Factors of collective psychological empowerment of active users in the online health community med.over.net

Open access

Izvleček

Namen: V članku raziskujemo v literaturi pogosto spregledano vprašanje kolektivnega psihološkega opolnomočenja uporabnikov spletnih zdravstvenih skupnosti. Izhajajoč iz teorij opolnomočenja s področja psihologije skupnosti, preverjamo, kateri dejavniki, ki obenem odražajo pomembne lastnosti spletnih zdravstvenih skupnosti, so povezani s kolektivnim psihološkim opolnomočenjem njihovih uporabnikov.

Metode: Vlogo štirih dejavnikov kolektivnega opolnomočenja smo analizirali s pomočjo multiple linearne regresije na podatkih, zbranih konec leta 2010 s spletno anketo na neverjetnostnem vzorcu (n = 235) aktivnih sodelujočih na forumih največje slovenske spletne zdravstvene skupnosti Med.over.net, ki je vključeval 8,5% moških, 49,7% vsaj visoko izobraženih in 41,5% poročenih anketirancev, ki so bili v povprečju stari 35,1 leta (SD = 9,1).

Rezultati: Ugotavljamo, da se predstavljeni teoretični model dejavnikov ustrezno prilega podatkom (F = 8,65, df = 8, p < 0,001) in z njim lahko pojasnimo 23,4% variabilnosti občutka kolektivnega opolnomočenja. Občutek pripadnosti spletni skupnosti (β = 0,279, p < 0,001), vključenost v organizacijske aktivnosti skupnosti (0,194, 0,001) in zaznana participacija spletne skupnosti v širšem okolju (0,157, 0,02) vplivajo na kolektivno opolnomočenje uporabnikov spletne zdravstvene skupnosti Med.over.net, medtem ko tega ni mogoče trditi za intenzivnost participacije v forumskih razpravah (0,029, 0,65).

Zaključek: Za povečevanje kolektivne komponente psihološkega opolnomočenja uporabnikov spletnih zdravstvenih skupnosti je treba v prvi vrsti graditi na kakovosti odnosov med člani, vključevanju članov v strateške odločitve o skupnosti in na vključenosti skupnosti v širše družbeno okolje, saj sama participacija uporabnikov v spletnih skupnosti še ne zagotavlja njihovega višjega kolektivnega opolnomočenja.

1. Uporaba informacijsko - komunikacijske tehnologije v gospodinjstvih in pri posameznikih Slovenija: končni podatki.Ljubljana: Statistični urad Republike Slovenije, 2012. Pridobljeno5. 12. 2012 s spletne strani: http://www.stat.si/.

2. Klemenc-Ketiš Z, Kersnik J. Seeking health advice on the Internet in patients with health problems: a cross-sectional population study in Slovenia. Inform Health Soc Care 2013; 3: 280-90.

3. Demiris G. The diffusion of virtual communities in health care: concepts and challenges. Patient Educ Couns 2006; 62: 178-88.

4. Fox S. Medicine 2.0: peer-to-peer healthcare: report.Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Research Center, 2011.

5. Preece J. Empathic communities: reaching out across the web.Interactions 1998; 2: 32-43.

6. Tanis M. Online social support groups. In Joinson A, McKenna KYA, Postmes T, Reips UD, editors. Oxford handbook of internet psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007: 137-52.

7. Barak A, Boniel-Nissim M, Suler J. Fostering empowerment in online support groups. Comput Hum Behav 2008; 24: 1867-83.

8. Santana S, Lausen B, Bujnowska-Fedak M, Chronaki CE, Prokosch H-U, Wynn R. Informed citizen and empowered citizen in health: results from an European survey. BMC Fam Pract 2011; 12: 20-35.

9. Coulson NS, Malik S. Health-related online support communities.

In: Yan Z, editor. Encyclopedia of cyber-behaviour. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2012: 671-88.

10. Bartlett K, Coulson NS. An investigation into the empowerment effects of using online support groups and how this affects doctor/patient communication. Patient Educ Couns 2011; 83: 113-9.

11. Seckin G. Informational and decisional empowerment in online health support communities: initial psychometric validation of the Cyber Info-Decisional Empowerment Scale (CIDES) and preliminary data from administration of the scale. Support Care Cancer 2011; 19: 2057-61.

12. Bridges J, Loukanova S, Carrera P. Patient empowerment in health care. In: Heggenhougen K, Quah S, editors. International encyclopedia of public health, Vol. 5. San Diego: Academic Press, 2008: 17-28.

13. van Uden-Kraan CF, Drossaert CHC, Taal E, Seydel ER, van de Laar MAJF. Self-reported differences in empowerment between lurkers and posters in online patient support groups. J Med Internet Res 2008; 10: e18. doi:10.2196/jmir.992.

14. Lemire M, Sicotte C, Paré G. Internet use and the logics of personal empowerment in health. Health Policy 2008; 88: 130-40.

15. Menon ST. Toward a model of psychological health empowerment: implications for health care in multicultural communities. Nurse Educ Today 2002; 22: 28-39.

16. Sharf BF. Communicating breast cancer on-line: support and empowerment on the internet. Women Health 1997; 26: 65-84.

17. van Uden-Kraan CF, Drossaert CHC, Taal E, Shaw BR, Seydel ER, van de Laar MAJF. Empowering processes and outcomes of participation in online support groups for patients with breast cancer, arthritis, or fibromyalgia. Qual Health Res 2008; 18: 405-17.

