联系我们
我们只做按需定制化代写服务,绝对原创!
QQ:41806229 点击这里在线咨询代写
Email:admin@assignment.cc
网  址:http://www.assignment.cc/
支持Paypal、VISA、MasterCard、Discover等银行卡支付
Paypal支付
代写essay,Health Communications Behaviours
发表日期:2013-09-14 07:13:58 | 来源:assignment.cc | 当前的位置:首页 > 代写essay > 正文
Health Communications Behaviours

Chapter One: Introduction

Health communications beat a significant character in shaping folk's decisions to employ in specific health behaviours. Most health messages can be framed in terms of either the benefits of engaging in the recommended conduct (gain-framed content) or the costs of not engaging in the conduct (loss-framed content. Message framing - presenting equal data in terms of either gains or losses - has proven to be an efficient, theoretically based health communication scheme substantiated by observational investigation (Rothman, Bartels, Wlaschin, & Salovey, 2006; Rothman, Kelly, Hertel, & Salovey, 2003.

Unanswered questions stay, however, regarding the consumption of content framing for encouraging a progressively popular kind of prevention conduct: vaccination. In the existing survey, we examined the comparative potency of gain - versus loss-framed messages in promoting approval of a vaccine to forbid transmission by human papillomavirus (HPV) - a virus that is accountable for nearly all cases of cervical cancer (Bosch, Lorincz, Muñoz, Meijer, & Shah, 2002. In addition, past studies have suggested that framed messages are more efficient among some individuals than among others. We thus sought to describe factors within the content recipient that might do to conservative framing effects.

Chapter Two: Literature Review

Fewer than 20 years ago, scientists identified HPV transmission as the underlying reason of cervical cancer. (Abood 2002)Well over 100 subtypes of HPV have been identified, many of which taint the genital parcel via intimate infection (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (Aiken 1991)Indeed, HPV is the almost popular sexually transmitted transmission (STI) in the United States: (Apanovitch 2003)

An estimated women will get acquired HPV by age 50. Infection with “low-risk” HPV subtypes (6 and 11) can head to genital warts, whereas transmission with “risky” types (almost usually 16 and 18) can ensue in cervical cancer. HPV Subtypes 16 and 18 are believed to be accountable for over 701261f all cervical cancers. (American Cancer Society 2006)

Although most HPV infections clear-cut upward on their own, when left undiscovered and raw, relentless HPV infections can finally advance to cervical cancer. (Baseman 2005)Early sensing of irregular cellular changes with Pap examination has significantly reduced the incidence of cervical cancer in the United States. (Bosch & Lorincz 2002)

Nevertheless, in 2006 an estimated 9,710 U. S. women will be diagnosed with intrusive cervical cancer and 3,700 women will perish from the disease. Prophylactic HPV vaccines have been developed and will be accessible to the world within the next year. (Capolongo 2006)

Clinical trials have establish the vaccines to be secure, well-tolerated, and extremely efficient at preventing HPV transmission and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Given that the HPV vaccines will be accessible in the nearby future, it is both significant and timely to probe the potency of health communications aimed at promoting their approval. (Carver 1994)

What can past investigation and hypothesis say us about whether a gain- or loss-framed content should head to high approval of the HPV vaccine? Only two past studies have investigated consumption of content framing in promoting vaccination conduct. (Chaiken 1980)One survey examined the effects of framed messages on influenza vaccination rates in grownup Medicare patients. (Detweiler 1999)

The new survey used gain - versus loss-framed messages to promote immunization for a fictional disease among college students. (Higgins 1997) Neither survey demonstrated a reward of one chassis over the new, although methodological limitations (e. g., reduced empirical command, consumption of a fictional disease) could partly account for the deficiency of findings. (Harper 2004)

There are, however, hypothetical reasons for expecting differential effects of gain- and loss-framed messages aimed at motivating vaccination conduct. Prospect hypothesis suggests that folk are mostly more ready to go risks when exposed to the unfavorable consequences that could ensue from a resolution but lean to be much danger averse when exposed to the constructive consequences.

