IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v71y2010i8p1498-1505.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

'All in the same boat'? Patient and carer attitudes to peer support and social comparison in Motor Neurone Disease (MND)

Author

Listed:
  • Locock, Louise
  • Brown, Janice B.

Abstract

This paper explores attitudes to peer support among people with Motor Neurone Disease (MND) and their family carers. It reports findings from a secondary analysis of data from two UK interview studies conducted by the authors. The process of secondary analysis is reported in detail. 48 people with MND and 22 carers were interviewed in 2005-2007. The authors identified narrative extracts on peer support from their own datasets and exchanged them for independent thematic analysis. Subsequent discussion, drawing on literature on support groups and social comparison, led to an exploration of two overarching themes: valuing camaraderie and comparison, and choosing isolation. Findings suggest that social comparison theory is a useful framework for analysing attitudes to MND support groups, but that on its own it is insufficient. 'Valuing camaraderie and comparison' explains how support groups offer practical and social support, as well as beneficial opportunities for social comparison. Seeing others coping well with the condition can provide hope, while downward comparison with those worse off can also make people feel better about their own situation. However, most people are also shocked and saddened by seeing others with the condition. Tension of identity can occur when group membership starts to define the individual as 'a person with MND, rather than the person I am that happens to have MND'. Choosing isolation can be a deliberate defensive strategy, to protect oneself from witnessing one's possible future. Levels of involvement may change over time as people struggle with their changing needs and fears.

Suggested Citation

  • Locock, Louise & Brown, Janice B., 2010. "'All in the same boat'? Patient and carer attitudes to peer support and social comparison in Motor Neurone Disease (MND)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(8), pages 1498-1505, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:71:y:2010:i:8:p:1498-1505
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(10)00575-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carmack Taylor, Cindy L. & Kulik, James & Badr, Hoda & Smith, Murray & Basen-Engquist, Karen & Penedo, Frank & Gritz, Ellen R., 2007. "A social comparison theory analysis of group composition and efficacy of cancer support group programs," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 262-273, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Libby Bishop & Arja Kuula-Luumi, 2017. "Revisiting Qualitative Data Reuse," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(1), pages 21582440166, January.
    2. Mazanderani, Fadhila & Locock, Louise & Powell, John, 2012. "Being differently the same: The mediation of identity tensions in the sharing of illness experiences," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(4), pages 546-553.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:71:y:2010:i:8:p:1498-1505. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.