Overview
The data in this report come from an online, mixed-methods survey conducted by Word In Black’s (WIB) Insights & Research Division of Black news readers across the U.S. The survey was conducted from November 5 to December 1, 2025. The aim of this mixed-methods study was to better understand attitudes, behaviors, and motivations around breast cancer and breast health in this community.
Questionnaire Development and Survey Testing
The survey questionnaire was developed by WIB researchers after conducting a literature review. The survey was tested on both PCs and mobile devices by the WIB research team and a team of publishers.
Sample Size and Oversampling
Prior to survey recruitment, a power analysis was performed and indicated that a total sample of 500–600 would be sufficient to detect small-to-moderate differences at α = .05 with 80% power. To ensure balanced quotas across five age groups and four U.S. regions and to allow stable subgroup estimates (±6% margin of error), the target was increased to N = 912 (Table 1). To account for exclusions, we recruited 1000 participants.
Table 1. Quota Table – Age x Region Balanced Sample
Sample Recruitment
Survey respondents were recruited via 12 publisher partner networks nationwide, affiliated with Word in Black, across all four key U.S. regions (Table 2). Participating publishers received a detailed marketing kit with banner ads, newsletter templates, social media posts, and sample editorial copy to promote the survey. Each outlet was asked to run a four-week campaign across their digital platforms, newsletters, and social channels to drive reader participation.
The target population for this survey included women 18 or older located in the U.S. who identified as Black/African American, or multiracial, including Black.
Table 2. Word In Black Publisher Distribution
| Region | Publication City |
| Northeast | New York, NY |
| South | Baltimore, MD.; D.C.; Houston, TX; Dallas, TX; Atlanta, GA |
| West | Seattle, WA; Sacramento, CA; Los Angeles, LA |
| Midwest | Detroit, MA; St. Louis, MO; Chicago, IL |
Procedure
Prior to beginning the survey, participants provided informed consent. Questionnaires consisting of measures assessing organ donation knowledge and beliefs and registration status were completed on participants’ personal computers or mobile devices (see full survey instrument for all items). The survey was untimed so participants were not timed out of the survey at any point.
Results
Descriptive Statistics
Participants
A sample of 1,639 participants – recruited through WIB’s online readership – completed the survey. The final sample consisted of 922 participants. 717 responses were dropped from the final data set for failing to consent, having a recaptcha score of .5 or greater, if they were duplicate respondents, or if they were in the bottom quartile of time to complete the survey (i.e., completed the survey in less than 47 seconds). Additionally, individuals who did not select female or transgender male, and those who selected ‘other’ and self-described their race as something other than Black or African American, or Multiracial, including Black or African American, for race were removed.
The majority of participants were 55 and older (n = 483) and from the southern region of the U.S. (n = 367); n = 280 had obtained a postgraduate or professional degree (e.g., master’s, PhD, JD, MD) and n = 245 had a household income of $100,000 to $149,000 (see Table 3 for full demographic breakdown).
Table 3. Sample Demographics (unweighted n, weighted %)
| Variable | Category | n | Weighted % |
| Race | |||
| Black or African American | 865 | 94.3 | |
| Multiracial, including Black or African American | 57 | 5.7 | |
| Age (Collapsed) | |||
| 18–34 | 154 | 36.0 | |
| 35–54 | 285 | 34.0 | |
| 55+ | 483 | 30.0 | |
| Income | |||
| Less than $35,000 | 76 | 14.0 | |
| $35,000 to $74,999 | 178 | 27.2 | |
| $75,000 to $99,999 | 124 | 18.0 | |
| $100,000 or more | 245 | 31.0 | |
| Prefer not to say | 78 | 9.7 | |
| Education | |||
| Less than high school | 3 | 0.7 | |
| High School Diploma or GED | 25 | 5.9 | |
| Some college or Associate’s Degree | 165 | 24.9 | |
| Bachelor’s Degree | 210 | 30.3 | |
| Graduate or Professional Degree (e.g., JD, MD, PhD) | 280 | 36.2 | |
| Prefer not to say | 19 | 2.0 | |
| Region | |||
| South | 367 | 55.0 | |
| West | 203 | 10.0 | |
| Midwest | 188 | 18.0 | |
| Northeast | 164 | 17.0 |
Note: Unweighted counts are shown for transparency. Percentages are weighted to align the sample with U.S. population benchmarks for Black adults by age and Census region.
Analyses
Weighting
Post-stratification weights were applied to align the sample with U.S. Census benchmarks for Black adults by collapsed age categories (18–34, 35–54, 55+) and U.S. Census region. Unweighted counts are presented for descriptive purposes; percentages and all analytic estimates are based on weighted data.
Provider mammogram recommendations by age were examined using logistic regression analysis and the message testing experiment was analyzed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA). Only statistically significant patterns (p < .05) or substantively meaningful ones were highlighted in this report.
We used an AI-assisted approach to analyze open-ended responses. ChatGPT, a large language model, identified initial themes across participants’ comments, and the researcher reviewed and refined these themes to ensure accuracy before finalizing the results.
Strengths, Limitations, and Recommendations for Future Research
This survey provides valuable insight into how Black women think and feel about breast cancer and breast health, drawing on responses from participants across the United States. Results are weighted to reflect the age and regional distribution of Black adults in the United States, strengthening the relevance of findings across geographic contexts and age groups. The survey also captured a broad range of topics, including personal and family cancer history, interactions with healthcare providers, knowledge of risk factors, perceived barriers to screening, and responses to different health messaging approaches.
Several strengths enhance the contribution of this study. The sample includes respondents from all U.S. Census regions and spans multiple age groups, enabling meaningful comparisons across demographic subgroups. In addition, the inclusion of an experimental messaging component allows for direct assessment of how different message frames influence intent to schedule a mammogram. This approach goes beyond descriptive findings and offers practical implications for health communication.
At the same time, findings should be interpreted in light of important limitations. The survey reflects the perspectives of Black women who are regular readers of Word In Black publications and who elected to participate. While weighting improves alignment with the U.S. Black population by age and region, other characteristics – such as education and income – were not included in the weighting process. As a result, respondents in this study are more highly educated and have higher household incomes than the broader population of Black women.
Because of these differences, some findings may not fully capture the experiences of Black women facing greater economic barriers to care or reduced access to health information. The results should therefore be interpreted as informative and directionally meaningful, rather than as fully nationally representative across all socioeconomic characteristics.
Future research could build on this work by expanding outreach strategies to better reach Black women with lower incomes or lower educational attainment, and by incorporating additional measures to better understand structural barriers to breast cancer screening and care. Longitudinal or repeated survey efforts may also help track changes in knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors over time.