Understanding Intentions and Action in Colorectal Cancer Screening
- 502 Downloads
Factors involved in forming intentions to attend cancer screening may be different from those involved in translating intentions into action.
To test the hypotheses that social cognition variables predict intention better than action, and that life difficulty variables predict action better than intention, in colorectal screening.
Participants from one center in the UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy Trial (n = 2,969) were categorized according to their screening intention, measured at baseline, and their subsequent attendance at screening (recorded at the clinic). Differences in factors related to life difficulty (socioeconomic deprivation, health, stress, social support) and social cognition variables were examined, and discriminant analysis was used to identify sets of variables that best differentiated the groups.
Social cognition variables were strongly associated with intention but only weakly with action. In contrast, factors related to life difficulties (socioeconomic deprivation, poor health status) were better predictors of action than intention.
Social cognition variables appeared to be important determinants of screening intentions. Other variables—that may be markers of barriers to implementing plans—were more strongly associated with action. To maximize colorectal screening participation, research is needed to identify a wider range of determinants of attendance.
KeywordsColorectal cancer Screening Intention Socioeconomic Psychological
This work was supported by Cancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council.
- 1.Becker MH. The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Educ Monogr. 1974; 2: 324–474.Google Scholar
- 2.Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.Google Scholar
- 4.Rogers RW. A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. J Psychol. 1975; 91: 93–114.Google Scholar
- 13.Schwarzer R. Self-efficacy in the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors: Theoretical approaches and a new model. In: Schwarzer R, ed. Self-efficacy: Thought Control of Action. Washington, DC: Hemisphere; 1992: 217–242.Google Scholar
- 15.Afridi A. Community Cohesion and Deprivation: A Discussion Paper for the Commission on Integration and Cohesion. London: The Stationery Office; 2007.Google Scholar
- 18.Prescott-Clarke P, Primatesta P, eds. Health Survey for England. London: HMSO; 1996.Google Scholar
- 23.Champion VL. Instrument development for health belief model constructs. Adv Nurs Sci. 1984; 6: 73–85.Google Scholar
- 24.Kinnear PR, Gray CD. SPSS 12 Made Simple. Hove, East Sussex: Psychology; 2004.Google Scholar
- 25.Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. New York: Harper & Row; 1989.Google Scholar
- 35.Bandura A. Desire for Control: Personality, Social and Clinical Perspectives. New York: Plenum; 1992.Google Scholar