Skip to main content
main-content
Top

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Behavioral Medicine 1/2021

28-07-2020

Gain–loss framing and patients’ decisions: a linguistic examination of information framing in physician–patient conversations

Auteurs: Ilona Fridman, Angela Fagerlin, Karen A. Scherr, Laura D. Scherer, Hanna Huffstetler, Peter A. Ubel

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Behavioral Medicine | Uitgave 1/2021

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

When discussing risks and benefits with cancer patients, physicians could focus on losses such as mortality rates and cancer recurrence or, alternatively, gains such as survival rates and curing cancer. Previous research has shown that the way health information is framed influences individuals’ preferences and choices. We operationalized gain–loss framing as physicians’ choice of words related to gains (cancer survival), or losses (cancer mortality). In an exploratory analysis, we investigated (a) whether physicians used gain or loss words as a function of their recommendation, (b) whether physicians’ choice of words was associated with patients’ treatment choices. We analyzed transcribed consultations with male patients who had intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Using an iterative process of gathering and evaluating words, we created gain- and loss-dictionaries. The loss-dictionary included words related to cancer death and cancer progression. The gain-dictionary included words related to survival and cure. Using Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count software, we calculated the number of words related to gains and losses in each transcript. We found that physicians who recommended immediate cancer treatment for prostate cancer (vs. active surveillance) used slightly fewer words related to losses and significantly fewer words related specifically to death from cancer. Further analysis showed that loss words were associated with the patient’s choice of immediate cancer treatment. A novel method of automated text analysis showed that physicians’ use of loss words was correlated with physicians’ recommendations for cancer treatment versus active surveillance. Additionally, loss words in consultations were associated with patients’ choice of cancer treatment.
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
go back to reference Albertsen, P. C., Hanley, J. A., Gleason, D. F., & Barry, M. J. (1998). Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA, 280, 975–980. PubMed Albertsen, P. C., Hanley, J. A., Gleason, D. F., & Barry, M. J. (1998). Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA, 280, 975–980. PubMed
go back to reference Chapman, A. R., Litton, E., Chamberlain, J., & Ho, K. M. (2015). The effect of prognostic data presentation format on perceived risk among surrogate decision makers of critically ill patients: A randomized comparative trial. Journal of Critical Care, 30, 231–235. PubMed Chapman, A. R., Litton, E., Chamberlain, J., & Ho, K. M. (2015). The effect of prognostic data presentation format on perceived risk among surrogate decision makers of critically ill patients: A randomized comparative trial. Journal of Critical Care, 30, 231–235. PubMed
go back to reference Deutsch, R., Kordts-Freudinger, R., Gawronski, B., & Strack, F. (2009). Fast and fragile: A new look at the automaticity of negation processing. Experimental Psychology, 56, 434–446. PubMed Deutsch, R., Kordts-Freudinger, R., Gawronski, B., & Strack, F. (2009). Fast and fragile: A new look at the automaticity of negation processing. Experimental Psychology, 56, 434–446. PubMed
go back to reference Donovan, J. L., Hamdy, F. C., Lane, J. A., Mason, M., Metcalfe, C., Walsh, E., et al. (2016). Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 375, 1425–1437. Donovan, J. L., Hamdy, F. C., Lane, J. A., Mason, M., Metcalfe, C., Walsh, E., et al. (2016). Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 375, 1425–1437.
go back to reference Fridman, I., Ubel, P. A., Blumenthal-Barby, J., England, C. V., Currier, J. S., Eyal, N., et al. (2020). “Cure” versus “clinical remission”: the impact of a medication description on the willingness of people living with HIV to take a medication. AIDS and Behavior, 24, 2054–2061. PubMed Fridman, I., Ubel, P. A., Blumenthal-Barby, J., England, C. V., Currier, J. S., Eyal, N., et al. (2020). “Cure” versus “clinical remission”: the impact of a medication description on the willingness of people living with HIV to take a medication. AIDS and Behavior, 24, 2054–2061. PubMed
go back to reference Gamache, D. L., McNamara, G., Mannor, M. J., & Johnson, R. E. (2015). Motivated to acquire? The impact of CEO regulatory focus on firm acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 58, 1261–1282. Gamache, D. L., McNamara, G., Mannor, M. J., & Johnson, R. E. (2015). Motivated to acquire? The impact of CEO regulatory focus on firm acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 58, 1261–1282.
go back to reference Hamdy, F. C., Donovan, J. L., Lane, J. A., Mason, M., Metcalfe, C., Holding, P., et al. (2016). 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 375, 1415–1424. Hamdy, F. C., Donovan, J. L., Lane, J. A., Mason, M., Metcalfe, C., Holding, P., et al. (2016). 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 375, 1415–1424.
