Abstract
BackgroundThis study identified optimistic biases in health and oral health hazards, and explored whether comparative risk judgements for oral health hazards vary systematically with socio-economic characteristics and self-reported risk experience.MethodsA simple random sample of 1,190 residents born in 1972 was drawn from the population resident in three counties of Norway. A total of 735 adults (51% women) completed postal questionnaires at home.ResultsMean ratings of comparative risk judgements differed significantly (p < 0.001) from the mid point of the scales. T-values ranged from -13.1 and -12.1 for the perceived risk of being divorced and loosing all teeth to -8.2 and -7.8 (p < 0.001) for having gum disease and toothdecay. Multivariate analyses using General Linear Models, GLM, revealed gender differences in comparative risk judgements for gum disease, whereas social position varied systematically with risk judgements for tooth decay, gum disease and air pollution. The odds ratios for being comparatively optimistic with respect to having gum disease were 2.9, 1.9, 1.8 and 1.5 if being satisfied with dentition, having a favourable view of health situation, and having high and low involvement with health enhancing and health detrimental behaviour, respectively.ConclusionOptimism in comparative judgements for health and oral health hazards was evident in young Norwegian adults. When judging their comparative susceptibility for oral health hazards, they consider personal health situation and risk behaviour experience.
Highlights
This study identified optimistic biases in health and oral health hazards, and explored whether comparative risk judgements for oral health hazards vary systematically with socioeconomic characteristics and self-reported risk experience
The present study examined whether an optimistic bias is present in the comparative risk judgements for various health-and oral health hazards among Norwegian adults
A mail questionnaire with an explanatory letter and a selfaddressed and pre-paid envelope for the reply was posted in March 1997
Summary
This study identified optimistic biases in health and oral health hazards, and explored whether comparative risk judgements for oral health hazards vary systematically with socioeconomic characteristics and self-reported risk experience. Perceived vulnerability to disease and injury is assumed to be a motivating factor for behaviour change in a number of theoretical models [1]. Health education campaigns have focused on influencing people's risk perceptions by exposure to relevant risk information. There is a notion that people do not draw personal implications from risk information. This, in turn, has been related to self-enhancing processes of social comparisons or unrealistic optimism [2], the tendency to perceive negative events as less likely and positive events as more likely to self than to others [2,3]. From a practical point of view this phenomenon could hinder the adoption of preventive behaviour and thereby undermine the effectiveness of health educational efforts. If health and oral health hazards primarily concern other people and not oneself – there might be no reason to adapt ones behaviour
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
