Biomedical subjects

Ellen Peters

Publications and source records attributed to Ellen Peters.

12 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2007

Associations of perceived risk and worry with cancer health-protective actions: data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS).

This study examined the associations of susceptibility, conceptualized as both a cognition (risk) and as affect (worry) and their possible interaction, with cancer screening behaviors. Data for this study were obtained from the 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Hierarchical regression models assessed the ability of risk, worry and their interaction (after controlling for other important variables) to predict cancer-screening behaviors. Results found that risk and worry (but not their interaction) were associated with regular mammography screening and having had a sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy but with neither FOBT nor PSA screening. The findings suggest that risk and worry are both important in predicting some types of screening behavior and that these variables operate independently.

Female↗

PubMed2006

Why worry? Worry, risk perceptions, and willingness to act to reduce medical errors.

Through the domain of medical errors, the role of worry and perceived risk in precautionary behaviors was examined in a convenience sample (N = 195, mean age = 42 years, 71% female). Worry was linked to fatality estimates. A model of the antecedents and consequences of worry also was tested. Risk characteristics such as dread and preventability, negative reactivity, and vulnerability to medical errors appeared to motivate worry about medical errors. Worry about medical errors was a better predictor of intentions to take precautionary actions than were risk perceptions. An understanding of how worry influences preventive efforts will help in building communication strategies to the public and in effectively engaging patients in the role of vigilant partner in care.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Numeracy and decision making.

A series of four studies explored how the ability to comprehend and transform probability numbers relates to performance on judgment and decision tasks. On the surface, the tasks in the four studies appear to be widely different; at a conceptual level, however, they all involve processing numbers and the potential to show an influence of affect. Findings were consistent with highly numerate individuals being more likely to retrieve and use appropriate numerical principles, thus making themselves less susceptible to framing effects, compared with less numerate individuals. In addition, the highly numerate tended to draw different (generally stronger or more precise) affective meaning from numbers and numerical comparisons, and their affective responses were more precise. Although generally helpful, this tendency may sometimes lead to worse decisions. The less numerate were influenced more by competing, irrelevant affective considerations. Analyses showed that the effect of numeracy was not due to general intelligence. Numerical ability appears to matter to judgments and decisions in important ways.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

A heuristics approach to understanding cancer risk perception: contributions from judgment and decision-making research.

BACKGROUND: The likelihood judgments that people make about their risks for cancer have important implications. At the individual level, risk estimates guide protective actions, such as cancer screening. However, at the extremes, exaggerated risk judgments can also lead to anxiety that degrades quality of life or to aggressive self-protective actions that are unwarranted given the objective risks. At the policy level, risk judgments may serve as an indicator of societal perceptions of the "war" against cancer. Using risk judgments, the public expresses its belief about whether we are winning. PURPOSE: We present theoretical perspectives from judgment and decision making, illustrate how they can explain some of the existing empirical findings in the cancer risk literature, and describe additional predictions that have not yet been tested. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we suggest that theories from the judgment and decision-making perspective offer a potentially powerful view for understanding and improving risk judgments for cancer and other diseases.

Attitude to Health↗

PubMed2005

A brief behavioral feedback intervention in hospital outpatients with a high cardiovascular risk.

OBJECTIVE: Examining the prevalence of risk behavior and motivation to change among hospital outpatients with a high cardiovascular risk, and the implementation and results of a brief behavioral feedback intervention by internists. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-one patients completed a lifestyle questionnaire and were given personalized feedback on the results by their internists. The delivery of the feedback was monitored. In an ad hoc non randomized comparison after four months, 68 patients who received an intervention were compared with 40 who did not receive it. RESULTS: Ninety-six percent of the patients demonstrated at least one risk behavior and 73% were not contemplating change. The intervention was correctly given to 62%. The patients who received the intervention reported more lifestyle changes and altered their motivation to change more often. DISCUSSION: Given the prevalence of risk behavior lifestyle interventions are worthwhile. Internists delivered the intervention to most patients. Small effects of the intervention were found, but the non-experimental nature of the study should be taken into account. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a behavioral feedback intervention seems to be feasible and can lead to worthwhile lifestyle changes for patients at risk for cardiovascular disease. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Training and education can improve the intervention. Also a nurse practitioner can perform part of it.

Cardiovascular Diseases↗

PubMed2005

Linking decision-making research and cancer prevention and control: important themes.

This article describes 6 themes underlying the multiple presentations from the Basic and Applied Decision Making in Cancer Control meeting, held February 19-20, 2004. The following themes have important implications for research and practice linking basic decision-making research to cancer prevention and control: (a) Traditional decision-making theories fail to capture real-world decision making, (b) decision makers are often unable to predict future preferences, (c) preferences are often constructed on the spot and thus are influenced by situational cues, (d) decision makers often rely on feelings rather than beliefs when making a decision, (e) the perspective of the decision maker is critical in determining preferences, and (f) informed decision making may--or may not--yield the best decisions.

Congresses as Topic↗

PubMed2005

Basic and applied decision making in cancer control.