go back to reference Harrington, N. G., & Kerr, A. M. (2017). Rethinking risk: Prospect theory application in health message framing research. Health Communication, 32, 131–141. PubMed Harrington, N. G., & Kerr, A. M. (2017). Rethinking risk: Prospect theory application in health message framing research. Health Communication, 32, 131–141. PubMed
go back to reference Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 77–89. Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 77–89.
go back to reference Heidenreich, A., Aus, G., Bolla, M., Joniau, S., Matveev, V. B., Schmid, H. P., et al. (2009). EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Actas Urologicas Espanolas, 33, 113–126. PubMed Heidenreich, A., Aus, G., Bolla, M., Joniau, S., Matveev, V. B., Schmid, H. P., et al. (2009). EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Actas Urologicas Espanolas, 33, 113–126. PubMed
go back to reference Hilton, D. J. (2011). Linguistic polarity, outcome framing, and the structure of decision making: A pragmatic approach. In G. Keren (Ed.), Perspectives on framing (pp. 135–156). New York: Psychology Press. Hilton, D. J. (2011). Linguistic polarity, outcome framing, and the structure of decision making: A pragmatic approach. In G. Keren (Ed.), Perspectives on framing (pp. 135–156). New York: Psychology Press.
go back to reference Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 1–55. Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 1–55.
go back to reference Holmes-Rovner, M., Kelly-Blake, K., Dwamena, F., Dontje, K., Henry, R. C., Olomu, A., et al. (2011). Shared decision making guidance reminders in practice (SDM-GRIP). Patient Education and Counseling, 85, 219–224. PubMed Holmes-Rovner, M., Kelly-Blake, K., Dwamena, F., Dontje, K., Henry, R. C., Olomu, A., et al. (2011). Shared decision making guidance reminders in practice (SDM-GRIP). Patient Education and Counseling, 85, 219–224. PubMed
go back to reference Humphreys, A., & Wang, R. J.-H. (2017). Automated text analysis for consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 44, 1274–1306. Humphreys, A., & Wang, R. J.-H. (2017). Automated text analysis for consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 44, 1274–1306.
go back to reference Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Macmillan. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Macmillan.
go back to reference Kanze, D., Huang, L., Conley, M. A., & Higgins, E. T. (2017). Male and female entrepreneurs get asked different questions by VCs—And it affects how much funding they get. Harvard Business Review, June, 27. Kanze, D., Huang, L., Conley, M. A., & Higgins, E. T. (2017). Male and female entrepreneurs get asked different questions by VCs—And it affects how much funding they get. Harvard Business Review, June, 27.
go back to reference Kühberger, A., & Tanner, C. (2010). Risky choice framing: Task versions and a comparison of prospect theory and fuzzy-trace theory. Journal of behavioral decision making, 23, 314–329. Kühberger, A., & Tanner, C. (2010). Risky choice framing: Task versions and a comparison of prospect theory and fuzzy-trace theory. Journal of behavioral decision making, 23, 314–329.
go back to reference Lavine, H., Thomsen, C. J., Zanna, M. P., & Borgida, E. (1998). On the primacy of affect in the determination of attitudes and behavior: The moderating role of affective-cognitive ambivalence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 398–421. Lavine, H., Thomsen, C. J., Zanna, M. P., & Borgida, E. (1998). On the primacy of affect in the determination of attitudes and behavior: The moderating role of affective-cognitive ambivalence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 398–421.
go back to reference Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 149–188. PubMed Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 149–188. PubMed
go back to reference Liberman, N., Idson, L. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2005). Predicting the intensity of losses vs. non-gains and non-losses vs. gains in judging fairness and value: A test of the loss aversion explanation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 527–534. Liberman, N., Idson, L. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2005). Predicting the intensity of losses vs. non-gains and non-losses vs. gains in judging fairness and value: A test of the loss aversion explanation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 527–534.
go back to reference McKenzie, C. R. (2004). Framing effects in inference tasks—And why they are normatively defensible. Memory & Cognition, 32, 874–885. McKenzie, C. R. (2004). Framing effects in inference tasks—And why they are normatively defensible. Memory & Cognition, 32, 874–885.
go back to reference McNeil, B. J., Pauker, S. G., Sox, H. C., Jr., & Tversky, A. (1982). On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. New England Journal of Medicine, 306, 1259–1262. McNeil, B. J., Pauker, S. G., Sox, H. C., Jr., & Tversky, A. (1982). On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. New England Journal of Medicine, 306, 1259–1262.