18. Speer PW. Intrapersonal and interactional empowerment: implication for theory. J Community Psychol 2000; 28: 51-61.

19. Zimmerman MA. Psychological empowerment: issues and illustrations. Am J Community Psychol 1995; 23: 581-99.

20. Speer PW, Hughey J. Community organizing: an ecological route to empowerment and power. Am J Community Psychol 1995; 23: 729-48.

21. Boehm A, Staples LH. Empowerment: the point of view of consumers. Fam Soc 2004; 85: 270-80.

22. Radin P. ‘‘To me, it’s my life’’: medical communication, trust, and activism in cyberspace. Soc Sci Med 2006; 62: 591-601.

23. Mlinar S. Perceptions of empowerment among part-time nursing students. Zdrav Var 2012; 51: 69-74.

24. Hur MH. Empowerment in terms of theoretical perspectives: exploring a typology of the process and components across disciplines. J Community Psychol 2006; 34: 523-40.

25. McMillan DW, Chavis DM. Sense of community: a definition and theory. J Community Psychol 1986; 14: 6-23.

26. Peterson NA, Lowe JB, Aquilino ML, Schnider JE. Linking social cohesion and interactional empowerment: support and new implications for theory. J Community Psychol 2005; 33: 233-44.

27. Blanchard AL, Welbourne JA, Boughton MA. A model of online trust: the mediating role of norms and sense of virtual community.Inform Commun Society 2011; 14: 76-106.

28. Stavrositu C, Sundar SS. Does blogging empower women? Exploring the role of agency and community. J Comput Mediat Comm 2012; 17: 369-86.

29. Michinov N, Michinov E, Toczek-Capelle MC. Social identity, group processes, and performance in synchronous computermediated communication. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 2004; 8: 27-39.

30. Matzat U. A theory of relational signals in online groups. New Media Soc 2009; 11: 375-94.

31. Tanis M. Health-related online forums: what’s the big attraction.J Health Commun 2008; 13: 698-714.

32. Verovšek A, Cimerman P. Predstavitev Med.over.net na prireditvi ob 10. letnici delovanja portala na Med.Over.Net.Ljubljana, 2010.

33. Ip EJ, Barnett MJ, Tenerowicz MJ, Perry PJ. The touro 12-step: a systematic guide to optimizing survey research with online discussion boards. J Med Internet Res 2010; 12: e16.

34. Blanchard AL. Testing a model of sense of virtual community.Comput Hum Behav 2008; 24: 2107-23.

35. Kraut RE, Resnick P, Kiesler S, Ren Y, Chen Y, Burke M et al.Building successful online communities: evidence-based social design. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2012.

36. Obst PL, Stafurik J. Online we are all able bodied: online psychological sense of community and social support found through membership of disability-specific websites promotes well-being for people living with a physical disability. J Community Appl Soc 2010; 20: 525-31.

37. Basu A, Dutta MJ. The relationships between health information seeking and community participation: the roles of health information orientation and efficacy. Health Commun 2008; 23: 70-9.

38. Vehovar V, Sicherl P, Hüsing T, Dolničar V. Methodological challenges of digital divide measurements. Inf Soc; 2006: 279-90.

39. Dolničar V. Merjenje dinamike digitalnega razkoraka. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za družbene vede, 2008.

40. Vehovar V, Travar J. RIS 2008: e-Zdravje in e- Farmacija (#84).Ljubljana: Fakulteta za družbene vede, 2009.

41. Mo PKH, Coulson NS. Developing a model for online support group use, empowering processes and psychosocial outcomes for individuals living with HIV/AIDS. Psychol Health 2012; 27: 445-59.

42. Welbourne JL, Blanchard AL, Wadsworth MB. Motivations in virtual health communities and their relationship to community, connectedness and stress. Comput Hum Behav 2013; 29: 129-39.

43. van Uden-Kraan CF, Drossaert CHC, Taal E, Seydel ER, van de Laar MAFJ. Participation in online patient support groups endorses patients’ empowerment. Patient Educ Couns 2009; 74: 61-9

44. Walther JB. Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: a relational perspective. Commun Res 1992; 19: 52-90.

45. Fox S, Duggan M. Health online 2013: report. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Research Center, 2013.

46. Černigoj Sadar N. Delovanje neformalnih socialnih omrežij pri zadovoljevanju potreb družin. In: Novak M, Černigoj Sadar N, Dragoš S, Ferligoj A, Hlebec V, Kogovšek T, Nagode M, editors.Omrežja socialne opore Slovencev, Ljubljana: Inštitut Republike Slovenije za socialno varstvo, 2004: 133-42.

47. Lozar Manfreda K, Bosnjak M, Berzelak J, Haas I, Vehovar V. Web surveys versus other survey modes: a meta-analysis comparing response rates. Int J Market Res 2008; 50: 79-104.

48. Ule M, Kamin T. Družbeni dejavniki neenakosti v zdravju. Zdrav Var 2012; 51: 1-4.

Slovenian Journal of Public Health

The Journal of National Institute of Public Health

Journal Information

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.620
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.488



CiteScore 2017: 0.33

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.147
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.429

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 218 218 10
PDF Downloads 93 93 8