Start Your Search
P1.16 - Treatment in the Real World - Support, Survivorship, Systems Research (ID 186)
- Event: WCLC 2019
- Type: Poster Viewing in the Exhibit Hall
- Track: Treatment in the Real World - Support, Survivorship, Systems Research
- Presentations: 1
- Coordinates: 9/08/2019, 09:45 - 18:00, Exhibit Hall
P1.16-45 - Changing Attitudes Regarding Lung Cancer: Shame, Embarrassment, and Hope (ID 2500)
09:45 - 18:00 | Author(s): Holli Kolkey
Sriram and colleagues (2015) showed that implicit attitudes (IA) and explicit attitudes (EA) related to shame, embarrassment and hope are more negative toward lung cancer (LC) than breast cancer (BC). The current study used the same measurement procedures as in 2012 to test whether stigma related to LC has decreased in the intervening years.Method
To assess EAs, participants (people with cancer [n=223], caregivers [n=590], healthcare providers [HCPs, n=160], and the general public [n=637]) were asked to rate their agreement on a six-point scale, with statements about how people with LC and BC “do feel” (descriptive attitudes). IAs were measured with 3 Implicit Association Tests (IAT) using LC or BC images and categories of good/bad; hope/despair; or suitable/shameful. An IAT D-score indicated the strength of bias of LC relative to BC where >0.15 = bias against LC; between -0.15 and +0.15 = no bias, and < -0.15 = bias against BC.Result
IAs and EAs were consistently more negative towards LC compared to BC, with the exception of the EA related to embarrassment. When compared to the 2012 data, all IAs and EAs indicate a significant reduction in negativity and stigma of IA and EA toward LC relative to BC, with the exception of IA related to Shame (p=.079). These trends were consistent across caregivers, patients, HCPs, and the public.
Compared to data collected in 2012, five of six implicit and explicit attitudes showed a significant reduction in negativity toward lung cancer relative to breast cancer. These findings are especially notable given that current evidence indicates little support for longitudinal shifts in IA at the group level (e.g., Lai et al., 2016; Schmidt & Axt, 2016).