nach oben

Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Erschienen in:

01.02.2014 | Original Article

Competitive Testing of Health Behavior Theories: How Do Benefits, Barriers, Subjective Norm, and Intention Influence Mammography Behavior?

verfasst von: Caitlin C. Murphy, M.P.H., Sally W. Vernon, Ph.D., Pamela M. Diamond, Ph.D., Jasmin A. Tiro, Ph.D.

Erschienen in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine | Ausgabe 1/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Competitive hypothesis testing may explain differences in predictive power across multiple health behavior theories.

Purpose

We tested competing hypotheses of the Health Belief Model (HBM) and Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) to quantify pathways linking subjective norm, benefits, barriers, intention, and mammography behavior.

Methods

We analyzed longitudinal surveys of women veterans randomized to the control group of a mammography intervention trial (n = 704). We compared direct, partial mediation, and full mediation models with Satorra–Bentler χ ² difference testing.

Results

Barriers had a direct and indirect negative effect on mammography behavior; intention only partially mediated barriers. Benefits had little to no effect on behavior and intention; however, it was negatively correlated with barriers. Subjective norm directly affected behavior and indirectly affected intention through barriers.

Conclusions

Our results provide empiric support for different assertions of HBM and TRA. Future interventions should test whether building subjective norm and reducing negative attitudes increases regular mammography.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Institute of Medicine. Speaking of Health: Assessing Health Communication Strategies for Diverse Populations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2002: 28-75.

Noar SM, Zimmerman RS. Health Behavior Theory and cumulative knowledge regarding health behaviors: Are we moving in the right direction. Health Educ Res. 2005; 20: 275-290.PubMedCrossRef

Weinstein ND, Rothman AJ. Commentary: Revitalizing research on health behavior theories. Health Educ Res. 2005; 20: 294-297.PubMedCrossRef

Brewer NT, Gilkey MB. Comparing theories of health behavior using data from longitudinal studies: A comment on Gerend and Shepherd. Ann Behav Med. 2012; 44: 147-148.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Aiken LS, West SG, Woodward CK, Reno RR. Health beliefs and compliance with mammography-screening recommendations in asymptomatic women. Health Psychol. 1994; 13: 122-129.PubMedCrossRef

Bowie JV, Curbow B, LaVeist TA, Fitzgerald S, Zabora J. The Theory of Planned Behavior and intention to repeat mammography among African-American women. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2004; 21: 23-43.CrossRef

Montaño DE, Taplin SH. A test of an expanded theory of reasoned action to predict mammography participation. Soc Sci Med. 1991; 32: 733-741.PubMedCrossRef

Rauscher GH, Earp JAL, O'Malley M. Relation between intervention exposures, changes in attitudes, and mammography use in the North Carolina Breast Cancer Screening Program. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2005; 13: 741-747.

Curry SJ, Emmons KM. Theoretical models for predicting and improving compliance with breast cancer screening. Ann Behav Med. 1994; 16: 302-316.

10.

Rakowski WA, Dube CA, Marcus BH, Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Abrams DB. Assessing elements of women's decisions about mammography. Health Psychol. 1992; 11: 111-118.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Rakowski WA, Fulton JP, Feldman JP. Women's decision making about mammography: a replication of the relationship between stages of adoption and decisional balance. Health Psychol. 1993; 12: 209-214.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Taplin SH, Montano DE. Attitudes, age, and participation in mammographic screening: A prospective analysis. J Am Board Fam Pract. 1993; 6: 13-23.PubMed

13.

Abraham C, Sheeran P. The health belief model. In: Conner M, Norman P, eds. Predicting Health Behavior. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press; 2005: 28-80.

14.

Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.; 1980.

15.

Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.

16.

Champion VL, Skinner CS. The Health Belief Model. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research and Practice. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2008: 45-65.

17.

Tiro JA, Diamond P, Perz CA, et al. Validation of scales measuring attitudes and norms related to mammography screening. Health Psychol. 2005; 24: 555-566.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Becker MH, Haefner DP, Kasl SV, Kirscht JP, Maiman LA, Rosenstock IM. Selected psychosocial models and correlates of individual health-related behaviors. Med Care. 1977; 15: 27-46.PubMedCrossRef

19.

