IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v31y1990i10p1177-1185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The psychological profile of women attending breast-screening tests

Author

Listed:
  • Kreitler, Shulamith
  • Chaitchik, Samario
  • Kreitler, Hans

Abstract

Though the benefits of early detection of breast cancer are generally known, only few women attend breast-screening examinations. The study was designed to gain insight into the problem by exploring the psychological profile of clinic attenders. In order to find out whether there is such a profile, 210 self-referred women were compared with 210 nonattending women, from the same working and social environments, matched in age, education and occupational level. All subjects were administered 10 tests in 7 domains. The tests were administered as part of a health survey. The results showed that clinic attenders scored higher on negative emotions and total emotions and lower on positive emotions; higher on repression; lower on daydreams; lower on range of self-concept, references to others and negative self-references but higher on positive self-references; scored higher on self-references describing oneself in a functional and in a passive way and scored lower on those describing oneself in terms of one's attitudes, body and appearance; scored lower on neuroticism; scored lower on different somatic complaints and health orientation but higher in alexithymia. No differences were found in authoritarianism, locus of control and self-complexity. Conclusions are that there is a psychological profile of clinic attenders, that it is focused on dysphoric emotions, psychological disease promotion and defensiveness and that it includes characteristics of the construct that is sometimes called the cancer-prone personality.

Suggested Citation

  • Kreitler, Shulamith & Chaitchik, Samario & Kreitler, Hans, 1990. "The psychological profile of women attending breast-screening tests," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 31(10), pages 1177-1185, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:31:y:1990:i:10:p:1177-1185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(90)90239-O
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:socmed:v:31:y:1990:i:10:p:1177-1185. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.