Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2024-12
Harnessing Hope in Digital Spaces for Health Equity: How Group Comparison Information and Supportive Comments Influence Bone Marrow Donor Intentions for African Americans
Pursuing health equity necessitates recognizing health disparities that disproportionately impact disadvantaged groups and eliminating their barriers to essential health resources. Interactive digital technologies—specifically, popular social media platforms such as blogs and social networks—can be leveraged to engage underserved minority populations in collective social action aimed at addressing key determinants of health disparities and promoting equitable health outcomes. The present research focuses on the plight of African Americans—a minority group facing significant health disparities. Particularly in the domain of bone marrow donation, African Americans remain the group least likely to find a matching donor. Guided by the social comparison framing literature, we conducted an online experiment to investigate how group comparison information (GCI) emphasizing group-based disparities and supportive user comments on social media platforms influence African Americans’ intentions to join a bone marrow registry. In doing so, we considered hope as a mediator and group identification as a moderator. Results based on a conditional process analysis showed that GCI led to greater bone marrow donor intentions in the presence of supportive comments through elicitation of hope, particularly among those low in group identification. The current findings demonstrate that it is important to consider the role of supportive message environments and group identification when addressing health disparities with GCI. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BravemanP. Health disparities and health equity: Concepts and measurement. Annu Rev Public Health, 2006; 27:167–194; doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.27.021405.102103
2.
GibbonsMC, FleisherL, SlamonRE, et al.Exploring the potential of web 2.0 to address health disparities. J Health Commun, 2011; 16(Suppl 1):77–89; doi: 10.1080/10810730.2011.596916
3.
GragertL, EapenM, WilliamsE, et al.HLA match likelihoods for hematopoietic stem-cell grafts in the U.S. registry. N Engl J Med, 2014; 371(4):339–348; doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1311707
4.
BarkerJN, BoughanK, DahiPB, et al.Racial disparities in access to HLA-matched unrelated donor transplants: A prospective 1312-patient analysis. Blood Adv, 2019; 3(7):939–944; doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2018028662
5.
BigmanCA. Social comparison faming in health news and its effect on perceptions of group risk. Health Commun, 2014; 29(3):267–280; doi: 10.1080/10410236.2012.745043
6.
LiuJ, NiederdeppeJ. Effects of communicating health disparities using social comparison framing: A comprehensive review. Soc Sci Med, 2024; 348:116808; doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116808
7.
AakerJ, SmithA. The dragonfly effect: Quick, effective, and powerful ways to use social media to drive social change. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco: CA; 2010.
8.
LeongJ, DonnellK, AveraE. Lives were saved: The Asian American Donor Program. In: Handbook of Asian American Health. (YooGJ, LeMN, OdaAY. eds.) Springer New York: New York, NY, 2013, pp. 363–374.
9.
SrivastavaJ, SaksJ, WeedAJ, et al.Engaging audiences on social media: Identifying relationships between message factors and user engagement on the American Cancer Society’s Facebook page. Telematics and Informatics, 2018; 35(7):1832–1844; doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2018.05.011
10.
DresslerWW, OthsKS, GravleeCC. Race and ethnicity in public health research: Models to explain health disparities. Annu Rev Anthropol, 2005; 34(1):231–252; doi: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120505
11.
WindschitlPD, MartinR, FlugstadAR. Context and the interpretation of likelihood information: The role of intergroup comparisons on perceived vulnerability. J Pers Soc Psychol, 2002; 82(5):742–755; doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.5.742
12.
LiuJ, NiederdeppeJ. Effects of social comparison framing of racial health disparities and behaviors. Human Communication Research, 2024; 50(1):79–94; doi: 10.1093/hcr/hqad041
13.
FestingerL. A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 1954; 7(2):117–140; doi: 10.1177/001872675400700202
14.
TaylorDM, MoghaddamFM, BelleroseJ. Social comparison in an intergroup context. The Journal of Social Psychology, 1989; 129(4):499–515; doi: 10.1080/00224545.1989.9712068
15.
ZieblandSUE, WykeS. Health and illness in a connected world: How might sharing experiences on the internet affect people’s health? Milbank Q, 2012; 90(2):219–249; doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2012.00662.x
16.
WaltherJB, DeAndreaD, KimJ, et al.The Influence of online comments on perceptions of antimarijuana public service announcements on YouTube. Hum. Commun. Res., 2010; 36(4):469–492; doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01384.x
17.
LeeE-J, KimHS, ChoJ. How user comments affect news processing and reality perception: Activation and refutation of regional prejudice. Commun. Monogr., 2017; 84(1):75–93; doi: 10.1080/03637751.2016.1231334
18.
LeeE-J. That’s not the way it is: How user-generated comments on the news affect perceived media bias. J Comput-Mediat Comm, 2012; 18(1):32–45; doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01597.x
19.