Drawing on outlook hypothesis, Rothman and Salovey (1997) proposed that matching the chassis of a content to the character of health conduct being promoted can increase the persuasiveness of the content. This framework rests upon the assumption that the success of a framed content depends upon the extent to which the recommended conduct is perceived to affect danger. (Idson 2004)Because folk are comparatively available to taking risks when faced with prospective losses, loss-framed appeals should be more efficient than gain-framed appeals in promoting disease sensing behaviours (e. g. , mammography, HIV examination) - behaviours that can be viewed as dangerous because the examination could disclose a severe disease. (Kiene 2005)

In contrast, because folk lean to avert risks in the cheek of prospective gains, gain-framed appeals should be more efficient than loss-framed appeals in promoting preventative health behaviours (e. g. , exercising, using sunscreen)-behaviours typically viewed as involving negligible danger because their finish is to forbid disease. (Kahneman 1979)

An amount of observational studies back this abstract framework. Thus, because vaccination is a preventative health conduct that involves negligible danger, predictions derived from outlook hypothesis would indicate that a gain-framed content should head to greater approval of the HPV vaccine than should a loss-framed content. (Lee 2004)

Yet, there are too reasons for thinking that a loss-framed charm may be more productive than a gain-framed charm in fostering vaccine approval. (Maheswaran 1990)First, although vaccination is a preventative health conduct, it may be viewed as dangerous for concern that injecting an international content into the system could present original harms quite than offer security. (Maner in press) For instance, despite evidence to the different, some parents are unsure to vaccinate their children against measles - mumps - rubella (MMR) because they think that the MMR vaccine causes autism. (Mann & Sherman 2004)

Even the very act of receiving an injection could be seen as dangerous in the sense that it mostly involves some degree of pain and soreness. (McCaul 2002)Furthermore, beliefs that the vaccine might not be efficient in preventing HPV transmission could evoke upward notions of danger.

For these reasons, a loss-framed content may evoke greater stake in vaccination than a gain-framed content. Researchers have hypothesized that the comparative effectiveness of gain- as well as loss-framed messages may differ with the level of effort required to carry out the preventive health behaviour. (Millar 2000)Purposely, it has been recommended that loss-framed messages might surpass gain-framed messages in inspiring disease prevention behaviours-for instance vaccination-that do not need concerted effort. (Petty 1984)

Earlier studies supporting the benefit of gain- over loss-framed messages have alerted approximately solely on preventive health behaviours that necessitate regular, repeated act to be effective. Whether these results be relevant to vaccination-a behavior that normally requires fewer effort than a lot of other precautionary health behaviours-is unknown. (Rothman 1999)

Earlier research decides that message framing effects frequently depend on uniqueness of the message recipient. One characteristic that serves as a significant mediator of message framing effects is individual involvement with the subject addressed in the message. (Rothman 2006) Steady with evidence that personal participation motivates individuals to develop a message more deeply; framing effects are time after time originated when a message is supposed to be highly relevant. (Robberson 1988)

For instance, few researchers found that a gain-framed message arguing sun protection led to superior interest in sunscreen use rather than a loss-framed message except only amongst participants who were anxious about skin cancer (i.e., women). On the other hand, under conditions of small relevance, framing be likely to have modest effect. Therefore, in the current study we will predict that framing effects, should they be observed at all, would be found mainly among those who perceive the HPV vaccine to be in person applicable. (Schneider 2001)

Theory as well as research also proposes that framing effects may be restrained by individual dissimilarities in approach-avoidance motivation. (Villa 2005)While a number of people are particularly sensitive to reward cues as well as look for move toward positive results, others are further responsive to threat cues as well as are motivated to avoid negative outcomes. (Tversky 1981)

Some proofs propose that individuals may be further receptive to messages which agree with their motivational point of reference. (Winer 2006) Purposely, gain-framed messages likely to be mainly effective for approach-oriented individuals, while loss-framed messages likely to be most efficient for avoidance-oriented individuals. (Zimet 2005)

Therefore, we predicted that framing effects would be observed most obviously when the frame of the health message was reliable with the motivational orientation of the receiver.

