Abstract
We explored the interaction effects of individual attentional style (high versus low monitoring) and the framing of informational messages on the responses of women undergoing diagnostic follow-up (colposcopy) for precancerous cervical lesions. Prior to the colposcopic procedure, patients (N=76) were randomly assigned to one of three preparatory conditions: (a) Loss-framed message, which emphasized the cost of nonadherence to screening recommendations; (b) Gain-framed message, which emphasized the benefit of adherence; and (c) Neutrally-framed message. It was hypothesized that low monitors (who are more positively biased about their health) would show a more adaptive pattern of response to loss-framed information than high monitors (who are more negatively biased about their health). The results of a series of hierarchical multiple regression analyses were consistent with this prediction. Low monitoring was associated with greater knowledge retention (β=.61, p<.05) and less canceling/rescheduling of follow-up appointments in the loss condition than in the neutral condition (β=.82, p<.002). High monitoring, however, was associated with greater intrusive ideation when information was presented in the loss-oriented frame as compared to the neutral frame (β=.99, p<.01). Knowledge retention and screening adherence were not affected by the framing manipulation. The differences between high versus low monitors as a function of loss or neutral frame suggest an interaction effect, wherein both the type of framing message and the individual's attentional style lead to distinctive cognitive-affective and behavioral patterns. The findings may have clinical implications for the tailoring of health messages to the individual's signature style.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Boring CC, Squires TS, Tong T: Cancer statistics, 1993.CA-A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 1993,43: 7–26.
Larsen PM, Vetner M, Hasen K, Fey SJ: Future trends in cervical cancer.Cancer Letters. 1988,41: 123–137.
American Cancer Society:Cancer Facts & Figures, 1998. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society, Inc., 1998.
Miller SM, Mischel W, O'Leary A, Mills M: From human papillomavirus (HPV) to cervical cancer: Psychosocial processes in infection, detection, and control.Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 1996.18: 219–228.
Lerman C, Ross E, Boyce A, et al: The impact of mailing psychoeducational materials to women with abnormal mammograms.American Journal of Public Health. 1992,82: 729–730.
Miller SM, Shoda Y, Hurley K: Applying cognitive-social theory to health-protective behavior: Breast self-examination in cancer screening.Psychological Bulletin. 1996,119: 70–94.
Rothman AJ, Salovey P: Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing.Psychological Bulletin. 1997,121: 3–19.
Miller SM, Mangan CE: Interacting effects of information and coping style in adapting to gynecologic stress: Should the doctor tell all?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1983,45: 223–236.
Watkins LO, Weaver L, Odegaard V: Preparation for cardiac catheterization: Tailoring the content of instruction to coping style.Heart and Lung. 1986,15: 382–389.
Gattuso S, Litt M, Fitzgerald T: Coping with gastrointestinal endoscopy: Self-efficacy enhancement and coping style.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1992,60: 133–139.
Jacob TC, Penn NE, Kulik JA, Spieth LE: Effects of cognitive style and maintenance strategies on breast self-examination (BSE) practice by African-American women.Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 1992,15: 589–609.
Miller SM: Monitoring versus blunting styles of coping with cancer influence the information patients want and need about their disease: Implications for cancer screening and management.Cancer 1995,76: 167–177.
Miller SM: Monitoring and blunting: Validation of a questionnaire to assess styles of information seeking under threat.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987,52: 345–353.
Rothman AJ, Salovey P, Antone C, Keough K, Martin CD: The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1993,29: 408–433.
Wilson DK, Purdon SE, Wallston KA: Compliance to health recommendations: A theoretical overview of message framing.Health Education Research. 1988,3: 161–171.
Leventhal H, Diefenbach MA, Leventhal E: Illness cognition: Using common sense to understand treatment adherence and affect cognition interaction.Cognitive Therapy and Research. 1992,16: 143–163.
Miller SM: Monitoring and blunting of threatening information: Cognitive interference and facilitation in the coping process. In Sarason IG, Pierce GR (eds),Cognitive Interference: Theories, Methods, and Findings. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1996, 175–190.
Tversky A, Kahneman D: The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice.Science. 1981211: 453–458.
Kahneman D, Tversky A: Choices, values, and frames.American Psychologist. 1984,39: 341–350.
Meyerowitz BE, Chaiken S: The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987,52: 500–510.
Maheswaran D, Meyers-Levy: The influence of message framing and issue involvement.Journal of Marketing Research. 1990,27: 361–367.
Block LG, Keller PA: When to accentuate the negative: The effects of perceived efficacy and message framing on intentions to perform a health-related behavior.Journal of Marketing Research. 1995,32: 192–203.
Lauver D, Rubin M: Message framing, dispositional optimism, and follow-up for abnormal Papanicolaou tests.Research, in Nursing and Health. 1990,15: 199–207.
Wegener DT, Petty RE, Klein DJ: Effect of mood on high elaboration change: The mediating role of likelihood judgments.European Journal of Social Psychology. 1994,24: 25–43.
Chaiken S: Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1980,39: 725–726.
Petty RE, Cacioppo JT: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: Application to advertising. In Percy L, Woodside A (eds).Advertising and Consumer Psychology. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1983, 3–23.
