Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Health Psychol. 2015 Aug;20(8):1049-59. doi: 10.1177/1359105313506761. Epub 2013 Oct 29.

Unreliable item or inconsistent person? A study of variation in health beliefs and belief-anchors to biomedical models.

Author information

1
Wake Forest School of Medicine, USA eip@wakehealth.edu.
2
Wake Forest School of Medicine, USA.
3
Oklahoma State University, USA.
4
Wake Forest School of Medicine, USA Oklahoma State University, USA.

Abstract

The reliability of an item designed to measure health belief is often confounded with response consistency at the person level. The study applied contemporary measurement methods to an inventory of common sense beliefs about diabetes and used a sample of N = 563 adults with diabetes to test the hypothesis that individuals whose beliefs are congruent with a biomedical model are more consistent in their responses. Item-level analysis revealed that the domains of Causes and Medical Management were the least reliable. Person-level analysis showed that respondents who held views congruent with the biomedical model were more consistent than people who did not.

KEYWORDS:

beliefs; chronic illness; concordance; health psychology; older person; quantitative methods; reliability

PMID:
24170016
PMCID:
PMC4004728
DOI:
10.1177/1359105313506761
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Atypon Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center