Chapter Three: Methodology

Participants

African American feminine undergraduate students (n = 127) recruited from Florida State University participated for class recognition. the closing sampling will be of 121 women.

Procedures & Material

Participants will be running in groups of 2 to 10 individuals. After a short creation, participants will be required to finish a pre-manipulation study that will be assessed demographic data, intimate conduct, and STI story. Next they will be given 5 min to learn a 2-page pamphlet that provided data about HPV transmission (its prevalence, infection, diagnosis, handling, danger factors, association with cervical cancer) and the upcoming HPV vaccines.

Measures

Participants will be arbitrarily assigned to learn either a gain- or loss-framed content about the HPV vaccine Number of life intimate partners and frequency of using STI security will be assessed on the pre-manipulation study. All new variables included in the analyses will be assessed on the post-manipulation study, after participants will be exposed to the health information.

References/Bibliography

Abood, D. A., Coster, D. C., Mullis, A. K., & Black, D. R. (2002). Evaluation of a “loss-framed” minimal intervention to increase mammography utilization among medically un- and under-insured women. Cancer Detection and Prevention26, 394–400.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

American Cancer Society (2006). Detailed guide: Cervical cancer. Retrieved August 12, 2005, from http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/CRI_2_3x.asp?dt=8

Apanovitch, A. M., McCarthy, D., & Salovey, P. (2003). Using message framing to motivate HIV testing among low-income, ethnic minority women. Health Psychology22, 60–67.

Baseman, J. G., & Koutsky, L. A. (2005). The epidemiology of human papillomavirus infections.Journal of Clinical Virology32(Suppl. 1), S16–24.

Bosch, F. X., Lorincz, A., Muñoz, N., Meijer, C. J., & Shah, K. V. (2002). The causal relation between human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Journal of Clinical Pathology55, 244–265.

Capolongo, M. J., DiBonaventura, M., & Chapman, G. B. (2006). Physician vaccinate thyself: Why influenza vaccination rates are higher among clinicians than nonclinicians. Annals of Behavioral Medicine31, 288–296.

Carver, C. S., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology67, 319–333.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2004). Genital HPV infection: CDC fact sheet. Retrieved February 20, 2005, from http://www.cdc.gov/std/HPV/STDFact-HPV.htm

Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology39, 752–756.

Detweiler, J. B., Bedell, B. T., Salovey, P., Pronin, E., & Rothman, A. J. (1999). Message framing and sunscreen use: Gain-framed messages motivate beach-goers. Health Psychology18, 189–196.

Gerend, M. A., Lee, S. C., & Shepherd, J. E. (in press). Predictors of human papillomavirus vaccination acceptability among underserved women. Sexually Transmitted Diseases.

Harper, D. M., Franco, E. L., Wheeler, C., Ferris, D. G., Jenkins, D., Schuind, A., et al. (2004). Efficacy of a bivalent L1 virus-like particle vaccine in prevention of infection with human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 in young women: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet364, 1757–1765.

Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist52, 1280–1300.

Idson, L. C., Liberman, N., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). Imagining how you'd feel: The role of motivational experiences from regulatory fit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin30, 926–937.

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk.Econometrica47, 263–291.

Kiene, S. M., Barta, W. D., Zelenski, J. M., & Cothran, D. L. (2005). Why are you bringing up condoms now? The effect of message content on framing effects of condom use messages.Health Psychology24, 321–326.

Lee, A. Y., & Aaker, J. L. (2004). Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology86, 205–218.

Maheswaran, D., & Meyers-Levy, J. (1990). The influence of message framing and issue involvement. Journal of Marketing Research27, 361–367.

Maner, J. K., & Gerend, M. A. (in press). Motivationally selective risk judgments: Do fear and curiosity boost the boons or the banes?Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.

Mann, T., Sherman, D., & Updegraff, J. (2004). Dispositional motivations and message framing: A test of the congruency hypothesis in college students. Health Psychology23, 330–334.

McCaul, K. D., Johnson, R. J., & Rothman, A. J. (2002). The effects of framing and action instructions on whether older adults obtain flu shots. Health Psychology21, 624–628.

