IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v24y2004i6p573-583.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Application of the Heuristic-Systematic Processing Model to Treatment Decision Making about Prostate Cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Suzanne K. Steginga

    (Queensland Cancer Fund and the School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia)

  • Stefano Occhipinti

    (School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia)

Abstract

The study investigated the utility of the Heuristic-Systematic Processing Model as a framework for the investigation of patient decision making. A total of 111 men recently diagnosed with localized prostate cancer were assessed using Verbal Protocol Analysis and self-report measures. Study variables included men’s use of nonsystematic and systematic information processing, desire for involvement in decision making, and the individual differences of health locus of control, tolerance of ambiguity, and decision-related uncertainty. Most men (68%) preferred that decision making be shared equally between them and their doctor. Men’s use of the expert opinion heuristic was related to men’s verbal reports of decisional uncertainty and having a positive orientation to their doctor and medical care; a desire for greater involvement in decision making was predicted by a high internal locus of health control. Trends were observed for systematic information processing to increase when the heuristic strategy used was negatively affect laden and when men were uncertain about the probabilities for cure and side effects. There was a trend for decreased systematic processing when the expert opinion heuristic was used. Findings were consistent with the Heuristic-Systematic Processing Model and suggest that this model has utility for future research in applied decision making about health.

Suggested Citation

  • Suzanne K. Steginga & Stefano Occhipinti, 2004. "The Application of the Heuristic-Systematic Processing Model to Treatment Decision Making about Prostate Cancer," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 24(6), pages 573-583, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:24:y:2004:i:6:p:573-583
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X04271044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X04271044
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X04271044?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hack, Thomas F. & Degner, Lesley F. & Dyck, Dennis G., 1994. "Relationship between preferences for decisional control and illness information among women with breast cancer: A quantitative and qualitative analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 279-289, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Camacho, N.M.A. & de Jong, M.G. & Stremersch, S., 2014. "The Effect of Customer Empowerment on Adherence to Expert Advice," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2014-005-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    2. Craig W. Trumbo & Lori Peek & Michelle A. Meyer & Holly L. Marlatt & Eve Gruntfest & Brian D. McNoldy & Wayne H. Schubert, 2016. "A Cognitive‐Affective Scale for Hurricane Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(12), pages 2233-2246, December.
    3. Hazen, Benjamin T. & Overstreet, Robert E. & Jones-Farmer, L. Allison & Field, Hubert S., 2012. "The role of ambiguity tolerance in consumer perception of remanufactured products," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(2), pages 781-790.
    4. Huai-Chun Lo & Chia-Ying Chan, 2023. "Mean reverting in stock ratings distribution," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 1065-1097, April.
    5. Durand, Robert B. & Limkriangkrai, Manapon & Fung, Lucia, 2014. "The behavioral basis of sell-side analysts’ herding," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 176-190.
    6. Camacho, Nuno & De Jong, Martijn & Stremersch, Stefan, 2014. "The effect of customer empowerment on adherence to expert advice," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 293-308.
    7. Schwab, Abraham P., 2008. "Putting cognitive psychology to work: Improving decision-making in the medical encounter," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 1861-1869, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gaston, Christine M. & Mitchell, Geoffrey, 2005. "Information giving and decision-making in patients with advanced cancer: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(10), pages 2252-2264, November.
    2. Kinta Beaver & Saima Latif & Susan Williamson & Debbie Procter & Janet Sheridan & Jonathan Heath & Shabbir Susnerwala & Karen Luker, 2010. "An exploratory study of the follow‐up care needs of patients treated for colorectal cancer," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(23‐24), pages 3291-3300, December.
    3. O' Donnell, Máire & Monz, Brigitta & Hunskaar, Steinar, 2007. "General preferences for involvement in treatment decision making among European women with urinary incontinence," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(9), pages 1914-1924, May.
    4. Budych, Karolina & Helms, Thomas M. & Schultz, Carsten, 2012. "How do patients with rare diseases experience the medical encounter? Exploring role behavior and its impact on patient–physician interaction," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 154-164.
    5. Jean Parboosingh & Sylvie Stachenko & Suzanne Inhaber, 1997. "A Model of Consumer Participation: The Canadian Breast Cancer Initiative," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 23(s1), pages 177-186, Spring.

    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:sae:medema:v:24:y:2004:i:6:p:573-583. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.