Risk Perceptions After Receiving Multiple Risk Feedback

Lade...
Vorschaubild
Dateien
Gamp_2-qcf2ojm75nug5.pdf
Gamp_2-qcf2ojm75nug5.pdfGröße: 248.29 KBDownloads: 499
Datum
2018
Herausgeber:innen
Kontakt
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
ArXiv-ID
Internationale Patentnummer
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Open Access Green
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Gesperrt bis
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Forschungsvorhaben
Organisationseinheiten
Zeitschriftenheft
Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
Published
Erschienen in
Personality & social psychology bulletin. 2018, 44(9), pp. 1350-1363. ISSN 0146-1672. eISSN 1552-7433. Available under: doi: 10.1177/0146167218767877
Zusammenfassung

How do people respond to multiple risk feedback in a real-life context? Based on theoretical assumptions, three different predictions for risk perceptions were tested: (a) relative accuracy in risk perceptions, (b) self-defensive responses according to self-affirmation theory, and (c) compensatory responses according to the compensatory health belief model. Participants of a community health screening ( N = 725) received multiple risk indicator feedback for actual blood pressure, blood glucose, and blood lipid levels. Consistent multiple risk feedback profiles encompassed three consistent readings (three normal or three elevated readings). Mixed risk profiles included one elevated and two normal readings. Results indicate relative accuracy in responses: an elevated reading triggered higher risk perception of the respective risk factor. Importantly, the effect was not modulated by the presence of normal readings as assumed by the self-defensive or compensatory response perspective, indicating that people accurately integrate multiple risk indicator feedback as it is often provided in real life.

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
150 Psychologie
Schlagwörter
risk perception, communication, multiple risk feedback, defensiveness
Konferenz
Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined
Zitieren
ISO 690GAMP, Martina, Harald T. SCHUPP, Britta RENNER, 2018. Risk Perceptions After Receiving Multiple Risk Feedback. In: Personality & social psychology bulletin. 2018, 44(9), pp. 1350-1363. ISSN 0146-1672. eISSN 1552-7433. Available under: doi: 10.1177/0146167218767877
BibTex
@article{Gamp2018-09Perce-43098,
  year={2018},
  doi={10.1177/0146167218767877},
  title={Risk Perceptions After Receiving Multiple Risk Feedback},
  number={9},
  volume={44},
  issn={0146-1672},
  journal={Personality & social psychology bulletin},
  pages={1350--1363},
  author={Gamp, Martina and Schupp, Harald T. and Renner, Britta}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43098">
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/43098"/>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">How do people respond to multiple risk feedback in a real-life context? Based on theoretical assumptions, three different predictions for risk perceptions were tested: (a) relative accuracy in risk perceptions, (b) self-defensive responses according to self-affirmation theory, and (c) compensatory responses according to the compensatory health belief model. Participants of a community health screening ( N = 725) received multiple risk indicator feedback for actual blood pressure, blood glucose, and blood lipid levels. Consistent multiple risk feedback profiles encompassed three consistent readings (three normal or three elevated readings). Mixed risk profiles included one elevated and two normal readings. Results indicate relative accuracy in responses: an elevated reading triggered higher risk perception of the respective risk factor. Importantly, the effect was not modulated by the presence of normal readings as assumed by the self-defensive or compensatory response perspective, indicating that people accurately integrate multiple risk indicator feedback as it is often provided in real life.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dc:contributor>Gamp, Martina</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Schupp, Harald T.</dc:contributor>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2018-08-16T09:52:36Z</dcterms:available>
    <dcterms:title>Risk Perceptions After Receiving Multiple Risk Feedback</dcterms:title>
    <dc:contributor>Renner, Britta</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:issued>2018-09</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2018-08-16T09:52:36Z</dc:date>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dc:creator>Renner, Britta</dc:creator>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/43098/1/Gamp_2-qcf2ojm75nug5.pdf"/>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/43098/1/Gamp_2-qcf2ojm75nug5.pdf"/>
    <dc:creator>Gamp, Martina</dc:creator>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dc:creator>Schupp, Harald T.</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
Interner Vermerk
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.
Prüfdatum der URL
Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation
Finanzierungsart
Kommentar zur Publikation
Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Ja
Begutachtet
Ja
Diese Publikation teilen