Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

How participants report their health status: cognitive interviews of self-rated health across race/ethnicity, gender, age, and educational attainment

Authors: Dana Garbarski, Jennifer Dykema, Kenneth D. Croes, Dorothy F. Edwards

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Self-rated health (SRH) is widely used to measure subjective health. Yet it is unclear what underlies health ratings, with implications for understanding the validity of SRH overall and across sociodemographic characteristics. We analyze participants’ explanations of how they formulated their SRH answer in addition to which health factors they considered and examine group differences in these processes.

Methods

Cognitive interviews were conducted with 64 participants in a convenience quota sample crossing dimensions of race/ethnicity (white, Latino, black, American Indian), gender, age, and education. Participants rated their health then described their thoughts when answering SRH. We coded participants’ answers in an inductive, iterative, and systematic process from interview transcripts, developing analytic categories (i.e., themes) and subdimensions within. We examined whether the presence of each dimension of an analytic category varied across sociodemographic groups.

Results

Our qualitative analysis led to the identification and classification of various subdimensions of the following analytic categories: types of health factors mentioned, valence of health factors, temporality of health factors, conditional health statements, and descriptions and definitions of health. We found differences across groups in some types of health factors mentioned—corresponding, conflicting, or novel with respect to prior research. Furthermore, we also documented various processes through which respondents integrate seemingly disparate health factors to formulate an answer through valence and conditional health statements. Finally, we found some evidence of sociodemographic group differences with respect to types of health factors mentioned, valence of health factors, and conditional health statements, highlighting avenues for future research.

