Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Hope in Medicine Scale

Authors

  • Lea Balthasar Orcid
    Pain and Psychotherapy Research Lab, RPTU Kaiserslautern-Landau, Landau, Germany
  • Anne-Kathrin Bräscher Orcid
    Department of Clinical Psychology, Psychotherapy, and Experimental Psychopathology, Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
  • Ted J. Kaptchuk Orcid
    Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
  • Sarah K. Ballou Orcid
    Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Division of Gastroenterology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
  • Tobias Kube Orcid
    Pain and Psychotherapy Research Lab, RPTU Kaiserslautern-Landau, Landau, Germany; Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

Abstract

Background: Hope is an integral, multi-dimensional part of seeking medical treatment. The aim of this study was to develop a self-report scale, the Hope in Medicine (HIM) scale, to measure different modes of hoping in relation to the course of symptoms, the effects of treatment, and supporting medical research. Method: We examined the psychometric properties of the scale in a sample of 74 allergic rhinitis patients participating in a 2-week randomized-controlled trial comparing open-label placebos (OLP) with treatment as usual (TAU). Results: The HIM scale had a Cronbach’s α of .78. An exploratory factor analysis revealed four factors: realistic hope (i.e., hoping for specific positive outcomes such as improvement in symptoms), transcendent hope (i.e., non-directed hoping that things will turn out positively), utopian hope (i.e., hoping to contribute to greater knowledge), and technoscience hope (i.e., hoping for scientific breakthroughs). Speaking to the convergent validity of the scale, realistic hope was moderately related to treatment expectancies (r = .54); transcendent hope was related to optimism (r = .50), treatment expectancies (r = .37), self-efficacy (r = .36), and inversely correlated with pessimism (r = -.43). Hope subscales predicted neither course of symptoms nor impairment. Conclusion: The HIM scale is a questionnaire with adequate internal consistency allowing to assess four modes of hoping. Preliminary results for its convergent validity are promising. Yet, further validation is needed.