This study sought to explore the contribution of the self-concept to older women’s adherence to regular mammography screening behavior. The PRECEDE and health belief model concepts were incorporated with a measure of the women’s future selves to determine whether the self-concept adds to our ability to predict screening. A self-administered questionnaire was completed by 210 community-dwelling women ages 50 to 75 years, recruited from urban and rural women’s groups. Logistic regression analyses revealed that predictors of adherence were clinical breast examination, physician recommendation, age, barriers, benefits, feared health-related possible self, and self-efficacy in the feared domain. The addition of the self measures significantly improved the overall fit of the model. Implications for theory development, practice, and future research are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Brown JS, McCreedy M: The hale elderly: Health behavior and its correlates. Research in Nursing and Health9:317-329, 1986.
2.
2. Stein KF, Markus HR: The role of the self in behavioral change. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration6:317-353, 1997.
3.
3. Canadian Cancer Statistics 1977. Toronto, National Cancer Institute of Canada, 1977.
4.
4. Costanza ME: Breast cancer screening in older women. Cancer69(7):1925-1931, 1992.
5.
5. King E, Rimer BK, Balshem A, Ross E, Seay J: Mammography-related beliefs of older women. Journal of Aging and Health5(1):82-100, 1993.
6.
6. Mah Z, Bryant H: Age as a factor in breast cancer knowledge, attitudes and screening behaviour. Canadian Medical Association Journal146(12):2167-2174, 1992.
7.
7. Rimer BK, Ross E, Cristinzio CS, King E: Older women’s participation in breast screening. Journal of Gerontology47:85-91, 1992.
8.
8. Keller ML, Leventhal H, Prohaska TR, Leventhal EA: Beliefs about aging and illness in a community sample. Research in Nursing and Health12:247-255, 1989.
9.
9. Green LW, Kreuter MW: Health Promotion Planning: An Educational and Environmental Approach. Mountain View, CA, Mayfield, 1991.
10.
10. Janz NK, Becker MH: The health belief model: A decade later. Health Education Quarterly11:1-47, 1984.
11.
11. Rosenstock IM: The health belief model: Explaining health behavior through expectancies, in Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK (eds.): Health Behavior and Education. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 1990, pp. 39-62.
12.
12. Markus H, Nurius P: Possible selves. American Psychologist4(9):954-969, 1986.
13.
13. Zapka JG, Hosmer D, Costanza ME, Harris DR, Stoddard A: Changes in mammography use: Economic, need, and service factors. American Journal of Public Health82(10):1345-1351, 1992.
14.
14. Aiken LS, West SG, Woodward CK, Reno RR: Health beliefs and compliance with mammography-screening recommendations in asymptomatic women. Health Psychology13(2):122-129, 1994.
15.
15. Zapka JG, Stoddard AM, Maul L, Costanza ME: Interval adherence to mammography screening guidelines. Medical Care29(8):697-707, 1991.
16.
16. Miller AM, Champion VL: Mammography in women > 50 years of age: Predisposing and enabling characteristics. Cancer Nursing16(4):260-269, 1993.
17.
17. Cross S, Markus H: Possible selves across the life span. Human Development34(4):230-255, 1991.
18.
18. Markus H: Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology35(2):63-78, 1977.
19.
19. Hooker K: Possible selves and perceived health in older adults and college students. Journal of Gerontology47(2):P85-P95, 1992.
20.
20. Markus H, Ruvolo AR: Possible selves: Personalized representations of goals, in Pervin LA (ed.): Goal Concepts in Personality and Social Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum, 1989, pp. 211-241.
21.
21. Hooker K, Kaus CR: Possible selves and health behaviors in later life. Journal of Aging and Health4(3):390-411, 1992.
22.
22. Oyserman D, Markus H: Possible selves in balance: Implications for delinquency. Journal of Social Issues46(2):141-157, 1990.
23.
23. Emmons RA: Personal strivings: An approach to personality and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51(5):1058-1068, 1986.