go back to reference Meyerowitz, B. E., & Chaiken, S. (1987). The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 500. PubMed Meyerowitz, B. E., & Chaiken, S. (1987). The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 500. PubMed
go back to reference Nan, X., Daily, K., & Qin, Y. (2018). Relative persuasiveness of gain-vs. loss-framed messages: A review of theoretical perspectives and developing an integrative framework. Review of Communication, 18, 370–390. Nan, X., Daily, K., & Qin, Y. (2018). Relative persuasiveness of gain-vs. loss-framed messages: A review of theoretical perspectives and developing an integrative framework. Review of Communication, 18, 370–390.
go back to reference O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2006). The advantages of compliance or the disadvantages of noncompliance? A meta-analytic review of the relative persuasive effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages. Annals of the International Communication Association, 30, 1–43. O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2006). The advantages of compliance or the disadvantages of noncompliance? A meta-analytic review of the relative persuasive effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages. Annals of the International Communication Association, 30, 1–43.
go back to reference O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2007). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of health communication, 12, 623–644. PubMed O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2007). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of health communication, 12, 623–644. PubMed
go back to reference O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2009). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease detection behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Communication, 59, 296–316. O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2009). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease detection behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Communication, 59, 296–316.
go back to reference Pennebaker, J. W. (1997). Writing about emotional experiences as a therapeutic process. Psychological Science, 8, 162–166. Pennebaker, J. W. (1997). Writing about emotional experiences as a therapeutic process. Psychological Science, 8, 162–166.
go back to reference Pennebaker, J. W., Booth, R. J., & Francis, M. E. (2007). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC [Computer software]. Austin, TX: liwc.net. Pennebaker, J. W., Booth, R. J., & Francis, M. E. (2007). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC [Computer software]. Austin, TX: liwc.net.
go back to reference Pennebaker, J. W., Boyd, R. L., Jordan, K., & Blackburn, K. (2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin. Pennebaker, J. W., Boyd, R. L., Jordan, K., & Blackburn, K. (2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin.
go back to reference Perneger, T. V., & Agoritsas, T. (2011). Doctors and patients’ susceptibility to framing bias: A randomized trial. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26, 1411–1417. PubMedPubMedCentral Perneger, T. V., & Agoritsas, T. (2011). Doctors and patients’ susceptibility to framing bias: A randomized trial. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26, 1411–1417. PubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 3. PubMed Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 3. PubMed
go back to reference Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., Antone, C., Keough, K., & Martin, C. D. (1993). The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 408. Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., Antone, C., Keough, K., & Martin, C. D. (1993). The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 408.
go back to reference Scherr, K. A., Delaney, R. K., Ubel, P. A., Kahn, V., & Fagerlin A. (Unpublished). Preparing patients with early stage prostate cancer to participate in clinical appointment using a shared decision-making training video. Scherr, K. A., Delaney, R. K., Ubel, P. A., Kahn, V., & Fagerlin A. (Unpublished). Preparing patients with early stage prostate cancer to participate in clinical appointment using a shared decision-making training video.
go back to reference Scherr, K. A., Fagerlin, A., Hofer, T., Scherer, L. D., Holmes-Rovner, M., Williamson, L. D., et al. (2017a). Physician recommendations trump patient preferences in prostate cancer treatment decisions. Medical Decision Making, 37, 56–69. PubMed Scherr, K. A., Fagerlin, A., Hofer, T., Scherer, L. D., Holmes-Rovner, M., Williamson, L. D., et al. (2017a). Physician recommendations trump patient preferences in prostate cancer treatment decisions. Medical Decision Making, 37, 56–69. PubMed
go back to reference Scherr, K. A., Fagerlin, A., Williamson, L. D., Davis, J. K., Fridman, I., Atyeo, N., et al. (2017b). The physician recommendation coding system (PhyReCS) a reliable and valid method to quantify the strength of physician recommendations during clinical encounters. Medical Decision Making, 37, 46–55. PubMed Scherr, K. A., Fagerlin, A., Williamson, L. D., Davis, J. K., Fridman, I., Atyeo, N., et al. (2017b). The physician recommendation coding system (PhyReCS) a reliable and valid method to quantify the strength of physician recommendations during clinical encounters. Medical Decision Making, 37, 46–55. PubMed
