This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Swartzman, L. C. Articles by Lundy, M. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Swartzman, L. C. Articles by Lundy, M. E. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Back Pain Complementary and Alternative Medicine Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

What Accounts for the Appeal of Complementary/Alternative Medicine, and What Makes Complementary/Alternative Medicine "Alternative"?

Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

Richard A. Harshman, PhD

Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

Jacquelyn Burkell, PhD

Faculty of Information and Media Studies, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

Margaret E. Lundy, BSc

Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

The goal of this study was to elucidate the basis for the appeal of complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) and the basis upon which people distinguish between CAM and conventional medicine. Undergraduates (N = 173) rated 19 approaches to the treatment of chronic back pain on 16 rating scales. Data were analyzed via 3-mode factor analysis, which extracted conceptual dimensions common to both the scales and the treatments. A 5-factor solution was judged to give the best description of the raters’ perceptions. One of these 5 factors clearly reflected the distinction between conventional versus CAM approaches, and a 2nd factor clearly referred to treatment appeal. The other 3 factors were invasiveness, health care professional versus patient effort, and "druglikeness." To the extent that treatment was seen as a CAM treatment (as opposed to a conventional treatment), it was seen to be more appealing, less invasive, and less druglike. Simple and partial correlations of the dimension weights indicated that both the appealof CAM and the distinction between CAM and conventional medicine were largely driven by the view that CAM is less invasive than conventional medicine.

Key Words: alternative medicine • complementary (natural) versus conventional (or traditional • biomedical) treatment • intractable pain • factor analysis • attitude toward health • psychological models • lay beliefs • PARAFAC • 3-way • multi-mode

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 22, No. 5, 431-450 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/027298902236943


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Burke, T. Kuo, R. Harvey, and J. Wang An International Comparison of Attitudes Toward Traditional and Modern Medicine in a Chinese and an American Clinic Setting Evid. Based Complement. Altern. Med., October 7, 2008; (2008) nen065v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. L. Nahin, C. H. Pontzer, and M. A. Chesney Racing Toward The Integration Of Complementary And Alternative Medicine: A Marathon Or A Sprint? Health Aff., July 1, 2005; 24(4): 991 - 993. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Sainfort The Use of Factor Analysis Techniques Med Decis Making, October 1, 2002; 22(5): 451 - 452. [PDF]