Related Experiment Videos
Three conflicts as a result of causal attributions
H ten Kroode1, M Oosterwijk, N Steverink
1Department of Medical Psychology, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Social Science & Medicine (1982)
|January 1, 1989
Summary
Cancer patients develop unique, personal explanations for their illness, unlike myocardial infarction patients who seek medically suggested causes. These cancer attributions often conflict with medical views, causing personal and social distress.
Area of Science:
- Psychology of illness
- Medical sociology
- Patient explanatory models
Background:
- Patients with serious illnesses develop causal attributions to understand their condition.
- Existing research suggests differences in attributional styles between cancer and myocardial infarction patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate and compare the causal attributions of cancer (Ca) patients and myocardial infarction (MI) patients.
- To explore the origins and consequences of these differing attributional styles.
Main Methods:
- Qualitative analysis of patient narratives and autobiographies.
- Comparison of attributional patterns between cancer and myocardial infarction patient groups.
Main Results:
- Myocardial infarction patients seek medically plausible causes within their life history.
- Cancer patients generate idiosyncratic, personal explanations often diverging from medical consensus.
- These personal cancer attributions lead to internal doubt and external conflicts with healthcare providers and family.
Conclusions:
- Cancer patients' lack of medical knowledge contributes to unique, self-constructed causal explanations.
- Patient-generated attributions, while personally meaningful, can create significant psychosocial challenges and interpersonal conflicts.