Meyers-Levy, J., & Maheswaran, D. (2004). Exploring message framing outcomes when systematic, heuristic, or both types of processing occur. Journal of Consumer Psychology14, 159–167.

Millar, M. G., & Millar, K. U. (2000). Promoting safe driving behaviours: The influences of message framing and issue involvement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology30, 853–856.

Moscicki, A. B. (2005). Impact of HPV infection in adolescent populations. Journal of Adolescent Health37, S3–9.

Muñoz, N., Bosch, F. X., de Sanjosé, S., Herrero, R., Castellsagué, X., Shah, K. V., et al. (2003). Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. New England Journal of Medicine348, 518–527.

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology46, 69–81.

Robberson, M. R., & Rogers, R. W. (1988). Beyond fear appeals: Negative and positive persuasive appeals to health and self-esteem. Journal of Applied Social Psychology13, 277–287.

Rothman, A. J., Bartels, R. D., Wlaschin, J., & Salovey, P. (2006). The strategic use of gain- and loss-framed messages to promote healthy behavior: How theory can inform practice.Journal of Communication56, S202–220.

Rothman, A. J., Kelly, K. M., Hertel, A., & Salovey, P. (2003). Message frames and illness representations: Implications for interventions to promote and sustain healthy behavior. In L. D.Cameron & H.Leventhal (Eds.), The self-regulation of health and illness behavior (pp. 278–296). London: Routledge.

Rothman, A. J., Martino, S. C., Bedell, B. T., Detweiler, J. B., & Salovey, P. (1999). The systematic influence of gain- and loss-framed messages on interest in and use of different types of health behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin11, 1355–1369.

Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin121, 3–19.

Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., Antone, C., Keough, K., & Martin, C. D. (1993). The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviours. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology29, 408–433.

Schneider, T. R., Salovey, P., Apanovitch, A. M., Pizarro, J., McCarthy, D., Zullo, J., et al. (2001). The effects of message framing and ethnic targeting on mammography use among low-income women. Health Psychology20, 256–266.

Taylor, B., Miller, E., Farrington, C. P., Petropoulos, M. C., Favot-Mayaud, I., Li, J., et al. (1999). Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine: No epidemiological evidence for a causal relation. Lancet353, 2026–2029.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice.Science211, 453–458.

Villa, L. L., Costa, R. L., Petta, C. A., Andrade, R. P., Ault, K. A., Giuliano, A. R., et al. (2005). Prophylactic quadrivalent human papillomavirus (types 6, 11, 16, and 18) L1 virus-like particle vaccine in young women: A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre phase II efficacy trial. Lancet Oncology6, 271–278.

Winer, R. L., Hughes, J. P., Feng, Q., O'Reilly, S., Kiviat, N. B., Holmes, K. K., et al. (2006). Condom use and risk of genital human papillomavirus infection in young women. New England Journal of Medicine354, 2645–2654.

Yacobi, E., Tennant, C., Ferrante, J., Pal, N., & Roetzheim, R. (1999). University students' knowledge and awareness of HPV. Preventive Medicine28, 535–541.

Zimet, G. D. (2005). Improving adolescent health: Focus on HPV vaccine acceptance. Journal of Adolescent Health37, S17–23.

 

