| Literature DB >> 35206141 |
Ying-Hsuan Chen1, Shun-Lung Chao2, Yen-Wei Chu3,4,5,6,7.
Abstract
There are many factors that affect vitamin D supplementation, including those from the theory of planned behaviour (TPB); however, how the perceived benefit acts in the model remains unknown. In the current study, we tested the efficacy of the TPB and the impacts of the perceived benefit (PBE) in the model. The subjects were 287 customers who purchased vitD from pharmacies in major cities in Taiwan. A structured questionnaire was used to collect the data. t-tests, analysis of variance (ANOVA), regression analyses, and path analysis via SPSS and AMOS were used to analyse the data. The original TPB model explained 47.5% of the variance of intention with the three variables of attitude (β = 0.261), perceived behavioural control (β = 0.183), and subjective norms (β = 0.169). The model that incorporated PBE increased the explained variance to 59.7%, and PBE became the strongest predictor (β = 0.310) and a significant mediator linking attitude, subjective norms, perceived control (ANC) with supplementation intention. PBE and attitude were the two most important variables in predicting vitD supplementation intention. We suggest that updated information regarding dietary sources of vitD and its benefits should be included in health- or nutrition-related courses in education programs for the overall health of the nation.Entities:
Keywords: nutrients; perceived benefit; theory of planned behaviour; vitamin D
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35206141 PMCID: PMC8872502 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19041952
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Participants’ profiles.
| Factors | Categories | * | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Female | 156 | 54.36 |
| Male | 131 | 45.64 | |
| Marital status | Single | 108 | 37.63 |
| Married | 179 | 62.37 | |
| Age | 20–30 | 54 | 18.82 |
| 31–35 | 42 | 14.63 | |
| 36–40 | 44 | 15.33 | |
| 41–45 | 39 | 13.59 | |
| 46–50 | 32 | 11.15 | |
| 51–55 | 35 | 12.20 | |
| 56 and above | 41 | 14.29 | |
| Education | High School or lower | 66 | 23.00 |
| College | 166 | 57.84 | |
| Post-graduate | 55 | 19.16 | |
| Income | USD 1228 or lower | 105 | 36.59 |
| USD 1229–1754 | 75 | 26.13 | |
| USD 1789–2280 | 48 | 16.72 | |
| USD 2315 and above | 59 | 20.56 | |
| Jobs | Office jobs | 46 | 16.03 |
| Healthcare | 67 | 23.34 | |
| Commerce | 56 | 19.51 | |
| Traditional | 40 | 13.94 | |
| None | 78 | 27.18 | |
| Area | North | 171 | 59.58 |
| Central | 30 | 10.45 | |
| South | 86 | 29.97 |
*n is sample size: 287.
Construct variance varied in gender, marriage, income, job, and area.
| Var | M | SD | Gender a | Marital b | Age | Edu | Income c | Job d | Area e |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AT | 3.94 | 0.65 | F > M ( | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. |
| SN | 3.60 | 0.67 | F > M ( | M > S ( | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | HC > O, N ( | S > N ( |
| PBC | 3.91 | 0.64 | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | H > L ( | n. s. | n. s. |
| PBE | 3.68 | 0.69 | F > M ( | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | HC > N ( | n. s. |
| BI | 3.71 | 0.69 | n. s. | M > S ( | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. | n. s. |
Only significantly different values are shown; M = mean; SD = standard deviation; n. s. = non-significant; AT = attitude; SN = subjective norms; PBC = perceived behavioural control; PBE = perceived benefit of vitamin D; BI = supplementation intention; a F = female; M = male; b M = married; S = single; c H = monthly income at least NTD 66K; L = monthly income no more than NTD 35K; d HC = healthcare; O = office worker; N = none; e N = north; C = central; S = south.
Means, standard deviations, reliability, and validity of the study variables.
| Factors | M | SD | Cronbach’s α | CR a | AT | SN | PBC | BI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AT | 3.94 | 0.65 | 0.950 | 0.900 |
| 0.639 ** | 0.507 ** | 0.638 ** |
| SN | 3.60 | 0.67 | 0.955 | 0.913 | 0.639 ** |
| 0.687 ** | 0.643 ** |
| PBC | 3.91 | 0.64 | 0.879 | 0.757 | 0.507 ** | 0.687 ** |
| 0.638 ** |
| BI | 3.71 | 0.69 | 0.923 | 0.909 | 0.638 ** | 0.643 ** | 0.638 ** |
|
CR = composite reliability; ** p ≤ 0.01; figures in boldface denote the square root of average value extract (AVE); AT = attitude; SN = subjective norms; PBC = perceived behavioural control; PBE = perceived benefit of vitamin D; BI = supplementation intention.
Figure 1Confirmatory factor analysis; AT = attitude; SN = subjective norms; PBC = perceived behavioural control; BI = supplementation intention; GFI = goodness of fit index; AGFI = adjusted goodness of fit index; CFI = comparative fit index; NNFI = non-normed fit index; IFI = incremental fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation.
Effects of ANC on BI and perceived benefit.
| Associations | Estimate | S.E. | C.R. |
| Std. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BI←-AT | 0.286 | 0.071 | 3.999 | *** | 0.261 | H1 was supported |
| BI←-PBC | 0.236 | 0.106 | 2.241 | 0.025 | 0.183 | |
| BI←-SN | 0.168 | 0.080 | 2.095 | 0.036 | 0.169 | |
| BI←-PBE | 0.322 | 0.067 | 4.806 | *** | 0.310 | |
| PBE←-AT | 0.290 | 0.073 | 3.951 | *** | 0.275 | H3 was supported |
| PBE←-PBC | 0.369 | 0.109 | 3.368 | *** | 0.296 | |
| PBE←-SN | 0.168 | 0.086 | 2.584 | 0.010 | 0.230 |
BI = vitD supplementation intention; PBE = perceived benefit of vitD; AT = attitude; PBC = perceived behavioural control; SN = subjective norm; S.E. = standard error; C.R. = critical ratio; *** p < 0.001.
Figure 2Structural equation model.AT = attitude; SN = subjective norms; PBC = perceived behavioural control; PBE = perceived benefit of vitamin D; BI = supplementation intention; GFI = goodness of fit index; AGFI = adjusted goodness of fit index; CFI = comparative fit index; NNFI = non-normed fit index; IFI = incremental fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation.
Standardized effects of ANC and PBE on BI (BCPM).
| Total Effects | Direct Effects | Indirect Effects | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Confidence I. | CI1 | CI2 |
| CI1 | CI2 |
| CI1 | CI2 |
|
| BI←-AT | 0.193 | 0.489 | 0.002 | 0.101 | 0.431 | 0.005 | 0.030 | 0.176 | 0.002 |
| BI←-SN | 0.052 | 0.440 | 0.029 | 0.012 | 0.365 | 0.042 | 0.015 | 0.156 | 0.017 |
| BI←-PBC | 0.058 | 0.484 | 0.018 | 0.011 | 0.376 | 0.050 | 0.037 | 0.179 | 0.002 |
| BI←-PBE | 0.163 | 0.473 | 0.004 | 0.163 | 0.473 | 0.004 | |||
BCPM = bias-corrected percentile methods; CI1 = confidence interval, lower bound; CI2 = confidence interval, upper bound; AT = attitude; SN = subjective norms; PBC = perceived behavioural control; PBE = perceived benefit of vitamin D; BI = supplementation intention.