go back to reference Siminoff, L. A., & Fetting, J. H. (1989). Effects of outcome framing on treatment decisions in the real world: Impact of framing on adjuvant breast cancer decisions. Medical Decision Making, 9, 262–271. PubMed Siminoff, L. A., & Fetting, J. H. (1989). Effects of outcome framing on treatment decisions in the real world: Impact of framing on adjuvant breast cancer decisions. Medical Decision Making, 9, 262–271. PubMed
go back to reference Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 24–54. Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 24–54.
go back to reference Thompson, I., Thrasher, J. B., Aus, G., Burnett, A. L., Canby-Hagino, E. D., Cookson, M. S., et al. (2007). Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. The Journal of Urology, 177, 2106–2131. PubMed Thompson, I., Thrasher, J. B., Aus, G., Burnett, A. L., Canby-Hagino, E. D., Cookson, M. S., et al. (2007). Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. The Journal of Urology, 177, 2106–2131. PubMed
go back to reference Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458. PubMed Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458. PubMed
go back to reference Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106, 1039–1061. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106, 1039–1061.
go back to reference Ubel, P. A. (2015). Medical facts versus value judgments—Toward preference-sensitive guidelines. New England Journal of Medicine, 372, 2475–2477. Ubel, P. A. (2015). Medical facts versus value judgments—Toward preference-sensitive guidelines. New England Journal of Medicine, 372, 2475–2477.
go back to reference van den Bergh, R. C., Korfage, I. J., & Bangma, C. H. (2012). Psychological aspects of active surveillance. Current Opinion in Urology, 22, 237–242. PubMed van den Bergh, R. C., Korfage, I. J., & Bangma, C. H. (2012). Psychological aspects of active surveillance. Current Opinion in Urology, 22, 237–242. PubMed
go back to reference Van’t Riet, J., Cox, A. D., Cox, D., Zimet, G. D., De Bruijn, G.-J., Van den Putte, B., et al. (2016). Does perceived risk influence the effects of message framing? Revisiting the link between prospect theory and message framing. Health Psychology Review, 10, 447–459. Van’t Riet, J., Cox, A. D., Cox, D., Zimet, G. D., De Bruijn, G.-J., Van den Putte, B., et al. (2016). Does perceived risk influence the effects of message framing? Revisiting the link between prospect theory and message framing. Health Psychology Review, 10, 447–459.
go back to reference Veldwijk, J., Essers, B. A., Lambooij, M. S., Dirksen, C. D., Smit, H. A., & de Wit, G. A. (2016). Survival or mortality: Does risk attribute framing influence decision-making behavior in a discrete choice experiment? Value in Health, 19, 202–209. PubMed Veldwijk, J., Essers, B. A., Lambooij, M. S., Dirksen, C. D., Smit, H. A., & de Wit, G. A. (2016). Survival or mortality: Does risk attribute framing influence decision-making behavior in a discrete choice experiment? Value in Health, 19, 202–209. PubMed
go back to reference Wilt, T. J., Brawer, M. K., Jones, K. M., Barry, M. J., Aronson, W. J., Fox, S., et al. (2012). Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 367, 203–213. Wilt, T. J., Brawer, M. K., Jones, K. M., Barry, M. J., Aronson, W. J., Fox, S., et al. (2012). Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 367, 203–213.
go back to reference Wilt, T. J., Jones, K. M., Barry, M. J., Andriole, G. L., Culkin, D., Wheeler, T., et al. (2017). Follow-up of prostatectomy versus observation for early prostate cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 377, 132–142. Wilt, T. J., Jones, K. M., Barry, M. J., Andriole, G. L., Culkin, D., Wheeler, T., et al. (2017). Follow-up of prostatectomy versus observation for early prostate cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 377, 132–142.
go back to reference Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Mayman, G., Fagerlin, A., Anderson, B., & Schulkin, J. (2014). Patient numeracy: What do patients need to recognize, think, or do with health numbers. In B. L. Anderson (Ed.), Numerical reasoning in judgments and decision making about health (pp. 80–104). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Mayman, G., Fagerlin, A., Anderson, B., & Schulkin, J. (2014). Patient numeracy: What do patients need to recognize, think, or do with health numbers. In B. L. Anderson (Ed.), Numerical reasoning in judgments and decision making about health (pp. 80–104). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Metagegevens
Titel
Gain–loss framing and patients’ decisions: a linguistic examination of information framing in physician–patient conversations
Auteurs
Ilona Fridman
Angela Fagerlin
Karen A. Scherr
Laura D. Scherer
Hanna Huffstetler
Peter A. Ubel
Publicatiedatum
28-07-2020
Uitgeverij
Springer US
Gepubliceerd in
Journal of Behavioral Medicine / Uitgave 1/2021
Print ISSN: 0160-7715
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-3521
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-020-00171-0