第一章:简介
健康通信击败一个重大字符,塑造民间的决定聘请在特定的健康行为。大多数健康信息可以从事的推荐行为(增益框的内容)或不参与的情况下进行(亏损框架的内容。消息帧 - 无论是收益方面呈现相同的数据的成本的好处被诬陷或亏损 - 已被证明是一种高效,理论基础健康传播计划观测调查( 2003年罗斯曼,巴特尔, Wlaschin ,沙洛维, 2006;罗斯曼,凯利,赫特尔,沙洛维,证实。
未回答的问题留下来,​​然而,鼓励逐渐流行的一种预防行为:疫苗接种有关消费的内容框架。在现有的调查中,我们研究了比较有力的增益 - 与框损失的消息推动批准的疫苗禁止由人类乳头状瘤病毒( HPV ) - 一种病毒,它是几乎所有的宫颈癌病例(洛林奇博世,负责传输,穆尼奥斯,梅耶尔沙阿, 2002年。此外,过去的研究表明,框架的消息比在其他一些个人之间更有效,因此,我们力求在内容收件人可能做保守的框架效应来形容因素。
第二章:文献综述
不到20年前,科学家们发现传输HPV子宫颈癌的根本原因。 ( 2002年Abood )嘛超过100 HPV亚型已经确定,许多污染生殖器包裹通过亲密的感染(疾病控制和预防中心( 1991年艾肯)事实上, HPV是几乎流行性病传输( STI )美国: ( 2003年Apanovitch )
据估计,妇女将被收购, 50岁的HPV 。可以前往“低风险” ( 6和11) HPV亚型感染尖锐湿疣,宫颈癌与“冒险”类型(通常差不多16和18) ,而传输,可随之而来。被认为是负责701261f所有子宫颈癌的HPV亚型16和18 。 ( 2006年美国癌症协会)
虽然大多数HPV感染旗帜鲜明自己向上,离开时未被发现的,原始的,无情的人乳头状瘤病毒感染,终于可以提前宫颈癌。 (贝斯曼2005 )早期检测与子宫颈抹片检查的不规则的细胞变化明显降低宫颈癌的发病率在美国。 (博世&洛林奇2002 )
然而,在2006年,估计有9,710名美国妇女将被诊断出患有侵入宫颈癌和3,700名妇女将灭亡疾病。预防性HPV疫苗已开发和在未来一年内将成为全球访问。 ( 2006年Capolongo )
建立临床试验的疫苗是安全的,耐受性良好,并且非常有效地防止HPV传输和宫颈上皮内瘤样病变。鉴于HPV疫苗将可在附近的将来,它既是重要和及时的探讨,旨在促进其批准的保健通信的效力。 ( 1994年卡弗)
过去的调查,并假设有什么可以说,我们的收益或亏损框的内容是否应该前往高批准的HPV疫苗?只有两个过去的研究调查,消费的内容框架,促进预防接种行为。 (蔡金1980 )的一项调查研究框架的消息的影响在大人的医保患者的流感疫苗接种率。 ( 1999年德特韦勒)
收益 - 新的调查则为亏损框的消息推动在大学生中的一个虚构的疾病免疫。 ( 1997年希金斯)无论调查显示,虽然一个机箱新的奖励方法的局限性(例如,降低了经验性的命令,一个虚构的疾病的消耗) ,可以部分解释调查结果的不足。 2004年(哈珀)
然而,假设的理由期待差分增益和损耗框消息,旨在激励接种行为的影响。展望假说建议,民间大多更愿意去冒险时,接触到的决议,但精益能够带来的不利后果要远远规避危险时暴露了建设性的后果。
前景假说,罗斯曼和沙洛维(1997)提出的内容,以促进健康行为的性格相匹配的机箱可以增加说服力的内容。此框架有赖于一个框架内容的成功取决于建议的行为在何种程度上被认为影响到危险的假设。因为民间( 2004年Idson )是相对可采取当面对潜在损失的风险,亏损框上诉应该是比增益装裱呼吁更有效地促进疾病检测的行为(例如,乳房X线照相术,艾滋病毒检查) - 的行为,可以被视为考试可能泄露的危险,因为一种严重的疾病。 ( 2005年Kiene )
与此相反,由于民间精益在脸颊,以避免风险的潜在收益,增益结构上诉应该是更有效率比框损失的上诉,在促进预防性健康行为(例如,锻炼,使用防晒霜)行为通常被视为涉及危险可以忽略不计因为他们的终点是禁止疾病。 (卡尼曼1979年)
量观测研究支持这一抽象的框架。因此,因为疫苗是一种预防性的健康行为,涉及危险可以忽略不计,来自前景假说的预测表明增益框的内容应该前往亏损框架内容应该比更大批准的HPV疫苗。 (李, 2004年)
