IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Gender roles, illness orientation and use of medical services

Listed author(s):
  • Hibbard, Judith H.
  • Pope, Clyde R.
Registered author(s):

    The study investigates illness orientation as a factor which may account for sex differences in the utilization of medical care. First, sex differences in the way symptoms are perceived, evaluated and acted upon (illness orientation) are analyzed. Then, gender role factors which may account for sex differences in illness orientation are examined. Finally, the degree to which gender role factors and illness orientation account for sex differences in medical care utilization are assessed. The study population includes 1648 adults between the ages of 18 and 59. Medical record data covering 7 years of outpatient services are linked with survey data on the respondents. The findings show that while females are more likely to perceive symptoms than males, there is no apparent sex difference in a tendency to adopt the sick role when ill. In addition, results indicate that gender role factors such as level and type of role responsibility and concern with health are related to female though not male symptom reports. Illness orientation variables are related to rates of medical utilization for both sexes. However, it is primarily the perception of symptoms and an interest and concern with health which contributes to sex differences in utilization rates. When examining respondents who report either a very low or very high number of symptoms, sex differences in utilization rates fall below statistical significance.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 17 (1983)
    Issue (Month): 3 (January)
    Pages: 129-137

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:17:y:1983:i:3:p:129-137
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:17:y:1983:i:3:p:129-137. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.