Risk perceptions for cancer measured on absolute scales (e.g., "What is the likelihood that you will get cancer?") and on comparative scales (e.g., "How does your risk compare with that of someone similar to you?") are independently associated with worry about cancer. We examined this finding in a large sample across several types of cancer, and explored whether these relationships are moderated by three clinically relevant variables-gender, levels of psychological distress, and cancer experience. Participants were respondents in a national survey who reported risk perceptions and worry regarding colon cancer (923 men, 1,532 women), breast cancer (2,154 women), and prostate cancer (860 men), and completed a validated measure of psychological distress. Analyses showed that absolute and comparative risk perceptions were independent predictors of worry across all cancer sites, but that absolute risk perceptions were significantly more predictive than comparative risk perceptions of worry for women (but not men). Among people who were more highly distressed, comparative risk perceptions were the only significant predictor of worry. Absolute risk and comparative risk were equally predictive of cancer worry among people who previously had been diagnosed with cancer. These findings imply that interventions highlighting the communication of comparative risk information may be differentially effective depending on the audience.

No abstract

These findings suggest that worry can moderate the extent to which risk perceptions motivate risk-related intentions and that the nature of such moderation may depend on other factors such as age.

No abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that loss-framed messages are more effective than gain-framed messages in motivating detection behaviors such as screening. The present study examined whether affective context moderates the degree to which message frame is associated with behavioral intentions to engage in colorectal cancer screening. In particular, we buttressed a framing manipulation with an "affective booster" to increase anticipated and anticipatory emotions associated with the framed messages. Consistent with previous research, we found that loss-framed messages are more effective in increasing intentions to screen. However, we found that among individuals who received gain-framed messages (but not loss-framed messages), the affective booster increased message persuasiveness. This effect on intentions was partially mediated by self-efficacy for engaging in screening. This study indicates that in the presence of emotional boosters, loss-framed messages may lose their advantage over gain-framed messages in motivating detection behaviors, and that self-efficacy may partially explain these effects.