The effects of anxiety on response times to disease detection and health promotion behaviors

Millar, Murray G.; Millar, Karen U.

doi:10.1007/bf01904765

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although it is tempting to classify a behavior as promotion- or prevention-focused, regulatory focus for engaging in health behavior varies across individuals (Updegraff and Rothman, 2013). However, other research has suggested that anxiety increases response times for providing attitudes about disease-preventing (e.g., screening) and health-promoting (e.g., healthy diet) behaviors (Millar and Millar, 1996), consistent with our findings that HRFS-Prevention negatively predicts healthy behaviors. Future research could examine whether the HRFS predicts behaviors perceived as health promoting or preventing by assessing whether people construe behavior as disease-preventive or health-promoting.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Developing a scale to assess health regulatory focus

Ferrer

Lipkus

Cerully

et al. 2017

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rationale: Regulatory focus (i.e., focus on motivation to achieve gains or avoid losses and non-gains) is used to tailor health behavior change interventions, improving efficacy, but is currently assessed by scales that are not health-specific and may capture a version of the construct that is not ideally matched to the rationale for tailoring. Objective: We developed and validated a Health Regulatory Focus Scale (HRFS), which assesses tendencies to avoid negative health consequences (prevention focus) or achieve positive health outcomes (promotion focus). Methods: Across four studies (and a scale development study in supplementary online materials), we established convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity for the HRFS. In studies examining predictive validity, main outcome measures were health behavior intentions, including intentions to reduce alcohol use, quit smoking, eat a healthy diet, exercise, be screened for cancer, and engage in general cancer preventive behaviors. Results: The promotion and prevention sub-scales performed well in confirmatory factor analyses. Single-factor models had significantly poorer fit than models delineating promotion and prevention. The sub-scales were differentially (and only modestly) correlated with related constructs (anxiety, optimism, information avoidance, ambiguity/fatalism). Higher HRFS-Promotion focus generally corresponded with greater health behavior intentions. Conversely, higher HRFS-Prevention focus corresponded with lower health behavior intentions. Associations were largely maintained even when controlling for established regulatory focus measures, supporting the assertion that the HRFS would predict unique variance in health behavior intentions. Conclusion: The HRFS has the potential to improve the precision with which framed health messages change behavior, as it may assess a version of regulatory focus that is more ideally matched to rationale for tailoring interventions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Developing a scale to assess health regulatory focus

Ferrer

Lipkus

Cerully

et al. 2017

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The contrasting experiences and perceptions of ethnic groups of women who chose to participate in screening mammography were also reflected in the level of anxiety experienced. In this study, women who were more anxious were less likely to actively question health professionals, which suggests “defensive avoidance” towards threatening information [ 70 ]. For example, reluctance to address anxiety-provoking threats to health was prevalent in an earlier study of women’s attitudes towards breast self-examination [ 71 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Effective Communication to Enhance Participation in Screening Mammography: A New Zealand Case

Brunton

2009

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes in the organisation of health care have dominated policy initiatives over the past two decades in many countries. An increasing reliance on public health initiatives to prevent or detect disease early has resulted in an increase in programs that screen for cancer in the community. In turn, this accentuates the need to persuasively communicate the value of such initiatives to encourage continued participation. Merely placing screening programs into a community setting is not sufficient to ensure that adequate numbers will voluntarily participate regularly to achieve anticipated cost and mortality savings in the population. In this research the influence of managing communication in a public screening mammography program was investigated. The results revealed that significant opportunities were overlooked for reassurance and information during the physical mammography process. In turn, this highlights the influence of constraints imposed by the structure of the screening program and the resources allocated to the process. This research suggests that it is important to address multiple influences, including ethnic differences, when asking questions about the effectiveness of public health policy, particularly when considering the choices women make about ongoing participation in breast screening programs.

show abstract

“…Fears and phobias interfere with medical care [23][24][25]. The cost for a migraine patient with anxiety was US$ 12 642 vs. US$5179 in those without it [26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cephalalgiaphobia: a possible specific phobia of illness

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychiatric comorbidity, mainly anxiety and depression, are common in chronic migraine (CM). Phobias are reported by half of CM patients. Phobic avoidance associated with fear of headache or migraine attack has never been adequately described. We describe 12 migraine patients with particular phobic-avoidant behaviours related to their headache attacks, which we classified as a specific illness phobia, coined as cephalalgiaphobia. All patients were women, mean age 42, and all had a migraine diagnosis (11 CM, all overused acute medications). Patients had either a phobia of a headache attack during a pain-free state or a phobia of pain worsening during mild headache episodes. Patients overused acute medication as phobic avoidance. It is a significant problem, associated with distress and impairment, interfering with medical care.Cephalalgiaphobia is a possible specific phobia of illness, possibly linked to progression of migraine to CM and to acute medication overuse headache.

show abstract

The effects of anxiety on response times to disease detection and health promotion behaviors

Cited by 17 publications

References 28 publications

Developing a scale to assess health regulatory focus

Developing a scale to assess health regulatory focus

The Role of Effective Communication to Enhance Participation in Screening Mammography: A New Zealand Case

Cephalalgiaphobia: a possible specific phobia of illness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About