| Title |
Affective associations and cognitive beliefs relate to individuals’ decisions to perform testicular or breast self-exams
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Behavioral Medicine, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10865-015-9641-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carolyn R. Brown-Kramer, Marc T. Kiviniemi |
| Abstract |
Affective associations with behavioral practices play an important role in individuals' uptake of a variety of health behaviors. Most work has looked at individual behavioral practices with a direct impact on health; because screening behaviors are conceptually distinct from such behaviors, it is important to examine the interplay of affect and cognition in screening decision making. The current research explored affective and cognitive predictors of testicular and breast self-examination behavior. Young adult participants (N = 184) reported cognitive beliefs and affective associations with testicular self-exam behavior (male participants) and breast self-exam behavior (female participants) and reported their own current screening behavior. In univariable models, affective associations were related to screening behavior for both testicular self-exams and breast self-exams. When examining affective associations and cognitive beliefs as simultaneous predictors, affective associations (but not cognitive beliefs) predicted testicular self-exams, and neither affective associations nor cognitive beliefs were uniquely related to breast self-exams. Moreover, for testicular self-exams, affective associations mediated the relation between cognitive beliefs and screening behavior; no mediation was present for breast self-exam behavior. These findings suggest three potential outcomes: first, that greater consideration of affective associations in testicular self-exam screening decisions may be warranted; second, that breast and testicular self-exams may have different antecedents; and third, that incorporation of affective factors in intervention design might have merit for increasing engagement in some cancer screening behaviors. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 22% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 22% |
| Unknown | 13 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,323,232
of 23,070,218 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#230
of 1,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,108
of 265,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,070,218 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,080 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,423 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.