All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Hispanic Women's Preferences for Breast Health Information: Subjective Cultural Influences on Source, Message, and Channel
Unformatted Document Text:  Breast Cancer Communication Preferences 14 receiving information from family and friends. This factor had the following descriptive information: M = 3.14, SD = .83, α = .80. The second factor accounted for 29.00% of the variance and included four items. It was labeled expert sources as the items focus on receiving information from a variety of experts on breast cancer. This factor had the following descriptive information: M = 4.04, SD = .71, α = .80. For message items, two factors accounting for 54.73% of the variance were discovered. The first factor accounted for 30.27% of the variance and contained six items. This factor was labeled fear messages because the items focus on receiving information that includes a variety of fear appeals. This factor had the following descriptive information: M = 2.54, SD = .80, α = .78. The second factor accounted for 24.46% of the variance and included four items. It was labeled encouraging messages as the items focus on receiving information that is hopeful. This factor also had a component of logical appeal. This factor had the following descriptive information: M = 3.79, SD = .74, α = .74. For channel items, two factors accounting for 63.00% of the variance were discovered. The first factor accounted for 34.19% of the variance and contained four items. This factor was labeled media channels because the items focus on receiving information from a variety of mass media. This factor had the following descriptive information: M = 3.33, SD = .83, α = .83. The second factor accounted for 28.81% of the variance and included three items. It was labeled face-to-face channels as the items focus on receiving information in interpersonal settings. This factor had the following descriptive information: M = 3.36, SD = .82, α = .75. We also included three items that stated a preference for not receiving information about breast cancer. These items had the following descriptives: M = 2.05, SD = .67, α = .65.

Authors: DeVargas, Felicia., Sanchez, Christina. and Oetzel, John.
first   previous   Page 14 of 31   next   last



background image
Breast Cancer Communication Preferences
14
receiving information from family and friends. This factor had the following descriptive information:
M = 3.14, SD = .83,
α
= .80. The second factor accounted for 29.00% of the variance and included four
items. It was labeled expert sources as the items focus on receiving information from a variety of
experts on breast cancer. This factor had the following descriptive information: M = 4.04, SD = .71,
α
= .80.
For message items, two factors accounting for 54.73% of the variance were discovered. The
first factor accounted for 30.27% of the variance and contained six items. This factor was labeled fear
messages because the items focus on receiving information that includes a variety of fear appeals. This
factor had the following descriptive information: M = 2.54, SD = .80,
α
= .78. The second factor
accounted for 24.46% of the variance and included four items. It was labeled encouraging messages as
the items focus on receiving information that is hopeful. This factor also had a component of logical
appeal. This factor had the following descriptive information: M = 3.79, SD = .74,
α
= .74.
For channel items, two factors accounting for 63.00% of the variance were discovered. The
first factor accounted for 34.19% of the variance and contained four items. This factor was labeled
media channels because the items focus on receiving information from a variety of mass media. This
factor had the following descriptive information: M = 3.33, SD = .83,
α
= .83. The second factor
accounted for 28.81% of the variance and included three items. It was labeled face-to-face channels as
the items focus on receiving information in interpersonal settings. This factor had the following
descriptive information: M = 3.36, SD = .82,
α
= .75. We also included three items that stated a
preference for not receiving information about breast cancer. These items had the following
descriptives: M = 2.05, SD = .67,
α
= .65.


Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 14 of 31   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.