24.
24. Bandura A: Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review84(2):11-215, 1977.
25.
25. Champion VL: Instrument development for health belief model constructs. Advances in Nursing Science6(3):73-85, 1984.
26.
26. Champion VL: Beliefs about breast cancer and mammography by behavioral stage. Oncology Nursing Forum21(6):1009-1014, 1994.
27.
27. Champion VL: Instrument refinement for breast cancer screening behaviors. Nursing Research42(3):139-143, 1993.
28.
28. Stephens T, Fowler Graham D: Canada’s Health Promotion Survey 1990: Technical Report. Ottawa, Minister of Supply and Services Canada, Health and Welfare Canada, 1993.
29.
29. Polednak AP, Lane DS, Burg MA: Mail versus telephone surveys on mammography utilization among women 50-75 years old. Medical Care29(3):243-250, 1991.
30.
30. The Workshop Group: Reducing deaths from breast cancer in Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal141:199-201, 1989.
32. Muhr T: ATLAS/ti Computer Aided Text Interpretation and Theory Building—Release 1.1E: User’s Manual. Berlin, Muhr, 1994.
33.
33. Oyserman D, Markus HR: Possible selves and delinquency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology59(1):112-125, 1990.
34.
34. Tesch R: Qualitative Research: Analysis Types and Software Tools. New York, Falmer, 1995.
35.
35. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S: Applied Logistic Regression. New York, John Wiley, 1989.
36.
36. Health Canada: Report on the National Forum on Breast Cancer. Ottawa, Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 1994.
37.
37. Champion VL: Compliance with guidelines for mammography screening. Cancer Detection and Prevention16(4):253-258, 1992.
38.
38. Rakowski W, Rimer BK, Bryant SA: Integrating behavior and intention regarding mammography by respondents in the 1990 National Health Interview Survey of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention. Public Health Reports108(5):605-624, 1993.
39.
39. Meischke H, Andersen R, Bowen D, Kuniyuki A, Urban N: A health priorities model: Application to mammography screening. Health Education & Behavior25(3):383-395, 1998.
40.
40. Salazar MK, de Moor C: An evaluation of mammography beliefs using a decision model. Health Education Quarterly22(1):110-126, 1995.
41.
41. Zapka JG, Stoddard AM, Costanza ME, Greene HL: Breast cancer screening by mammography: Utilization and associated factors. American Journal of Public Health79(11):1499-1502, 1989.
42.
42. Zapka JS, Stoddard A, Maul L, Costanza ME: Interval adherence to mammography screening guidelines. Medical Care29(8):697-701, 1991.
43.
43. Stein JA, Fox SA, Murata PJ, Morisky DE: Mammography usage and the health belief model. Health Education Quarterly19(4):447-462, 1992.
44.
44. Hooker K, Kaus CR: Health-related possible selves in young and middle adulthood. Psychology and Aging9(1):126-133, 1994.
45.
45. Maddux JE, Rogers RW: Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology19:469-479, 1983.
46.
46. Mor V, Pacala JT, Rakowski W: Mammography for older women: Who uses, who benefits?Journal of Gerontology47:43-49, 1992.
47.
47. Self CA, Rogers RW: Coping with threats to health: Effects of persuasive appeals on depressed, normal and antisocial personalities. Journal of Behavioral Medicine13(4):343-357, 1990.
48.
48. Maxwell CJ, Kozak JF, Desjardins-Denault SD, Parboosingh J: Factors in promoting mammography screening among Canadian women. Canadian Journal of Public Health88(5):346-350, 1997.
49.
48. Etzi S, Lane D, Grimson R: The use of mammography vans by low-income women: The accuracy of self-reports. American Journal of Public Health84(1):107-109, 1994.
50.
49. King ES, Rimer BK, Trock B, Balshem A, Engstrom P: How valid are mammography self-reports?American Journal of Public Health80(11):1386-1388, 1990.