King JB. The impact of patients perceptions of high blood pressure on attendance at screening: An extension of the Health Belief Model. Soc Sci Med. 1982; 16: 1079-1091.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Calnan M. The health belief model and participation in programmes for the early detection of breast cancer: A comparative analysis. Soc Sci Med. 1984; 19: 823-830.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Norman P, Conner M. Predicting and changing health behavior: future directions. In: Conner M, Norman P, eds. Predicting Health Behavior. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press; 2005: 324-372.

22.

Trafimow D. Attitudinal and normative processes in health behaviour. In: Norman P, Abraham C, Conner M, eds. Understanding and Changing Health Behaviour: From Health Beliefs to Self-regulation. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Harwood Academic Publishers; 2000: 101-113.

23.

Mattson M. Towards a reconceptualization of communication cues to action in the health belief model: HIV test counselling. Commun Monogr. 1999; 66: 240-265.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Becker MH, Maiman LA. Sociobehavioral determinants of compliance with health and medical care recommendations. Med Care. 1975; 13: 10-24.PubMedCrossRef

25.

del Junco DJ, Vernon SW, Coan SP, et al. Promoting regular mammography screening I. A systematic assessment of validity in a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008; 100: 333-346.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

26.

Vernon SW, del Junco DJ, Tiro JA, et al. Promoting regular mammography screening II. Results from a randomized controlled trial in US women veterans. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008; 100: 347-358.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

27.

Rakowski WA, Andersen MR, Stoddard AM, et al. Confirmatory analysis of opinions regarding the pros and cons of mammography. Health Psychol. 1997; 16: 433-441.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Vernon SW, Myers RE, Tilley BC. Development and validation of an instrument to measure factors related to colorectal cancer screening adherence. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 1997; 6: 825-832.

29.

Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus Version 7.0. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 2012.

30.

Yu C-Y. Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes (dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles; 2002.

31.

Raykov T, Marcoulides GA. On desirability of parsimony in structural equation model selection. Struct Equ Model. 1999; 6: 292-300.CrossRef

32.

Satorra A, Bentler PM. A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika. 2001; 66: 507-514.CrossRef

33.

Bryant FB, Satorra A. Principles and practice of scaled difference chi-square testing. Struct Equ Model. 2012; 19: 372-398.CrossRef

34.

Satorra A, Bentler PM. Ensuring positiveness of the scaled difference chi-square test statistic. Psychometrika. 2010; 75: 243-248.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

35.

Cook T, Flay BR. The temporal persistance of experimentally induced attitude change: an evaluative review. In: Berkowitz L, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic; 1978: 1-57.

36.

Hu LH, Bentler PM. Evaluating model fit. In: Hoyle RH, ed. Structural Equation Modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1995.

37.

Hu LH, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model. 1999; 6: 1-55.CrossRef

38.

Weinstein ND. The precaution adoption process. Health Psychol. 1988; 7: 355-386.PubMedCrossRef

39.

Baumann LJ, Fontana SA, Brown RL, Cameron L. Testing a model of mammography intention. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1993; 23: 1733-1756.CrossRef

40.

Lauver D, Nabholz S, Scott K, Tak Y. Testing theoretical explanations of mammography use. Nurs Res. 1997; 46: 32-39.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Montaño DE, Thompson B, Taylor VM, Mahloch J. Understanding mammography intention and utilization among women in an inner city public hospital clinic. Prev Med. 1997; 26: 817-824.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Zapka JG, Stoddard AM, Costanza ME, Greene HL. Breast cancer screening by mammography: Utilization and associated factors. Am J Public Health. 1989; 79: 1499-1502.PubMedCrossRef

43.

Burns RB, Freund KM, Ash A, Shwartz M, Antab L, Hall R. Who gets repeat screening mammography: The role of the physician. J Gen Intern Med. 1995; 10: 520-522.PubMedCrossRef

44.

