Perceived breast cancer risk: heuristic reasoning and search for a dominance structure
Studies suggest that people construct their risk perceptions by using inferential rules called heuristics. The purpose of this study was to identify heuristics that influence perceived breast cancer risk. We examined 11 interviews from women of diverse ethnic/cultural backgrounds who were recruited from community settings. Narratives in which women elaborated about their own breast cancer risk were analyzed with Argument and Heuristic Reasoning Analysis methodology, which is based on applied logic. The availability, simulation, representativeness, affect, and perceived control heuristics, and search for a dominance structure were commonly used for making risk assessments. Risk assessments were based on experiences with an abnormal breast symptom, experiences with affected family members and friends, beliefs about living a healthy lifestyle, and trust in health providers. Assessment of the potential threat of a breast symptom was facilitated by the search for a dominance structure. Experiences with family members and friends were incorporated into risk assessments through the availability, simulation, representativeness, and affect heuristics. Mistrust in health providers led to an inappropriate dependence on the perceived control heuristic. Identified heuristics appear to create predictable biases and suggest that perceived breast cancer risk is based on common cognitive patterns.
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 60 (2005)
Issue (Month): 2 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:60:y:2005:i:2:p:421-432. 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.