Table 2. Personal Attitude and Social Norm Regarding MH Resource Use for Rural and Nonrural Cancer Survivors.
| Rural (n=51) | Nonrural (n=62) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Resource | M | SD | M | SD | p-valuea | ESb |
| Psychologist | ||||||
| Personal Attitude | 3.49 | 1.07 | 3.77 | 1.08 | .164 | .26 |
| Social Norm | 3.41 | 0.98 | 3.77 | 0.98 | .054 | .36 |
| Religious Leader | ||||||
| Personal Attitude | 4.06 | 0.95 | 4.00 | 0.95 | .737 | .07 |
| Social Norm | 3.92 | 0.91 | 4.03 | 0.87 | .511 | .12 |
| Friends/Family | ||||||
| Personal Attitude | 4.10 | 1.10 | 4.50 | 0.74 | .023 | .43 |
| Social Norm | 4.18 | 0.84 | 4.48 | 0.76 | .044 | .37 |
| Cancer Survivor | ||||||
| Personal Attitude | 4.18 | 0.71 | 4.42 | 0.78 | .090 | .32 |
| Social Norm | 4.06 | 0.65 | 4.23 | 0.82 | .238 | .23 |
| Support Group | ||||||
| Personal Attitude | 3.69 | 0.91 | 3.97 | 0.98 | .118 | .29 |
| Social Norm | 3.69 | 0.88 | 4.03 | 0.81 | .032 | .40 |
| Prescription Medication | ||||||
| Personal Attitude | 3.35 | 1.04 | 3.55 | 1.08 | .332 | .19 |
| Social Norm | 3.35 | 1.00 | 3.56 | 1.04 | .243 | .22 |
| Personal Attitude Composite | 3.81 | 0.57 | 4.04 | 0.58 | .043 | .39 |
| Social Norm Composite | 3.77 | 0.60 | 4.01 | 0.61 | .030 | .39 |
Note. Data corresponds to means (M) and standard deviations (SD) for each group. For both Personal Attitude and Social Norm, responses were obtained on a five-point Likert scale from 1 (“a really bad idea”) to 5 (“a really good idea”) with the midpoint (i.e., 3) labeled “neither a good nor bad idea”; thus higher scores indicate more favorable attitudes and social norm regarding MH resource use.
a
independent samples t-test
b
calculated as difference in group means divided by sample SD