IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0145715.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attitudes and Stereotypes in Lung Cancer versus Breast Cancer

Author

Listed:
  • N Sriram
  • Jennifer Mills
  • Edward Lang
  • Holli K Dickson
  • Heidi A Hamann
  • Brian A Nosek
  • Joan H Schiller

Abstract

Societal perceptions may factor into the high rates of nontreatment in patients with lung cancer. To determine whether bias exists toward lung cancer, a study using the Implicit Association Test method of inferring subconscious attitudes and stereotypes from participant reaction times to visual cues was initiated. Participants were primarily recruited from an online survey panel based on US census data. Explicit attitudes regarding lung and breast cancer were derived from participants’ ratings (n = 1778) regarding what they thought patients experienced in terms of guilt, shame, and hope (descriptive statements) and from participants’ opinions regarding whether patients ought to experience such feelings (normative statements). Participants’ responses to descriptive and normative statements about lung cancer were compared with responses to statements about breast cancer. Analyses of responses revealed that the participants were more likely to agree with negative descriptive and normative statements about lung cancer than breast cancer (P

Suggested Citation

  • N Sriram & Jennifer Mills & Edward Lang & Holli K Dickson & Heidi A Hamann & Brian A Nosek & Joan H Schiller, 2015. "Attitudes and Stereotypes in Lung Cancer versus Breast Cancer," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0145715
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145715
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0145715
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0145715&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0145715?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0145715. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.