Decision making is fundamental to all aspects of cancer care--prevention, detection, treatment, survivorship, and end of life--yet researchers and clinicians have limited knowledge of the ways in which patients and their health care providers make critical health decisions. Recognizing how important it is to understand how patients and their providers make potentially life-altering decisions, the National Cancer Institute developed a decision making in cancer control initiative. The goal of this initiative is to enhance understanding of human decision-making processes so that individuals can make more informed and satisfying choices regarding their health. This article describes the multidisciplinary meeting that provided the scientific foundation for this initiative.

Decision Support Techniques↗

PubMed2005

Affect, risk, and decision making.

Risk is perceived and acted on in 2 fundamental ways. Risk as feelings refers to individuals' fast, instinctive, and intuitive reactions to danger. Risk as analysis brings logic, reason, and scientific deliberation to bear on risk management. Reliance on risk as feelings is described with "the affect heuristic." The authors trace the development of this heuristic across a variety of research paths. The authors also discuss some of the important practical implications resulting from ways that this heuristic impacts how people perceive and evaluate risk, and, more generally, how it influences all human decision making. Finally, some important implications of the affect heuristic for communication and decision making pertaining to cancer prevention and treatment are briefly discussed.

Affect↗

PubMed2005

Can patients be part of the solution? Views on their role in preventing medical errors.

Patients have the potential to play an important role in preventing medical errors. Yet little is known about how to effectively engage patients in this role as a "vigilant partner" in care. Respondents were asked to assess the perceived effectiveness of fourteen recommended actions for preventing medical errors. The findings indicate that most of the actions are viewed as effective. However, respondents also indicate that they are unlikely to engage in many of the recommended actions. Having a greater sense of self-efficacy in being able to prevent medical errors is significantly linked with a greater reported likelihood of engaging in preventive action.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality.

Modern theories in cognitive psychology and neuroscience indicate that there are two fundamental ways in which human beings comprehend risk. The "analytic system" uses algorithms and normative rules, such as probability calculus, formal logic, and risk assessment. It is relatively slow, effortful, and requires conscious control. The "experiential system" is intuitive, fast, mostly automatic, and not very accessible to conscious awareness. The experiential system enabled human beings to survive during their long period of evolution and remains today the most natural and most common way to respond to risk. It relies on images and associations, linked by experience to emotion and affect (a feeling that something is good or bad). This system represents risk as a feeling that tells us whether it is safe to walk down this dark street or drink this strange-smelling water. Proponents of formal risk analysis tend to view affective responses to risk as irrational. Current wisdom disputes this view. The rational and the experiential systems operate in parallel and each seems to depend on the other for guidance. Studies have demonstrated that analytic reasoning cannot be effective unless it is guided by emotion and affect. Rational decision making requires proper integration of both modes of thought. Both systems have their advantages, biases, and limitations. Now that we are beginning to understand the complex interplay between emotion and reason that is essential to rational behavior, the challenge before us is to think creatively about what this means for managing risk. On the one hand, how do we apply reason to temper the strong emotions engendered by some risk events? On the other hand, how do we infuse needed "doses of feeling" into circumstances where lack of experience may otherwise leave us too "coldly rational"? This article addresses these important questions.

Affect↗

PubMed2002

Strategies for reporting health plan performance information to consumers: evidence from controlled studies.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether presentation approaches designed to be more meaningful result in greater weighting of quality information in decisions. An emerging body of research indicates that the way information is presented affects how it is interpreted and how it is weighted in decisions. Comparative health plan performance reports are not being used by consumers possibly because the information presented is difficult to use. The next generation of these reports should be designed to support decision making. DESIGN AND STUDY PARTICIPANTS: The study uses a controlled experimental design. Participants (n = 162) were randomly assigned to different conditions and asked to complete tasks related to using quality information and making health plan selections. Dependent variables included the amount of weight given to quality information in choices and decision accuracy. RESULTS: Some presentation approaches make it easier for users to process and integrate quality data into their choices. However, other presentation formats influence consumers' decisions in ways that undermine their self-interest. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that presenting quality data in a more evaluable format increases the weight it carries in consumer decisions. Every change made in the presentation of comparative data has the potential to influence decisions. Those who disseminate information have a responsibility to be aware of how they use that influence and to direct it in productive and defensible ways. The alternative is to manipulate people in ways that are unknown, are not thought out, or are not defensible, but are no less manipulative.

Adult↗

PubMed2001

Supporting informed consumer health care decisions: data presentation approaches that facilitate the use of information in choice.

To make informed choices and navigate within a complex health care system, consumers must have easily available, accurate, and timely information, and they must use it. Contrary to the consumer-driven approach, however, the evidence demonstrates that having an abundance of information does not always translate into its being used to inform choices. The challenge is not merely to communicate accurate information to consumers, but to understand how to present and target that information so that it is actually used in decision-making. This paper reviews what is known from studies of human judgment and decision-making and discusses their implications for supporting informed consumer choice. We delineate the types of decisions that consumers and patients are making, the barriers to using information effectively in choice, and draw upon the evidence for the efficacy of different presentation strategies to propose an initial framework for evaluating and choosing comparative information presentation approaches.

Comprehension↗