More theory development about interpersonal communication during cancer is needed so that scholarship can be advanced and practical applications of findings can be best disseminated and applied. We proposed an evidence-based extension to the theory of illness trajectories based on findings from a qualitative study of cancer survivors' (n = 40) experiences with communication. Grounding our analysis in respondents' descriptions of the demands, obligations, and preparatory activities involved in discussing their cancer, we theorized the construct of communication work, which focuses on the labor and resources devoted to managing talk during cancer and living with illness. Findings are discussed in terms of how this conceptualization presents new opportunities for research and practice.
The intersections between identity and health communication are complex and dynamic, yet few studies employ a critical-empirical research strategy to understand how these factors affect patient experiences. And although other disciplines have examined lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, and queer (LGBTQ)-specific issues surrounding identity and health care, there is a gap in communication studies literature on the topic. The present study examines how LGBTQ patients experience the language and structure of medical intake forms by analyzing both existing forms and patient survey responses. Relying on a queer theory framework, we illustrate how intake forms can foreclose on LGBTQ identity with heteronormative assumptions about sexuality, gender, and relationships. We also offer recommendations for creating queer-friendly intake forms and avoiding heteronormativity in health communication research. Overall, we argue that researchers must use reflexive methodology in considering how identity categories can both limit and assist LGBTQ patients.
This study explored the meanings that people attribute to talking about their cancer. Framed by interpersonal and health communication scholarship on privacy management and multiple meanings, we asked cancer survivors to describe how and why they discussed their cancer with others. Interviews (focus group or one-on-one) were conducted with 40 survivors. Using a grounded theory approach, we developed a conceptual framework that describes how communication about cancer may be particularly meaningful because it is something that people feel as though they can control during a highly stressful and turbulent time. However, attempts to manage communication are challenged by constraints imposed by others, such as unfavorable and unpredictable reactions to disclosure, which ultimately place limits on survivors' control.
Research into the dissemination of health information now includes more focus on how various organizations (e.g., beauty shops, schools, workplaces, and churches) and health information technologies (HITs) reach and affect audiences. One relational feature of organizations is identification--the feeling of belongingness. Our study explores how it influences audiences, especially in combination with HITs such as e-mail, websites, and social media. We use social identity theory to predict how organizational identification and social media might function in health communication. Using a 3 × 2 experimental design, we find that people's identification with a message source mediates the effect of social media on outcomes. These findings improve our understanding of when organizations might be most helpful for disseminating health information.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.