![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
“Mild traumatic brain injury” (mTBI) and “concussion” are terms often used interchangeably. However, “mTBI” is frequently seen as representing a broader injury that encompasses the construct of “concussion,” which often conveys transience or decreased severity. The present study examined the influence of varying diagnostic terminology on acute injury expectations in an undergraduate population (N = 105). Participants were presented with an mTBI vignette and were randomly assigned to one of two conditions in which the term “mTBI” or “concussion” was used to describe the injury. There were no significant differences between the two conditions on anxiety, symptomatology, timeline, or consequence scales. However, participants in the “mTBI” group allocated more days to return to play than participants in the “concussion” group, suggesting that terminology has an effect on perceptions of the severity of the injury. Varsity athletes allocated fewer days to return to play than nonathletes. Individuals with a history of concussion, both athletes and nonathletes, indicated fewer days to return to play, but greater symptomatology than individuals with no history of concussion. Clinicians should consider the influence of diagnostic terminology, athletic background, and history of concussion on perceptions of the severity of an injury because expectations can influence injury outcomes and compliance in a recovery process.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Mark Saviano for his technical and statistical assistance in this project.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.