Conclusion

This study provides a description of how participants rate their general health status and highlights potential differences in these processes across sociodemographic groups, helping to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how SRH functions as a measure of health.
Footnotes
1
Groves and colleagues [6] examined whether participants made comparisons to others or themselves in the past using closed-ended questions that prompts participants to explicitly make this comparison. The current study documents comparisons to oneself in the past deriving from information revealed spontaneously in participants’ descriptions of their response process.
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference OECD. Health at a Glance 2015: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2015. OECD. Health at a Glance 2015: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2015. 
2.
go back to reference Mavaddat N, Valderas JM, van der Linde R, Khaw KT, Kinmonth AL. Association of self-rated health with multimorbidity, chronic disease and psychosocial factors in a large middle-aged and older cohort from general practice: a cross-sectional study. BMC Fam Pract. 2014;15(1):185.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mavaddat N, Valderas JM, van der Linde R, Khaw KT, Kinmonth AL. Association of self-rated health with multimorbidity, chronic disease and psychosocial factors in a large middle-aged and older cohort from general practice: a cross-sectional study. BMC Fam Pract. 2014;15(1):185.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Idler EL, Benyamini Y. Self-rated health and mortality: a review of twenty-seven community studies. J Health Soc Behav. 1997;38(1):21–37.CrossRefPubMed Idler EL, Benyamini Y. Self-rated health and mortality: a review of twenty-seven community studies. J Health Soc Behav. 1997;38(1):21–37.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Garbarski D. Research in and prospects for the measurement of health using self-rated health. Public Opin Q. 2016;80(4):977–97.CrossRefPubMed Garbarski D. Research in and prospects for the measurement of health using self-rated health. Public Opin Q. 2016;80(4):977–97.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Canfield B, Miller K, Beatty P, Whitaker K, Calvillo A, Wilson B. Adult questions on the health interview survey – results of cognitive testing interviews conducted April–May 2003. Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics, Cognitive Methods Staff; 2003. p. 1–41. Canfield B, Miller K, Beatty P, Whitaker K, Calvillo A, Wilson B. Adult questions on the health interview survey – results of cognitive testing interviews conducted April–May 2003. Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics, Cognitive Methods Staff; 2003. p. 1–41.
6.
go back to reference Groves RM, Fultz FN, Martin E. Direct questioning about comprehension in a survey setting. In: Tanur JM, editor. Questions about questions: inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 1992. p. 49–61. Groves RM, Fultz FN, Martin E. Direct questioning about comprehension in a survey setting. In: Tanur JM, editor. Questions about questions: inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 1992. p. 49–61.
7.
go back to reference Kaplan G, Baron-Epel O. What lies behind the subjective evaluation of health status? Soc Sci Med. 2003;56(8):1669–76.CrossRefPubMed Kaplan G, Baron-Epel O. What lies behind the subjective evaluation of health status? Soc Sci Med. 2003;56(8):1669–76.CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
go back to reference Miller K, Willis G, Eason C, Moses L, Canfield B. Interpreting the results of cross-cultural cognitive interviews. In: Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik JHP and Harkness JA, editors. Methodological aspects in cross-national research. Mannheim: ZUMA; 2005. p. 79–92. Miller K, Willis G, Eason C, Moses L, Canfield B. Interpreting the results of cross-cultural cognitive interviews. In: Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik JHP and Harkness JA, editors. Methodological aspects in cross-national research. Mannheim: ZUMA; 2005. p. 79–92.
10.
go back to reference Manderbacka K. Examining what self-rated health question is understood to mean by respondents. Scand J Public Health. 1998;26(2):145–53.CrossRef Manderbacka K. Examining what self-rated health question is understood to mean by respondents. Scand J Public Health. 1998;26(2):145–53.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Simon J, De Boer J, Joung I, Bosma H, Mackenbach J. How is your health in general? A qualitative study on self-assessed health. Eur J Pub Health. 2005;15(2):200–8.CrossRef Simon J, De Boer J, Joung I, Bosma H, Mackenbach J. How is your health in general? A qualitative study on self-assessed health. Eur J Pub Health. 2005;15(2):200–8.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory. Los Angeles: Sage; 2014. Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory. Los Angeles: Sage; 2014.
13.
go back to reference Corbin J, Strauss A. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Los Angeles: Sage; 2007. Corbin J, Strauss A. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Los Angeles: Sage; 2007.
14.
go back to reference Willis GB. Analysis of the Cognitive Interview in Questionnaire Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015. Willis GB. Analysis of the Cognitive Interview in Questionnaire Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.
15.
go back to reference Jylhä M. What is self-rated health and why does it predict mortality? Towards a unified conceptual model. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69(3):307–16.CrossRefPubMed Jylhä M. What is self-rated health and why does it predict mortality? Towards a unified conceptual model. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69(3):307–16.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Tourangeau R, Rips LJ, Rasinski KA. The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000. Tourangeau R, Rips LJ, Rasinski KA. The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
17.
go back to reference Willis GB. Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2004. Willis GB. Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2004.
18.
go back to reference Edwards DF. Voices Heard. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Health Equity Leadership Institute, Madison, Wisconsin; 2015. Edwards DF. Voices Heard. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Health Equity Leadership Institute, Madison, Wisconsin; 2015.
19.
go back to reference Barrett LF. Valence is a basic building block of emotional life. J Res Pers. 2006;40(1):35–55.CrossRef Barrett LF. Valence is a basic building block of emotional life. J Res Pers. 2006;40(1):35–55.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Choo HY, Ferree MM. Practicing Intersectionality in sociological research: a critical analysis of inclusions, interactions, and institutions in the study of inequalities. Sociol Theory. 2010;28(2):129–49. Choo HY, Ferree MM. Practicing Intersectionality in sociological research: a critical analysis of inclusions, interactions, and institutions in the study of inequalities. Sociol Theory. 2010;28(2):129–49.
21.
go back to reference Crenshaw K: Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. U Chi Legal F 1989:139. Crenshaw K: Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. U Chi Legal F 1989:139.
22.
go back to reference Zajacova A, Montez JK, Herd P. Socioeconomic disparities in health among older adults and the implications for the retirement age debate: a brief report. J Gerontol Ser B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2014;69(6):973–8.CrossRef Zajacova A, Montez JK, Herd P. Socioeconomic disparities in health among older adults and the implications for the retirement age debate: a brief report. J Gerontol Ser B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2014;69(6):973–8.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Willis GB. The practice of cross-cultural cognitive interviewing. Public Opin Q. 2015;79(S1):359–95.CrossRef Willis GB. The practice of cross-cultural cognitive interviewing. Public Opin Q. 2015;79(S1):359–95.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Johnson T, Shavitt S, Holbrook A. Culture and response styles in survey research. In: Cross-cultural research methods in psychology; 2011. p. 130–78. Johnson T, Shavitt S, Holbrook A. Culture and response styles in survey research. In: Cross-cultural research methods in psychology; 2011. p. 130–78.
25.
go back to reference Holstein M: Women in Late Life: Critical Perspectives on Gender and Age. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield; 2015. Holstein M: Women in Late Life: Critical Perspectives on Gender and Age. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield; 2015.
26.
go back to reference Grol-Prokopczyk H, Freese J, Hauser RM. Using anchoring vignettes to assess group differences in general self-rated health. J Health Soc Behav. 2011;52(2):246–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Grol-Prokopczyk H, Freese J, Hauser RM. Using anchoring vignettes to assess group differences in general self-rated health. J Health Soc Behav. 2011;52(2):246–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
How participants report their health status: cognitive interviews of self-rated health across race/ethnicity, gender, age, and educational attainment
Authors
Dana Garbarski
Jennifer Dykema
Kenneth D. Croes
Dorothy F. Edwards
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4761-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Public Health 1/2017 Go to the issue