Skip to main content
Log in

The distinction between affect and cognition in the quality of life of cancer patients—sensitivity and stability

  • Research Papers
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The distinction between affect and cognition has been put forward to clarify the lack of differences found in studies describing quality of life under deteriorated circumstances, such as serious iliness. In the study reported here, cancer patients under treatment (n=201) were compared with a random sampie from the normal population (n=200). As hypothesized, the affective component of life quality turned out to be more severely impaired than the cognitive component. Besides, it was investigated which factors contribute to the affective and the cognitive component of the quality of life of cancer patients under treatment. In cancer patients affect proved more strongly related to the physical domain. Cognition on the other hand was more strongly related to coping resources, especially personality characteristics like the level of self-esteem. It is concluded that an affective measure of quality of life is more sensitive to change in patients. The stability of life quality is attributed to the rather strong relation the affective and the cognitive component both have to coping resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brickman P, Coates D, Janoff-Bulman R. Lottery winners and accident victims: is happiness relative? J Personal Soc Psychol 1978; 36: 917–927.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Michalos AC. Satisfaction and happiness. Soc Indic Res 1980; 8: 385–422.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Campbell A, Converse PE, Rodgers WL. The Quality of American Life. New York: Sage, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Veenhoven R. Conditions of Happiness. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  5. McKennell AC. Cognition and affect in perceptions of well-being. Soc Indic Res 1978; 5: 389–426.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Andrews FM, McKennell AC. Measures of self reported well-being: their affective, cognitive and other components. Soc Indic Res 1980; 8: 127–155.

    Google Scholar 

  7. McKennell AC, Andrews FM. Models of cognition and affect in perceptions of well-being. Soc Indic Res 1980; 8: 257–298.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Headey B, Holmström E, Wearing A. The impact of life events and changes in domain satisfactions on well-being. Soc Indic Res 1984; 15: 203–227.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Haes JCJMde, Pennink BJW, Welvaart K. The distinction between affect and cognition. Soc Indic Res 1987; 19: 367–378.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Weisman AD, Worden JW. The existential plight in cancer: significance of the first 100 days. Int J Psychiatr Med 1976–1977; 7: 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yalom ID. Existential Psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  12. McCorkle R, Quint-Benoliel J. Symptom distress, current concerns and mood disturbance after diagnosis of life threatening disease. Soc Sci Med 1983; 17: 431–438.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Beckmann J, Ditlev. Conceptual views on quality of life: an impossible task or a necessary challenge? Scand J Gastroenterol 1987; 22: 83–86.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Caplan G. Principles of Preventive Psychiatry. New York/London: Basic Books, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Stewart AL. Measuring the ability to cope with serious illness. Santa Monica: Rand (N-1907-RC), 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Michalos AC. Multiple discrepancies theory (MDT). Soc Indic Res 1985; 16: 347–413.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Szalaï A. The meaning of comparative research on the quality of life. In: Szalaï A, Andrews FM, eds. The Quality of Life, Comparative Studies. London: Sage, 1980: 7–21.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hörnquist JO. The concept of quality of life. Scand J Soc Med 1982; 10: 57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Haes JCJMde, vanKnippenberg FCE, Neijt JP. Measuring psychological and physical distress in cancer patients: structure and application of the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist. Br J Cancer 1990; 62: 1034–1038.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Haes JCJMde, Welvaart K. Quality of life after breast cancer surgery. J Surg Oncol 1985; 28: 123–125.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bradburn NM. The Structure of Psychological Wellbeing Chicago: Aldine 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Tempelaar R, deHaes JCJM, deRuiter JH, et al. The social experiences of cancer patients under treatment. Soc Sci Med 1989; 29: 635–642.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. Wonen en validiteit (Hoofdstuk 5 Lichamelijke validiteit). s-Gravenhage: Staatsuitgeverij, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Luteijn F, Starren J, Dijk Hvan. Handleiding bij de NPV. Lisse: Swets en Zeitlinger, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Rosenberg M. Society and the Adolescent Self Image. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sidle A, Moos R, Adams J, Cady P. Development of a coping scale — a preliminary study. Arch Gen Psychiatr 1969; 20: 226–232.

    Google Scholar 

  27. SPSS Inc. SPSS-X User's Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill Company, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Zajonc RB. Feeling and thinking. Preferences need no inferences. Am Psychol 1980; 35: 151–175.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zajonc RB. On the primacy of affect. Am Psychol 1984; 39: 117–123.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lazarus RS. A cognitivist's reply to Zajonc on Emotion and Cognition. Am Psychol 1981; 36: 222–223.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lazarus RS. Thoughts on the relation between emotion and cognition. Am Psychol 1982; 37: 1019–1024.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lazarus RS. On the primacy of cognition. Am Psychol 1984; 39: 124–129.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Costa PT, McCrae RR, Zonderman AB. Environmental and dispositional influences on well-being: Longitudinal follow-up of an American national sample. Br J Psychol 1987; 78: 299–306.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Haes JCJMde, vanKnippenberg FCE. The quality of life of cancer patients, a review of the literature. Soc Sci Med 1985; 20: 809–817.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Costa PT, McCrae RR. Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. J Personal Soc Psychol 1980; 38: 668–678.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ormel J. Neuroticism and well-being inventories: Measuring traits or states? Psychol Med 1983; 13: 165–176.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Diener E, Sandvik E, Pavot W, Gallagher D. Response artifacts in the measurement of subjective well-being. Soc Indic Res 1991; 24: 35–56.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Coates A, Abraham S, Kay SB, et al. On the receiving end-patient perception of the side effects of cancer chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1983; 19: 203–208.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

de Haes, J.C.J.M., de Ruiter, J.H., Tempelaar, R. et al. The distinction between affect and cognition in the quality of life of cancer patients—sensitivity and stability. Qual Life Res 1, 315–322 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00434945

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00434945

Key words

Navigation