WinterS, BrücknerC, KrämerNC. They came, they liked, they commented: Social influence on Facebook News channels. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw, 2015; 18(8):431–436; doi: 10.1089/cyber.2015.0005
20.
OhHJ, LeeB. The effect of computer-mediated social support in online communities on patient empowerment and doctor–patient communication. Health Commun, 2012; 27(1):30–41; doi: 10.1080/10410236.2011.567449
21.
ChunJW, LeeMJ. Understanding empowerment process of willingness to speak out on social media: Amplifying effect of supportive communication. Telemat inform., 2022; 66:101735; doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2021.101735
22.
ChadwickAE. Toward a theory of persuasive hope: Effects of cognitive appraisals, hope appeals, and hope in the context of climate change. Health Commun, 2015; 30(6):598–611; doi: 10.1080/10410236.2014.916777
23.
LazarusRS, LazarusBN. Passion and reason. Oxford University Press: New York, NY, 1994.
24.
Cohen-ChenS, CrispRJ, HalperinE. A new appraisal-based framework underlying hope in conflict resolution. Emot. Rev., 2017; 9(3):208–214; doi: 10.1177/1754073916670023
25.
NabiRL. Discrete emotions and persuasion. In: The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice. (DillardJP, PfauM. eds.) Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, 2002, pp. 289–308.
26.
GreenawayKH, CichockaA, van VeelenR, et al.Feeling hopeful inspires support for social change. Political Psychology, 2016; 37(1):89–107; doi: 10.1111/pops.12225
27.
PhinneyJS, OngAD. Conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity: Current status and future directions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2007; 54(3):271–281; doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.271
28.
WongCA, EcclesJS, SameroffA. The influence of ethnic discrimination and ethnic identification on African American adolescents’ school and socioemotional adjustment. J Pers, 2003; 71(6):1197–1232; doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.7106012
29.
KellyC. Group identification, intergroup perceptions and collective action. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol., 1993; 4(1):59–83; doi: 10.1080/14792779343000022
30.
JamesK, CropanzanoR. Dispositional group loyalty and individual action for the benefit of an ingroup: Experimental and correlational evidence. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process., 1994; 60(2):179–205; doi: 10.1006/obhd.1994.1080
31.
SnyderCR. Reality negotiation: From excuses to hope and beyond. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol., 1989; 8(2):130–157; doi: 10.1521/jscp.1989.8.2.130
32.
KempE, MinKS, JointE. Selling hope: The role of affect-laden health care advertising in consumer decision making. JMTP, 2015; 23(4):434–454; doi: 10.1080/10696679.2015.1049688
33.
YzerbytV, CastanoE, LeyensJ-P, et al.The primacy of the ingroup: The interplay of entitativity and identification. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol., 2000; 11(1):257–295; doi: 10.1080/14792772043000059
34.
CohenEL, HoffnerC. Gifts of giving: The role of empathy and perceived benefits to others and self in young adults’ decisions to become organ donors. J Health Psychol, 2013; 18(1):128–138; doi: 10.1177/1359105311433910
35.
MyrickJG. Public perceptions of celebrity cancer deaths: How identification and emotions shape cancer stigma and behavioral intentions. Health Commun, 2017; 32(11):1385–1395; doi: 10.1080/10410236.2016.1224450
36.
NabiRL, PrestinA. Unrealistic hope and unnecessary fear: Exploring how sensationalistic news stories influence health behavior motivation. Health Commun, 2016; 31(9):1115–1126; doi: 10.1080/10410236.2015.1045237
37.
ParkHS, SmithSW. Distinctiveness and influence of subjective norms, personal descriptive and injunctive norms, and societal descriptive and injunctive norms on behavioral intent: A case of two behaviors critical to organ donation. Human Comm Res, 2007; 33(2):194–218; doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00296.x
38.
HayesAF. Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Commun. Monogr., 2018; 85(1):4–40; doi: 10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100
39.
ShipleyA. Social comparison and prosocial behavior: An applied study of social identity theory in community food drives. Psychol Rep, 2008; 102(2):425–434; doi: 10.2466/pr0.102.2.425-434
40.
AnthiasC, ShawBE, BruceJG, et al.Role of race/ethnicity in donor decisions about unrelated hematopoietic progenitor cell donation: Exploring reasons for higher attrition among racial/ethnic minorities. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant, 2020; 26(3):593–599; doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2019.10.012
41.
RayB, AbedinMA, ShawR. Safe drinking water solutions in parts of West Bengal, India: Combating health issues through participatory water management. In: Public Health and Disasters: Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management in Asia. (ChanEYY, ShawR. eds.) Springer: Singapore, 2020, pp. 185–200.
42.
EmileR, ClammerJR, JayaswalP, et al.Addressing water scarcity in developing country contexts: A socio-cultural approach. Humanit Soc Sci Commun, 2022; 9(1):144; doi: 10.1057/s41599-022-01140-5
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