然而,有太多思考原因,一个框损失的魅力比增益结构的魅力在促进疫苗的审批可能更富有成效。首先, ( 1990年Maheswaran )虽然接种疫苗是一种预防性的健康行为,它可能被看作是危险的关注,注入到系统中可能存在的国际内容提供安全比原来的危害相当。 (记者满耳)例如,尽管不同的证据,但一些家长不知道孩子接种疫苗预防麻疹 - 腮腺炎 - 风疹疫苗(MMR ) ,因为他们认为MMR疫苗导致自闭症。 (曼2004年谢尔曼)
即使接受注射的非常行为,可以看作是危险的,在某种意义上说,它主要涉及一定程度的疼痛和酸痛。 ( 2002年麦克考尔)此外,信念,这种疫苗可能无法有效预防人乳头状瘤病毒传播,可能会唤起向上的危险观念。
由于这些原因,损失框架内容可能唤起接种比增益框架内容的更大的利益。研究人员假设,开展预防性健康行为所需的工作量比较效益增益以及亏损框的消息可能会有所不同。 (米勒2000年)故意,已建议框损失的消息可能超越增益结构的消息鼓舞人心的疾病预防行为例如接种疫苗,并不需要共同努力。 ( 1984年小资)
此前有研究支持的利益增益损失框架的消息已通知约完全必要定期的预防性健康行为,反复的行为是有效的。这些结果是否接种疫苗的行为比很多其他预防性健康行为是未知的,通常需要更少的努力有关​​。 (罗思曼1999 )
此前的研究决定,框架效应经常依赖于独特的邮件收件人的消息。一个最大的特点,作为一个重要的调停消息框架效应是个人参与的主题在消息处理。 ( 2006年罗斯曼)稳定的证据表明,个人参与消息激励个人发展更深入;框架效应是一次又一次的起源,当一个消息被认为是高度相关的。 ( 1988年Robberson )
例如,一些研究人员发现,在使用防晒霜的最高利益的增益框消息,争论防晒,而比框亏损的消息,除了参与者之间谁是担心皮肤癌(即女性) 。另一方面,关联的小的条件下,划分可能有适度的影响。因此,在目前的研究中,我们将预测框架效应,他们应该可以在所有观察到,会被发现主要是在那些谁认为HPV疫苗在人适用。 ( 2001年施耐德)
理论以及研究还建议,框架效应可能会受制于个别相异方法避税动机。 2005年(别墅)虽然有不少人都特别敏感,以及奖励线索,看看朝着积极的成果,其他都是威胁线索的动机,以避免负面结果以及进一步响应。 ( 1981年特沃斯基)
一些证据建议个人可能进一步接受同意他们的动机的参考点的消息。 2006年(秋冬)故意,增益结构可能主要是有效的方法,面向个人的消息,而亏损框的消息可能是最有效的避免面向个人。 ( 2005年兹米特)
因此,我们预测框架效应,将观察到的健康消息的帧时,可靠的接收器与动机倾向最明显。
第三章:研究方法
参与者
非洲裔女性本科学生组(n = 127)从佛罗里达州立大学招募参加级的认可。收盘采样,将有121名妇女。
程序及材料
参与者将运行在2至10个人的团体。经过短暂的创作,参与者将被要求完成一项操作前研究将评估人口统计数据,亲密行为和性病的故事。接着,他们将给予5分钟学习2页的小册子关于HPV传播提供的数据(其患病,感染,诊断,处理,危险因素,与宫颈癌)和即将推出的HPV疫苗。
措施
与会者将可以任意分配给学习有关HPV疫苗生活的亲密伙伴数目和频率使用STI安全的收益或亏损框的内容将被评估的操作前研究。所有新的变量纳入分析评估后操纵研究后,参与者将被暴露的健康信息。
参考/参考书目
Abood ,DA,科斯特, DC ,穆利斯, AK ,与黑色, DR (2002年) 。一个“框损失”最小干预,以增加乳房X光检查的利用率未保险的妇女之间的医疗评估。癌症检测和预防,26 , 394-400 。
艾肯,湖南,西, S. G. (1991) 。多元回归测试和口译相互作用。纽伯里公园, CA :贤者。
美国癌症协会(2006年) 。详细指南:宫颈癌。 8月12日,2005 http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/CRI_2_3x.asp?dt=8
