| Literature DB >> 15771774 |
Birgitte Wammes1, Stef Kremers, Boudewijn Breedveld, Johannes Brug.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study is an application of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) with additional variables to predict the motivations to prevent weight gain. In addition, variations in measures across individuals classified into Precaution Adoption Process stages (PAPM-stages) of behaviour change were investigated.Entities:
Year: 2005 PMID: 15771774 PMCID: PMC1079920 DOI: 10.1186/1479-5868-2-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ISSN: 1479-5868 Impact factor: 6.457
PAPM staging-algorithm applied to weight gain prevention
| 1. Unengaged | I have never thought about actively trying to prevent weight gain |
| 2. Undecided to act | I have thought about actively trying to prevent weight gain but I do not know (yet) whether I will do so |
| 3. Decided not to act | I have decided not to actively try to prevent weight gain |
| 4. Decided to act | I have decided to actively try to prevent weight gain but I am currently not doing so (yet) |
| 5. Action and maintenance | I do already actively try to prevent weight gain |
Number of items on determinant constructs related to prevention of weight gain, the internal consistency between the items and the mean scores on the constructs, n = 979
| Determinant (Range) | Number of items | Internal consistency (α) | Mean score (SD) |
| Intention (-2,2) | 1 | 1.36 (1.18) | |
| Attitude (-2,2) | 3 | 0.53 | 0.59 (0.65) |
| Subjective norm (-2,2) | 1 | -0.67 (1.47) | |
| Perceive behavioural control (-2,2) | 2 | 0.53 | 0.88 (0.92) |
| Descriptive norm (-2,2) | 1 | 0.20 (1.19) | |
| Social support (-2,2) | 1 | -1.05 (1.03) | |
| Risk perception (1,15) | 2 | 5.92 (3.69) | |
| Weight perception (-2,2) | 2 | 0.65 | 0.12 (0.72) |
Correlates of intention to avoid weight gain based on stepwise logistics regression analysis (n = 979): odds ratios (OR), 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) and explained variance (Nagelkerke R2).
| BMI (20–30 kg/m2) | 1.30 (1.20–1.42) | BMI | 1.22 (1.11–1.35) | BMI | 1.04 (0.91–1.19) |
| Sex (0 = man; 1 = woman) | 2.34 (1.61–3.39) | Sex | 1.81 (1.13–2.89) | Sex | 1.00 (0.58–1.71) |
| Age (25–35y) | 1.07 (1.01–1.13) | Age | 1.09 (1.01–1.17) | Age | 1.12 (1.04–1.20) |
| Education (1 = low; 2 = high) | 1.29 (0.92–1.81) | Education | 1.26 (0.89–1.78) | Education | 1.19 (0.84–1.70) |
| Ethnicity (1 = Non Dutch origin; 2 = Dutch origin) | 1.04 (0.58–1.89) | Ethnicity | 1.22 (0.60–2.50) | Ethnicity | 1.23 (0.58–2.59) |
| Attitude | 10.10 (6.85–14.89) | Attitude | 7.91 (5.33–11.74) | ||
| Subjective norm | 1.24 (1.04–1.47) | Subjective norm | 1.17 (0.97–1.40) | ||
| Perceived behavioural control | 1.00 (0.78–1.27) | Perceived behavioural control | 1.12 (0.88–1.44) | ||
| Descriptive norm | 1.19 (0.99–1.45) | ||||
| Social support | 1.10 (0.82–1.47) | ||||
| Risk perception | 1.24 (1.11–1.38) | ||||
| Weight perception | 1.36 (0.81–2.30) | ||||
Significant differences between PAPM stages on socio-demographic and psychosocial correlates (n = 979)
| Age | 30.00 | 30.28 | 30.35 | 31.28 | 30.98 | A>UE |
| Sex (% women) | 30.3 | 29.7 | 37.5 | 54.1 | 64.1 | DA, A>UE, UD A>DN |
| Education (% higher education) | 40.4 | 60.9 | 45.0 | 47.1 | 53.0 | - |
| BMI | 22.33 | 23.12 | 23.02 | 24.79 | 23.97 | DA> UE, UD, DN A> UE, DN |
| Attitude | -0.095 | 0.35 | -0.079 | 0.42 | 0.83 | A> UE, UD, DN, DA UD, DA >DN, UE |
| Subjective norm | -1.06 | -0.88 | -1.14 | -0.28 | -0.57 | A, DA > UE, DN |
| Perceived behavioural control | 0.82 | 0.87 | 0.74 | 0.38 | 0.96 | UE, UD, A > DA |
| Descriptive norm | -0.028 | -0.078 | -0.063 | 0.035 | 0.31 | - |
| Social support | -1.49 | -1.42 | -1.54 | -1.02 | -0.88 | A> UE, UD, DN DA> UE, DN |
| Risk perception | 2.96 | 3.97 | 3.89 | 6.51 | 6.79 | DA, A > UE, UD, DN |
| Weight perception | -0.46 | -0.094 | -0.22 | 0.46 | 0.23 | DA, A > UE, UD, DN UD>UE |
*Statistical significant at P < 0.05
Note: UE = unengaged; UD = undecided to act; DN = decided not to act; DA = decided to act; A = action