A social comparison theory analysis of group composition and efficacy of cancer support group programs
Introduction
The standard psychosocial referral for cancer patients is to a support group, a fact that highlights the importance of providing effective theoretically based programs. In contrast to cancer clinical trials that enroll only patients who require medical intervention, psychosocial support group trials typically include all patients of a particular cancer site or stage, regardless of any demonstrated psychosocial need for an intervention. Research indicates that psychosocial group support programs can increase social support and decrease psychological distress in cancer patients but may be most effective for patients in distress and/or with limited social resources (Goodwin et al., 2001; Helgeson, Cohen, Schulz, & Yasko, 2000; Lepore & Helgeson, 1999). These findings suggest that interventions may best address patient need by including only those most likely to benefit. Nonetheless, researchers have varying opinions about the advisability of providing interventions to a homogeneous group of psychologically distressed patients since nondistressed patients may be needed to model adaptive coping to distressed patients (Helgeson et al., 2000; Helgeson, Cohen, Schulz, & Yasko, 2001; Lepore, 2001). However, group psychological interventions comprising both heterogeneous (Antoni et al., 2001; Helgeson, Cohen, Schulz, & Yasko, 1999; Lepore & Helgeson, 1999; Lepore, Helgeson, Eton, & Schulz, 2003) and homogeneous (Eldredge et al., 1997; Silverman et al., 1999; Telch & Telch, 1986; Telch et al., 1993) compositions with respect to distress levels have resulted in improvements for distressed individuals. Thus, important theoretical and practical questions are whether heterogeneous groups are better than homogeneous groups for distressed patients and whether nondistressed patients are benefited by group support interventions. No single research study to date has considered the foregoing questions.
Here, we instead provide a theoretical evaluation of these issues by examining group composition (heterogeneous versus homogeneous groups) from the perspective of social comparison theory, which was originally proposed by Festinger (1954). For simplicity, we will discuss homogeneous and heterogeneous groups in reference to psychological functioning and assume a homogeneous group with regard to disease factors, as most cancer support group studies include only individuals facing a particular cancer and typically exclude individuals with advanced disease (unless that is the focus of study). To illustrate the potential importance of group composition for the efficacy of cancer support group programs, we briefly describe how our ideas may operate in group cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) programs. Our goal is to provide a critical theoretical evaluation of how the structure of typical support groups in clinical and research settings may impact its participants. Our evaluation is based on published research emanating from the United States and Western Europe, but our specific hypotheses have not been tested directly to date. Ultimately, we hope this evaluation leads to theory-based research.
Section snippets
Social support for cancer patients
Numerous studies suggest the importance of social support for the well-being of cancer patients. For example, high perceived support has been positively associated with quality of life (QOL) in breast cancer survivors (Sammarco, 2001), and emotional support from friends and instrumental support from spouses has predicted lower distress post-surgery in Hispanic women being treated for early stage breast cancer (Alferi, Carver, Antoni, Weiss, & Duran, 2001). Social support also has been
Group-based psychosocial interventions for cancer patients
Psychosocial interventions, both individual and group-based, can positively affect emotional and functional adjustment, as well as treatment and disease-related symptoms (Compas, Haaga, Keefe, Leitenberg, & Williams, 1998; Fawzy, Fawzy, Arndt, & Pasnau, 1995; Meyer & Mark, 1995). Group support programs are less costly than individual therapy because they require fewer professional resources to provide services to a large number of patients (Spiegel & Diamond, 2001). Furthermore, serving a
Why from a social comparison theory perspective support group programs may help cancer patients
Support groups may help cancer patients because they provide an opportunity for social comparison. According to the original social comparison theory of Festinger (1954), people compare themselves with others to evaluate their own opinions and abilities, particularly when no objective information is available. The theory proposes a preference for making social comparisons to similar rather than dissimilar others, purportedly because comparisons to similar others provide more accurate, stable
Theoretical analysis of support group effects based on social comparison theory
As noted by Taylor and Lobel (1989), cancer patientsā preferences for social comparison-related activities can diverge simultaneously as a function of different needs or motivations. Thus, patients can prefer to make downward comparisons for more favorable self-evaluations, but simultaneously prefer to seek information from and affiliation with better-off others (upward contacts). Table 1 depicts these preferences and their differential availability depending on support group composition
What would be the implications of research indicating heterogeneous groups are most effective for distressed patients, but offer no benefit or are perceived as negative for nondistressed patients?
The arguments presented here are based on existing data supporting social comparison theory, but they have not been empirically tested. To date, no research has been specifically designed or adequately powered to investigate whether distressed patients benefit from the presence of nondistressed patients in a group support setting or whether nondistressed patients also benefit from participation. However, if future research supports our arguments, such findings will have important research and
References (70)
- et al.
Mediating variable framework in physical activity intervention: How are we doing? How might we do better?
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
(1998) - et al.
Social comparison and patient information: What do patients want?
Patient Education and Counseling
(2002) Threat as determinant of downward comparison
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Supplement
(1966)- et al.
Marriage and mortality in prostate cancer
The Journal of Urology
(1996) - et al.
The relationship between major and subthreshold variants of unipolar depression
Journal of Affective Disorders
(1997) - et al.
Effect of psychosocial treatment on survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer
The Lancet
(1989) - et al.
Group cognitive-behavioral treatment of panic disorder
Behavior Research and Therapy
(1993) - et al.
Self-evaluation, self-enhancement, and the locus of social comparison
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Supplement
(1966) - et al.
An exploratory study of social support, distress, and life disruption among low-income Hispanic women under treatment for early stage breast cancer
Health Psychology
(2001) - et al.
Cognitive-behavioral stress management intervention decreases the prevalence of depression and enhances benefit finding among women under treatment for early-stage breast cancer
Health Psychology
(2001)