Measurement of preference for information in U.S. and Korean cardiac catheterization patients

• Published in: Research in nursing & health 2000-08, Vol.23 (4), p.310-318
• Main Authors: Garvin, Bonnie J., Kim, Cho-Ja
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biological and medical sciences; cardiac catheterization; Cardiac Catheterization - psychology; Cross-Cultural Comparison; Female; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Humans; Illness and personality; Illness, stress and coping; information; Korea; Male; Middle Aged; Nursing; Patient Education as Topic; psychological stress; Psychology and medicine; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Psychometrics - methods; Reproducibility of Results; Stress, Psychological - ethnology; Stress, Psychological - etiology; Stress, Psychological - psychology; United States
• ISSN: 0160-6891; 1098-240X
• DOI: 10.1002/1098-240X(200008)23:4<310::AID-NUR7>3.0.CO;2-#

Seeking information is a common coping strategy of patients facing a stressful event. Persons differ, however, in how much information they want to help them in their coping process. Research‐based practice related to patients' preferences for information is hampered by the lack of reliable, valid, and clinically useful instruments to measure preference for information. Furthermore, it is imperative that researchers and clinicians understand preference for information in different cultures to reflect the diversity of the needs of patients in clinical practice. This study was designed to determine the reliability and validity of three measures of preference for information—the Miller Behavioral Style Scale (MBSS), the Krantz Health Opinion Survey‐Information Subscale (KHOS‐I), and the Preference for Information Scale—in 106 U.S. and Korean cardiac catheterization subjects. The MBSS and the KHOS‐I were found to have fair‐to‐excellent reliability and fair‐to‐moderate convergent validity. The lack of a correlation of either of these two instruments with the Preference for Information Scale does not support convergent validity for that instrument. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Res Nurs Health 23:310–318, 2000.