Halabi S, Skinner CS, Samsa GP, Strigo TS, Crawford YS, Rimer BK. Factors associated with repeat mammography screening. J Fam Pract. 2000; 49: 1104-1112.PubMed

45.

Howe HL. Repeat mammography among women over 50 years of age. Am J Prev Med. 1992; 8: 182-185.PubMed

46.

Jepson R, Clegg A, Forbes C, Lewis R, Sowden A, Kleijnen J. The determinants of screening uptake and interventions for increasing uptake: A systematic review. Health Technol Assess. 2000; 4: 1-133.

47.

Lerman CL, Rimer BK, Trock BJ, Balshem AM, Engstrom PF. Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening. Prev Med. 1990; 19: 279-290.PubMedCrossRef

48.

Lipkus IM, Rimer BK, Halabi S, Strigo TS. Can tailored interventions increase mammography use among HMO women? Am J Prev Med. 2000; 18: 1-10.PubMedCrossRef

49.

Mayne L, Earp JA. Initial and repeat mammography screening: Different behaviors/different predictors. J Rural Heal. 2003; 19: 63-71.CrossRef

50.

Rimer BK, Lerman CL, Trock BJ, King ES, Engstrom PF. Why do some women get regular mammograms? Am J Prev Med. 1991; 7: 69-74.PubMed

51.

Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991; 50: 179-211.CrossRef

52.

Department of Veteran Affairs. 2001 National Survey of Veterans (NSV): final report. Available at http://www1.va.gov/vetdata/page.cfm?pg=5. Accessibility verified February 13, 2007.

53.

Weinstein ND. Misleading tests of health behavior theories. Ann Behav Med. 2007; 33: 1-10.PubMedCrossRef

54.

Nigg CR, Allegrante JP, Ory M. Theory-comparison and multiple-behavior research: Common themes advancing health behavior research. Health Educ Res. 2002; 17: 670-679.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Competitive Testing of Health Behavior Theories: How Do Benefits, Barriers, Subjective Norm, and Intention Influence Mammography Behavior?
verfasst von: Caitlin C. Murphy, M.P.H.
Sally W. Vernon, Ph.D.
Pamela M. Diamond, Ph.D.
Jasmin A. Tiro, Ph.D.
Publikationsdatum: 01.02.2014
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Annals of Behavioral Medicine / Ausgabe 1/2014
Print ISSN: 0883-6612
Elektronische ISSN: 1532-4796
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-013-9528-0

Neu in den Fachgebieten Neurologie und Psychiatrie

23.04.2024 | Demenz | Nachrichten

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Competitive Testing of Health Behavior Theories: How Do Benefits, Barriers, Subjective Norm, and Intention Influence Mammography Behavior?

Abstract

Background

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Neu in den Fachgebieten Neurologie und Psychiatrie

Demenzkranke durch Antipsychotika vielfach gefährdet

Parkinson-Therapie im Wandel – aktuelle Leitlinie im Fokus

Weniger postpartale Depressionen nach Esketamin-Einmalgabe

Auf diese Krankheiten bei Geflüchteten sollten Sie vorbereitet sein

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Background

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2014

Conscientiousness and Medication Adherence: A Meta-analysis

Behavioral Medicine in the 21st Century: Transforming “the Road Less Traveled” into the “American Way of Life”

The Relationship of Patient and Spouse Personality to Cardiac Patients’ Health: Two Observational Studies of Mediation and Moderation

Structural Stigma and Hypothalamic–Pituitary–Adrenocortical Axis Reactivity in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Young Adults

Structural Stigma and Cigarette Smoking in a Prospective Cohort Study of Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Youth

Barriers and Facilitators to Engagement and Retention in Care among Transgender Women Living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus

Neu in den Fachgebieten Neurologie und Psychiatrie

Demenzkranke durch Antipsychotika vielfach gefährdet

Parkinson-Therapie im Wandel – aktuelle Leitlinie im Fokus

Weniger postpartale Depressionen nach Esketamin-Einmalgabe

Auf diese Krankheiten bei Geflüchteten sollten Sie vorbereitet sein