Empathic exchanges in online cancer support groups: Distinguishing message expression and reception effects

Jeong Yeob Han, Dhavan V. Shah, Eunkyung Kim, Kang Namkoong, Sun Young Lee, Tae J. Moon, Rich Cleland, Q. Lisa Bu, Fiona M. McTavish, David H. Gustafson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

65 Scopus citations

Abstract

Past studies on the efficacy of participation in online cancer support groups have primarily focused on the role of expression in the accrual of health benefits for participants. Unfortunately, few steps have been taken to determine whether this observed effect arises solely from the internal mental processes underlying the act of expressing or, perhaps, owes something to a nuanced, multidimensional understanding of expression that includes reception of responses to what is expressed. To test for the multilayered effect, we attend to one of the key concepts in the online support community scholarship: empathy. Our findings suggest that it is a combination of empathy expression and reception that is crucial to attaining optimal benefits for cancer patients. Further, our finding supports the buffering hypothesis that empathic expression provides a salutary effect for patients who experienced a higher degree of concern associated with their cancer diagnosis and follow-up treatments.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)185-197
Number of pages13
JournalHealth Communication
Volume26
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2011
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Communication

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Empathic exchanges in online cancer support groups: Distinguishing message expression and reception effects'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Han, J. Y., Shah, D. V., Kim, E., Namkoong, K., Lee, S. Y., Moon, T. J., Cleland, R., Bu, Q. L., McTavish, F. M., & Gustafson, D. H. (2011). Empathic exchanges in online cancer support groups: Distinguishing message expression and reception effects. Health Communication, 26(2), 185-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2010.544283