上午, Apanovitch的麦卡锡,D. ,&沙洛维, P. (2003) 。消息帧来激励在低收入,少数族裔妇女的艾滋病毒检测。健康心理学杂志,22, 60-67 。
二垒手J. G.,& Koutsky的, L. (2005 ) 。人类乳头状瘤病毒感染的流行病学。 [临床病毒学, 32 (增刊1 ) , S16 - 24 。
博世, FX ,洛林奇, A. ,穆尼奥斯, N. ,梅哲, CJ ,沙阿, KV (2002) 。人类乳头状瘤病毒与宫颈癌之间的因果关系。 [临床病理学, 55 , 244-265 。
, MJ Capolongo的DiBonaventura , M. , &查普曼, GB (2006年) 。医生接种疫苗,你自己:为什么流感疫苗接种率医生比nonclinicians之间更高的。行为医学史册,31, 288-296 。
卡弗, C. S. , &白, T. L. (1994) 。行为抑制,行为激活,和即将到来的奖励和惩罚: BIS / BAS秤的情感反应。人格与社会心理学杂志,67, 319-333 。
美国疾病控制和预防中心(2004年) 。生殖器HPV感染: CDC事实表。检索2005年2月20日,从http://www.cdc.gov/std/HPV/STDFact-HPV.htm
蔡金, S. (1980) 。启发式与系统的信息处理和使用的源与消息线索劝说。人格与社会心理学杂志,39, 752-756 。
,JB,德特韦勒的比德尔, BT ,沙洛维, P. ,普罗宁, E. , &罗斯曼, AJ (1999) 。消息帧和使用防晒霜:增益框的消息激励弄潮儿。健康心理学杂志,18, 189-196 。
Gerend ,马,李, SC ,牧羊犬, JE (新闻) 。预测人类乳头状瘤病毒疫苗接种的接受程度不周到的妇女。性病。
哈珀, DM ,佛朗哥, : EL ,惠勒, C. ,摩天, DG ,詹金斯, D. , Schuind , A. ,等。 (2004年) 。疗效的二价L1病毒样颗粒疫苗在预防感染人乳头状瘤病毒16型和18的年轻女性:一项随机对照试验。柳叶刀“ , 364 , 1757年至1765年。
希金斯, E. T. (1997) 。除了快乐和痛苦。美国心理学家,52, 1280-1300 。
Idson , LC ,利伯曼, N. , &希金斯, ET (2004年) 。想象你会觉得如何监管配合的作用,激励人心的经验。人格与社会心理学通报,30, 926-937 。
卡尼曼, D.,&特沃斯基, A. (1979) 。前景理论:风险决策分析。计量经济学“ ,47, 263-291 。
Kiene , : SM ,巴塔, WD , Zelenski , JM , Cothran , DL (2005年) 。为什么你带安全套呢?使用安全套的消息的消息内容的框架效应的影响。健康心理学杂志,24, 321-326 。
李, A. Y. ,阿克尔, J. L. (2004) 。成为关注的焦点:调节契合影响瞻帧处理的流畅性和劝说。人格与社会心理学杂志,86, 205-218 。
Maheswaran , D. , &迈尔斯 - 列维, J. (1990) 。消息的取景和发行参与的影响。 [市场研究,27, 361-367 。
满耳, J. K. , & Gerend , M. A. (记者) 。动机选择性风险的判断:不要恐惧和好奇心推动的恩赐或巴内斯?组织行为与人类决策过程。
曼, T. ,谢尔曼博士, Updegraff , J. (2004年) 。倾向性的动机和消息帧:在校大学生的一致性假设的测试。健康心理学杂志,23, 330-334 。
麦克考尔, KD ,约翰逊, RJ ,罗斯曼, AJ (2002) 。老年人是否获得流感疫苗取景和动作指令的影响。健康心理学杂志,21, 624-628 。
迈尔斯 - 列维, J. , & Maheswaran , D. (2004) 。探索消息时取景成果系统化,启发式,或出现两种类型的处理。 [消费心理学,14, 159-167 。
