Emotions, Recipient Factors, and Different Organ Donation Types: An Experimental Investigation of Disgust and Health Anxiety

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Consedine, N en
dc.contributor.author Simonsen, Alysha en
dc.date.accessioned 2016-11-14T02:00:32Z en
dc.date.issued 2015 en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2292/31024 en
dc.description Full text is available to authenticated members of The University of Auckland only. en
dc.description.abstract Posthumous organ donation and transplantation is a life-saving intervention for people with organ failure. However, the number of organs needed outweighs the number available, both worldwide and in New Zealand. Family refusal (lack of proxy consent) is among biggest barriers to donation, as families refuse 50% of viable transplants (Hyde & White, 2010). The origins of refusal are unclear with most work being correlational and concentrated on demographics in the context of self donation. Given that emotions are arguably the biggest driver of human behaviour and decisionmaking (Consedine & Moskowitz, 2007), emotions provide a credible and promising avenue for investigation. Common elicitors of disgust and health anxiety are present in organ donation contexts (e.g. illness, death, surgery) making the relevance of these emotions likely. The current thesis experimentally examined whether disgust and health anxiety influence donation decisions, and whether recipient factors and different types of organ donation also predict or moderate these effects. Ninety-nine participants completed a web-based questionnaire assessing demographics, donation attitudes, and personality factors. Participants were then gender block randomised to control, disgust, or health anxiety conditions, in which they attended a 30-minute laboratory session. Participants completed eight organ donation vignettes, each outlining a scenario where self, family, or proxy donation was possible, and rated the likelihood that they would authorise each donation. Disgust and health anxiety were successfully manipulated, but neither emotion independently predicted donation ratings. As expected, negative donation attitudes predicted lower donation ratings and moderated the effect of induced disgust. Consistent with prediction, ratings were higher for self versus proxy or family donation ratings (and proxy ratings were higher than family ratings). Participants gave higher ratings to both positively presenting and less accountable recipients; additional interactions were also evident. Overall, findings provide novel, experimental evidence that the determinants of organ donation decisions involve emotions, but that their causal impact is unclear and may be moderated by both dispositional attitudes and recipient factors. Findings and effect sizes are interpreted in light of prior research, and implications for addressing negative perceptions regarding donation and the differences between different types of donation decisions are noted. en
dc.publisher ResearchSpace@Auckland en
dc.relation.ispartof Masters Thesis - University of Auckland en
dc.relation.isreferencedby UoA99264887710002091 en
dc.rights Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. en
dc.rights Restricted Item. Available to authenticated members of The University of Auckland. en
dc.rights.uri https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm en
dc.rights.uri http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/nz/ en
dc.title Emotions, Recipient Factors, and Different Organ Donation Types: An Experimental Investigation of Disgust and Health Anxiety en
dc.type Thesis en
thesis.degree.discipline Health Psychology en
thesis.degree.grantor The University of Auckland en
thesis.degree.level Masters en
dc.rights.holder Copyright: The author en
pubs.elements-id 545979 en
pubs.record-created-at-source-date 2016-11-14 en
dc.identifier.wikidata Q112910683


Files in this item

Find Full text

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Share

Search ResearchSpace


Browse

Statistics