This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Taylor, K. L. Articles by McGuire, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Taylor, K. L. Articles by McGuire, C.

The Impact of Item Order on Ratings of Cancer Risk Perception¹

Lombardi Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington DC 20007-4104

Although perceived risk is central to most theories of health behavior,there is little consensus on its measurement with regard to item wording, response set, or the number of items to include. In a methodological assessment of perceived risk, we assessed the impact of changing the order of three commonly used perceived risk items: quantitative personal risk, quantitative population risk, and comparative risk. Participants were 432 men and women enrolled in an ancillary study of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. Three groups of consecutively enrolled participants responded to the three items in one of three question orders. Results indicated that item order was related to the perceived risk ratings of both ovarian (P < 0.05) and colorectal (P < 0.05) cancers. Perceptions of risk were significantly lower when the comparative rating was made first. The findings suggest that compelling participants to consider their own risk relative to the risk of others results in lower ratings of perceived risk. Although the use of multiple items may provide more information than when only a single method is used, different conclusions may be reached depending on the context in which an item is assessed.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Gurmankin Levy, J. Shea, S. V. Williams, A. Quistberg, and K. Armstrong Measuring perceptions of breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., October 1, 2006; 15(10): 1893 - 1898. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Hay, E. Shuk, G. Cruz, and J. Ostroff Thinking Through Cancer Risk: Characterizing Smokers' Process of Risk Determination Qual Health Res, October 1, 2005; 15(8): 1074 - 1085. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. L. Taylor, R. Shelby, E. Gelmann, and C. McGuire Quality of Life and Trial Adherence Among Participants in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial J Natl Cancer Inst, July 21, 2004; 96(14): 1083 - 1094. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]