1):132-143. doi: 10.1002/jgc4.1302. Epub 2020 Jun 24.
Monitoring and blunting are coping styles that characterize how people respond when faced with personally threatening situations. High monitors tend to pay more attention to, scan for, and amplify threatening cues; high blunters tend to avoid information and seek distractions when faced with a threatening event. This study sought to investigate possible differential effects of monitoring and blunting coping styles on information preferences in a hypothetical cancer diagnosis scenario in the adult general public of Minnesota. In a survey administered at a large public venue (2016 Minnesota State Fair), participants were asked to imagine they carried a gene mutation and were diagnosed with colon cancer. They indicated their information preference [modified Cassileth Information Styles Questionnaire (MCISQ)], completed two coping style measures [Miller Behavioral Style Scale (MBSS) and Threatening Medical Situations Inventory (TMSI)], rated their perceived severity of colon cancer (low, moderate, high), and answered demographic questions. Eight hundred fifty-five individuals provided usable data. Participants classified as monitors on the TMSI had significantly higher MCISQ scores (i.e., preferred more information) than those classified as blunters (p = .004). Those scoring high on monitoring and low on blunting on the MBSS preferred significantly more information than those scoring high on both monitoring and blunting (p = .04). Linear regression analysis revealed being a monitor (TMSI), scoring high on monitoring (MBSS), rating colon cancer as more severe, and having a higher education level were significant positive predictors of MCISQ scores. Results suggest individual differences in coping style, perceived severity, and education level affect desire for information. Genetic counselors should consider these patient characteristics (e.g., asking patients about their information preferences) and tailor their approaches accordingly.
监测和钝感是应对个人威胁情境的两种方式，特点是人们在面对这种情境时的反应方式。高监测者往往更关注、扫描和放大威胁线索；高钝感者则倾向于在面对威胁性事件时避免信息并寻求分心。本研究旨在调查监测和钝感应对方式在明尼苏达州成年普通人群对假设性癌症诊断情景的信息偏好中可能产生的不同影响。在一个大型公共场所（2016 年明尼苏达州博览会）进行的调查中，参与者被要求想象自己携带基因突变并被诊断患有结肠癌。他们表示自己的信息偏好（修改后的 Cassileth 信息风格问卷（MCISQ）），完成了两项应对方式量表（Miller 行为风格量表（MBSS）和威胁性医疗情况量表（TMSI）），评估了他们对结肠癌的感知严重程度（低、中、高），并回答了人口统计学问题。855 人提供了可用数据。在 TMSI 上被归类为监测者的参与者的 MCISQ 得分显著高于被归类为钝感者的参与者（p=0.004）。在 MBSS 上监测得分高且钝感得分低的参与者比监测和钝感得分都高的参与者更倾向于获取更多信息（p=0.04）。线性回归分析显示，作为监测者（TMSI）、在 MBSS 上监测得分高、认为结肠癌更严重以及教育水平更高是 MCISQ 得分的显著正预测因素。结果表明，应对方式、感知严重程度和教育水平的个体差异会影响对信息的需求。遗传咨询师应考虑这些患者特征（例如，询问患者对信息的偏好），并相应地调整他们的方法。
