↓ Skip to main content

Communication Efficacy and Couples' Cancer Management: Applying a Dyadic Appraisal Model

Overview of attention for article published in Communication Monographs, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Communication Efficacy and Couples' Cancer Management: Applying a Dyadic Appraisal Model
Published in
Communication Monographs, November 2014
DOI 10.1080/03637751.2014.971415
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to apply Berg and Upchurch's (2007) developmental-conceptual model to understand better how couples cope with cancer. Specifically, we hypothesized a dyadic appraisal model in which proximal factors (relational quality), dyadic appraisal (prognosis uncertainty), and dyadic coping (communication efficacy) predicted adjustment (cancer management). The study was cross-sectional and included 83 dyads in which one partner had been diagnosed with and/or treated for cancer. For both patients and partners, multilevel analyses using the actor-partner interdependence model (APIM) indicated that proximal contextual factors predicted dyadic appraisal and dyadic coping. Dyadic appraisal predicted dyadic coping, which then predicted dyadic adjustment. Patients' confidence in their ability to talk about the cancer predicted their own cancer management. Partners' confidence predicted their own and the patient's ability to cope with cancer, which then predicted patients' perceptions of their general health. Implications and future research are discussed.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 65 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 32%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 12%
Student > Master 5 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 29%
Social Sciences 18 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 13 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 April 2019.
All research outputs
#17,729,864
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Communication Monographs
#2
of 2 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,115
of 277,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Communication Monographs
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 277,922 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.