Skeptical reactions to breast cancer screening benefits and harms: Antecedents, consequences, and implications for screening communication.

Abstract

Objective: When people receive information about the benefits and harms of mammography screening, they do not always accept it at face value and instead express skepticism. The purpose of this research was to identify the psychological drivers of this skepticism. Two theory-driven hypotheses were considered: One hypothesis proposes that skeptical reactions reflect a psychological defense against information that is emotionally aversive. Another proposes that skeptical reactions reflect a normative probabilistic inference that information that conflicts with prior beliefs is unlikely to be true. This work also identified the potential consequences of skepticism for people's screening preferences.

Method: A nationally representative sample of female participants ages 39-49 received information about the benefits and harms of mammography screening. Skepticism toward information about screening benefits and harms was measured, as well as hypothesis-relevant predictors of that skepticism. Participants' preferred age to have regular mammograms was also assessed.

Results: The results did not support the hypothesis that skepticism reflects an emotional defense. Instead, skepticism was associated with experiencing the information as conflicting with beliefs and past screening messages. Expressing more skepticism toward screening harms was associated with preferring to start screening at a younger age.

Conclusions: These data suggest that people express skepticism toward mammography evidence not because it is aversive information, but instead because it conflicts with other things they believe and have been told. Consistent, coordinated messages from health experts about mammography evidence may therefore help to reduce skepticism, and help promote an informed patient population. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).