IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v56y2003i8p1661-1667.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Elderly people's ratings of the importance of health-related factors to their self-assessments of health

Author

Listed:
  • Benyamini, Yael
  • Leventhal, Elaine A.
  • Leventhal, Howard

Abstract

Identifying the bases for self-assessed health (SAH) has interested researchers in their attempts to understand its validity as a predictor of future health outcomes. Quantitative approaches typically used statistical methods to identify correlates of SAH while qualitative approaches asked people to elaborate on the reasons underlying their rating of health. The current study used a quantitative methodology, asking 487 elderly people to rate the importance of 42 health-related factors as bases for their SAH judgment. Factors indicating overall functioning/vitality were rated highly by all participants. Factors indicating current disease were rated highly by people reporting poor/fair SAH while risk factors and positive indicators were rated highly by those reporting good, very good, or excellent health. Thus, there seems to be a clear distinction between poor and fair SAH that reflect levels of illness, and higher levels of SAH that reflect levels of health.

Suggested Citation

  • Benyamini, Yael & Leventhal, Elaine A. & Leventhal, Howard, 2003. "Elderly people's ratings of the importance of health-related factors to their self-assessments of health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(8), pages 1661-1667, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:8:p:1661-1667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(02)00175-2
    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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jylhä, Marja, 2009. "What is self-rated health and why does it predict mortality? Towards a unified conceptual model," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 307-316, August.
    2. Subramanian, S.V. & Acevedo-Garcia, Dolores & Osypuk, Theresa L., 2005. "Racial residential segregation and geographic heterogeneity in black/white disparity in poor self-rated health in the US: a multilevel statistical analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 1667-1679, April.
    3. Natalia Golini & Viviana Egidi, 2016. "The Latent Dimensions of Poor Self-Rated Health: How Chronic Diseases, Functional and Emotional Dimensions Interact Influencing Self-Rated Health in Italian Elderly," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 128(1), pages 321-339, August.
    4. Hafiz T. A. Khan & Matt Flynn, 2016. "Self-Reported Health Status of Older Adults in Malaysia and Singapore: Evidence from the 2007 Global Ageing Survey," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 11(3), pages 687-705, September.
    5. Baron-Epel, Orna & Kaplan, Giora & Haviv-Messika, Amalia & Tarabeia, Jalal & Green, Manfred S. & Nitzan Kaluski, Dorit, 2005. "Self-reported health as a cultural health determinant in Arab and Jewish Israelis: MABAT--National Health and Nutrition Survey 1999-2001," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(6), pages 1256-1266, September.
    6. Cheng, Sheung-Tak & Chan, Alfred C.M., 2006. "Social support and self-rated health revisited:: Is there a gender difference in later life?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 118-122, July.
    7. George Ploubidis & Emily Grundy, 2011. "Health Measurement in Population Surveys: Combining Information from Self-reported and Observer-Measured Health Indicators," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 48(2), pages 699-724, May.

    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:56:y:2003:i:8:p:1661-1667. 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). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.