Adopting a survivor identity after cancer in a peer support context
- 761 Downloads
The term cancer survivor can refer to individuals from diagnosis through the rest of their life. However, not all people with cancer identify as a survivor, and underlying factors and correlates are yet to be well-explored empirically.
Study 1 surveyed men in a prostate cancer peer support network (n = 514), exploring psychosocial variables related to adopting a survivor identity. Study 2 interviewed 160 women with breast cancer in an online support group and collected observational data, assessing how survivor identity relates to perceptions of and participation in online support groups.
For men, survivor identity (35 %) was related to lower levels of threat appraisal (p = .000), more deliberate rumination (p = .042), gaining greater understanding of cancer experience through peers (p = .041) and a higher, though marginally significant, level of posttraumatic growth (p = .052). Women adopting a survivor identity (50 %) had higher rates of online support group posts (p = .048), a greater feeling of mattering to the group (p = .002), rated the group as more helpful (p = .004 to .01) and had less difficulty in relating to the group (p = .002) than women not identifying as a survivor.
Survivor identity was related to active and positive engagement with peers, and cognitive processing.
Implications for cancer survivors
While the cancer survivor metaphor may be salient for some people diagnosed with cancer, many did not associate with the term, highlighting the complexity surrounding survivorship discourse and the need to be sensitive to unique individual needs in psychosocial interventions that involve groups.
KeywordsCancer Survivor identity Peer support Posttraumatic growth
The authors wish to thank the Brisbane Prostate Support Network, the Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Cancer Council Queensland and the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health (Grant CA15887) for their support and assistance in this project. Prof. Suzanne Chambers is supported by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship.
Conflict of interest
The authors wish to state that they have no conflicts of interest to declare in regards to this submission to the Journal of Cancer Survivorship.
- 2.National Cancer Institute. Milestone (1971): President Nixon declares war on cancer [cited 2013 22nd April]; Available from: http://dtp.nci.nih.gov/timeline/noflash/milestones/M4_Nixon.htm
- 3.National Cancer Institute. About cancer survivorship research: History. 2012 [cited 2013 22nd April]; Available from: http://dccps.nci.nih.gov/ocs/history.html
- 4.National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship. Our History 2013 [cited 2013 30th April]; Available from: http://www.canceradvocacy.org/about-us/our-history/
- 6.National Cancer Institute. About survivorship research: Survivorship definitions. 2012 [cited 2013 22nd April]; Available from: http://dccps.nci.nih.gov/ocs/definitions.html
- 15.Sontag S. Illness as metaphor. New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux; 1978.Google Scholar
- 17.Stanton AL, Bower JE, Low CA. Posttraumatic growth model: sociocultural considerations. In: Calhoun LG et al., editors. Handbook of posttraumatic growth: research and practice. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2006. p. 138–75.Google Scholar
- 18.Calhoun LG, Tedeschi RG. Posttraumatic growth in clinical practice. New York: Routledge; 2013.Google Scholar
- 19.Davies B, Harre R. Positioning and personhood. In: Harre R, van Langenhove L, editors. Positioning theory. Oxford: Blackwell; 1998.Google Scholar
- 22.Lepore SJ, Kernan W. Positive life change and the social context of illness: an expanded social-cognitive processing model. In: Park CL et al., editors. Medical illness and positive life change: can crisis lead to personal transformation? Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2009. p. 139–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 6th ed. Boston: Pearson; 2012.Google Scholar
- 30.Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1988.Google Scholar
- 35.Marcus FM. Mattering: its measurement and theoretical significance for social psychology. In: Paper presented in Annual meeting of the Eastern Sociological Association. Cincinnati: OH; 1991.Google Scholar
- 36.Rosenberg M, McCullough BC. Mattering: inferred significance and mental health among adolescents. Res Community Ment Health. 1981;2:163–82.Google Scholar
- 39.Lieberman MA, Yalom ID, Miles M. Encounter groups: first facts. New York: Basic Books; 1973.Google Scholar
- 40.Zebrack B. Cancer survivors and quality of life: a critical review of the literature. Oncol Nurse Forum. 2000;27:1395–401.Google Scholar