Miller SM, Green V, Bales CB: What you don't know can hurt you: A cognitive-social framework, for understanding children's responses to stress. In Lewis M, Ramsay D (eds).Stress and Soothing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum (in press, 1999).
Miller SM, Brody DS, Summerton J: Styles of coping with threat: Implications for health.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1988,54: 142–148.
Miller SM, Leinbach A, Brody DS: Coping styles in hypertensive patients: Nature and consequences.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1989,57: 333–337.
Steptoe A, O'Sullivan J: Monitoring blunting coping styles in women prior to surgery.British Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1986,25: 143–144.
Steptoe A, Sutcliffe I, Allen B, Coombes C: Satisfaction with communication, medical knowledge, and coping style in patients with metastatic cancer.Social Science and Medicine. 1991,32: 627–632.
Christensen AJ, Moran PJ, Lawton W, Stallman D, Voigts A: Monitoring attentional style and medical regimen adherence in hemodialysis patients.Health Psychology. 1997,16: 256–262.
Muris P, van Zuuren FJ, Kindt M: Monitoring coping style, fear of AIDS, and attitudes towards AIDS prevention.Social Behavior and Personality. 1994,22: 137–144.
Miller SM, Roussi P, Altman D, Helm W, Steinberg A: Effect of coping style on psychological reactions of low-income, minority women to colposcopy.Journal of Reproductive Medicine. 1994,39: 711–718.
Miller SM, Rodoletz M, Schroeder CM, Mangan CE, Sedlacek TV: Applications of the monitoring process model to coping with severe long-term medical threats.Health Psychology. 1996,15: 216–225.
Miller SM, Roussi P, Caputo GC, Kruus L: Patterns of children's coping with an aversive dental tratment.Health Psychology. 1995,14: 236–246.
Lerman C, Rimer B, Blumberg B: et al: Effects of coping style and relaxation on cancer chemotherapy side effects and emotional responses.Cancer Nursing. 1990,13: 308–315
Ludwick-Rosenthal R, Neufeld R: Preparation for undergoing an invasive medical procedure: Interacting effects of information and coping style.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1993,61: 156–164.
van Zuuren FJ: Coping under experimental threat: Observable and cognitive correlates of dispositional monitoring and blunting.European Journal of Personality. 1993,7: 245–253.
Phipps S, Zinn A: Psychological response to amniocentesis: Effects of coping style.American Journal of Medical Genetics. 1986,25: 143–148.
Wardle F, Pernet A, Collins W, Bourne T: False-positive results in ovarian cancer screening: One-year follow-up of psychological status.Psychology and Health. 1994,10: 33–40.
Weinstein ND: Testing four competing theories of health-protective behavior.Health Psychology. 1993,12: 324–333.
Horowitz MJ, Wilner N, Alvarez W: Impact of Events Scale: A measure of subjective stress.Psychosomatic medicine. 1979,41: 209–218.
Wilson DK, Wallston KA, King JE: Effects of contract framing, motivation to quit, and self-efficacy on smoking reduction.Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1990,20: 531–547.
Miller SM: Monitoring and blunting in the face of threat: Implications for adaptation and health. In Montada L, Filipp S, Lerner M, (eds),Life Crises and Experiences of Loss in Adulthood. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1992, 255–273.
Miller SM, Fang C, Diefenbach M, Bales C: Tailring psychosocial interventions to the individual's health information processing style. In Baum A, Anderson B (eds),Psychosocial Interventions and cancer. Washington, DC: APA (inpress, 1999).
King ES, Rimer BK, Trock B, Balshem A, Engstrom P: How valid are mammography self-reports?American Journal of Public Health. 1990,80: 1386–1388.
Aiken LS, West SG:Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991.
Schwartz MD, Lerman C, Miller SM, Daly M, Masny A: Coping disposition, perceived risk, and psychological distress among women at increased risk for ovarian cancer.Health Psychology. 1995,14: 232–235.
Miller SM, Mischel W, Schroeder CM, et al: Intrusive and avoidant ideation among females pursuing infertility treatment.Psychology and Health. 1999,13: 847–858.
Weinstein ND: Effects of personal experience on self-protective behavior.Psychological Bulletin. 1989,105: 31–50.
Wilson DK, Chaiken S, Axsom D: The cognitive mediation of message framing in persuasion. Annual Midwestem Psychological Association Convention. Chicago, IL: 1986.
Purdon SE, Wilson DK, Endom PL: The cognitive mediation of persuasive messages in health psychology. Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association. New York: 1987.
Croyle RT, Lerman C: Interest in genetic testing for colon cancer susceptibility: Cognitive and emotional correlates.Preventive Medicine. 1993,22: 284–292.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Preparation of this manuscript was supported in part by NIH grants CA58999, CA61280, CA06927, HG0166, ACS grant PBP-89318, DOD grants BC971638 and OC970004, and appropriations from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of Rob Sipps, Leeann Speechley, and Lloyd Ohls.
About this article
Cite this article
Miller, S.M., Buzaglo, J.S., Simms, S.L. et al. Monitoring styles in women at risk for cervical cancer: Implications for the framing of health-relevant messages. ann. behav. med. 21, 27–34 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02895030
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02895030