G. ,米勒, M.米勒, K. U. (2000 ) 。促进安全驾驶行为的消息的取景和发行参与的影响。 [应用社会心理学,30, 853-856 。
莫希齐茨基A. B. (2005) 。 HPV感染在青少年人群中的影响。青少年健康杂志,37, S3 -9 。
穆尼奥斯, N. ,博世, FX ,德SANJOSE , S. ,雷罗, R. , Castellsagué , X. ,沙阿, KV等。 (2003年) 。流行病学与宫颈癌的人类乳头状瘤病毒类型分类。新英格兰医学杂志, 348 , 518-527 。
小资, R. E. , &卡西奥普, J. T. (1984) 。参与反应参数的数量和质量:中央及周边航线劝说效果。人格与社会心理学杂志,46, 69-81 。
Robberson , M. R. , &罗杰斯, R. W. (1988) 。除了恐惧诉求:阴性和阳性的有说服力的上诉对健康和自尊。 [应用社会心理学,13, 277-287 。
罗斯曼, AJ ,巴特尔, RD , Wlaschin , J. , &沙洛维, P. (2006) 。战略使用的增益和损耗框的讯息,以促进健康的行为:理论如何可以告知的做法。 [通讯, 56 ,S202 -220 。
罗斯曼, AJ ,凯利, KM ,赫特尔, A. , &沙洛维, P. (2003) 。消息帧和疾病陈述影响的干预措施,以促进和维持健康行为。在LDCameron H.Leventhal ( 1997 ) ,自我调节的健康和疾病的行为(第278-296 ) 。伦敦: ROUTLEDGE 。
罗斯曼, : AJ ,马蒂诺, SC ,比德尔, BT ,德特韦勒, JB ,沙洛维, P. (1999) 。系统的增益和损耗框的讯息影响,利息和使用不同类型的健康行为。人格与社会心理学通报,11日, 1355年至1369年。
罗斯曼, A. J. , &沙洛维, P. (1997) 。整形的看法,鼓励健康的行为:消息帧的作用。心理通报,121, 3-19。
罗斯曼, AJ ,沙洛维P. , ANTONE , C. ,基奥, K. , &马丁, CD ( 1993年) 。消息帧的意图执行健康行为的影响。实验社会心理学杂志,29, 408-433 。
施耐德, TR ,沙洛维, P. , Apanovitch , AM ,皮萨罗, J. ,麦卡锡, D. ,祖洛, J. ,等。 (2001年) 。消息帧和民族针对低收入妇女的乳房X线照相术使用的影响。健康心理学杂志,20, 256-266 。
泰勒,B.米勒,大肠杆菌,富华, CP ,彼得罗普洛斯, MC , Favot Mayaud , I. ,李, J. ,等。 ( 1999年) 。自闭症与麻疹,腮腺炎和风疹疫苗的因果关系:无流行病学证据。柳叶刀“ ,353 , 2026年至2029年。
特沃斯基, A. , &卡尼曼, D. (1981) 。取景的决定和选择的心理。科学, 211 , 453-458 。
别墅, LL ,哥斯达黎加, RL , Petta , CA ,安德拉德, RP ,奥尔特, KA ,朱利亚诺, AR等。 (2005年) 。预防性四价人乳头状瘤病毒(类型6 , 11 , 16 , 18) L1病毒样颗粒疫苗的年轻女性:一项随机双盲安慰剂对照的多中心二期药效试验。柳叶刀肿瘤学,6, 271-278 。
温纳, RL ,休斯, JP ,冯强,奥赖利, S. , Kiviat , NB ,福尔摩斯, KK等。 (2006年) 。安全套的使用和年轻女性生殖器人乳头状瘤病毒感染的风险。新英格兰医学杂志, 354 , 2645年至2654年。
Yacobi ,E. :坦, C. ,费兰特, J. ,PAL , N. , & Roetzheim , R. (1999) 。大学学生的知识和意识的HPV 。预防医学,28, 535-541 。
兹米特, G. D. (2005) 。改善青少年健康:关注HPV疫苗的接受。青少年健康杂志,37, S17 -23 。