Cancer-related identity and positive affect in survivors of prostate cancer

  • Keith M. BellizziEmail author
  • Thomas O. Blank



Despite a shift in the cancer culture and language used to describe individuals diagnosed with this disease, the extent to which individuals with cancer adopt a particular cancer-related identity and the impact of these identities in relation to their well-being is virtually unknown.

Materials and methods

Using a cross-sectional study design and a metropolitan tumor registry, a mail questionnaire to examine post-treatment quality of life was sent to prostate cancer (PCa) survivors. The sample consisted of 490 PCa survivors, ranging in age from 49–88 (M = 69.7; SD = 7.8), one to eight years after diagnosis. The outcome measure used in these analyses was the PANAS to assess positive and negative affect.


The most frequently reported cancer-related identity was “someone who has had PCa” (57%). The least reported self view was “victim” (1%). Twenty-six percent of men self-identified as “survivors” while 6% thought of themselves as “cancer conquerors.” Only 9% self-identified as a “patient.” Multivariate analyses, adjusted for potential confounders, show respondents who identified themselves as “survivors” or “cancer conquerors” reported significantly higher scores on positive affect than men who self-identified as “patients” (p < .001).


Although the majority of respondents identified themselves as “someone who has had cancer,” identifying as a “survivor” or “someone who has conquered cancer” appears to have adaptive value for positive mood.

Implications for cancer survivors

Those who perceive themselves as survivors of prostate cancer may derive some benefit in well-being associated with this self assessment.


Prostate cancer Positive and negative affect Identity 



The ideas and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors, and endorsement by the National Cancer Institute and University of Connecticut is not intended nor should be inferred.


This study was supported by the National Institute of Aging, 1-R0317728 to the University of Connecticut (T. O. Blank, PI).


  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society (2006). Cancer facts and figures. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bellizzi, K. M. (2004). Expressions of generativity and posttraumatic growth in adult cancer survivors. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 58, 247–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blank, T. O., & Bellizzi, K. M. (2006). After prostate cancer: Predictors of well-being among long-term prostate cancer survivors. Cancer, 106(10), 2128–2135.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deimling, G. T., Bowman, K. F., & Wagner, L. J. (in press). Cancer survivorship and identity among long-term survivors. Cancer Investigation.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deimling, G. T., Kahana, B., & Schumacher, J. (1997). Life-threatening illness: The transition from victim to survivor. The Journal of Identity and Aging, 2, 164–186.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eton, D., Lepore, S., & Helgeson, V. (2001). Early quality of life in patients with localized prostate carcinoma. Cancer, 92, 1451–1459.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eton, D., & Lepore, S. (2002). Prostate cancer and health-related quality of life: A review of the literature. Psycho-Oncology, 11, 307–326.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ford, L. A., & Christmon, B. C. (2005). Every breast cancer is different: Illness narratives and the management of identity in breast cancer. In E. B. Ray (Ed.), Health communication in practice: A case study approach. vol. Xxii (pp. 157–169). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoffman, B. (2004). A cancer survivor’s almanac: Charting your journey (3 ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Little, M., Paul, K., Jordens, C. F. C., & Sayers, E.-J. (2002). Survivorship and discourses of identity. Psycho-Oncology, 11, 170–178.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mead, G. H. (1967). Mind, self and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Cancer Institute. Cancer Survivorship Research Website:
  14. 14.
    Sparks, L., & Mittapalli, K. (2004). To know or not to know: The case of communication by and with older adult Russians diagnosed with cancer. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 19, 383–403.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Voogt, E., Van Der Heide, A., Van Leeuwen, A. F., Visser, A. P., Cleiren, M. P. H. D., Passchier, J., et al. (2005). Positive and negative affect after diagnosis of advanced cancer. Psycho-Oncology, 14(4) 262–273.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zebrack, B. (2000). Cancer survivor identity and quality of life. Cancer Practice, 8(5), 238–242.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Office of Cancer SurvivorshipNational Cancer InstituteBethesdaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Human Development and Family StudiesUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA

Personalised recommendations