84
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Theories of behaviour and behaviour change across the social and behavioural sciences: a scoping review

      other

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Interventions to change health-related behaviours typically have modest effects and may be more effective if grounded in appropriate theory. Most theories applied to public health interventions tend to emphasise individual capabilities and motivation, with limited reference to context and social factors. Intervention effectiveness may be increased by drawing on a wider range of theories incorporating social, cultural and economic factors that influence behaviour. The primary aim of this paper is to identify theories of behaviour and behaviour change of potential relevance to public health interventions across four scientific disciplines: psychology, sociology, anthropology and economics. We report in detail the methodology of our scoping review used to identify these theories including which involved a systematic search of electronic databases, consultation with a multidisciplinary advisory group, web searching, searching of reference lists and hand searching of key behavioural science journals. Of secondary interest we developed a list of agreed criteria for judging the quality of the theories. We identified 82 theories and 9 criteria for assessing theory quality. The potential relevance of this wide-ranging number of theories to public health interventions and the ease and usefulness of evaluating the theories in terms of the quality criteria are however yet to be determined.

          Related collections

          Most cited references98

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance

          Evaluating complex interventions is complicated. The Medical Research Council's evaluation framework (2000) brought welcome clarity to the task. Now the council has updated its guidance
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            A Theory of Social Comparison Processes

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research

              Background An integrative theoretical framework, developed for cross-disciplinary implementation and other behaviour change research, has been applied across a wide range of clinical situations. This study tests the validity of this framework. Methods Validity was investigated by behavioural experts sorting 112 unique theoretical constructs using closed and open sort tasks. The extent of replication was tested by Discriminant Content Validation and Fuzzy Cluster Analysis. Results There was good support for a refinement of the framework comprising 14 domains of theoretical constructs (average silhouette value 0.29): ‘Knowledge’, ‘Skills’, ‘Social/Professional Role and Identity’, ‘Beliefs about Capabilities’, ‘Optimism’, ‘Beliefs about Consequences’, ‘Reinforcement’, ‘Intentions’, ‘Goals’, ‘Memory, Attention and Decision Processes’, ‘Environmental Context and Resources’, ‘Social Influences’, ‘Emotions’, and ‘Behavioural Regulation’. Conclusions The refined Theoretical Domains Framework has a strengthened empirical base and provides a method for theoretically assessing implementation problems, as well as professional and other health-related behaviours as a basis for intervention development.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Health Psychol Rev
                Health Psychol Rev
                RHPR
                rhpr20
                Health Psychology Review
                Routledge
                1743-7199
                1743-7202
                7 August 2015
                8 August 2014
                : 9
                : 3
                : 323-344
                Affiliations
                [ a ]Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London , London, UK
                [ b ]School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol , Bristol, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Email: s.michie@ 123456ucl.ac.uk
                Article
                941722
                10.1080/17437199.2014.941722
                4566873
                25104107
                dc26719e-41b1-4fd1-884e-4eaafe6e025b
                © 2014 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis

                This is an Open Access article. Non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly attributed, cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way, is permitted. The moral rights of the named author(s) have been asserted.

                History
                : 29 January 2014
                : 2 July 2014
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 2, References: 83, Pages: 22
                Funding
                Funding: This project was funded by the Medical Research Council's Population Health Sciences Research Network [grant number PHSRN10]. The work was undertaken with the support of The Centre for the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions for Public Health Improvement (DECIPHer), a UKCRC Public Health Research: Centre of Excellence. Funding from the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council [RES-590-28-0005], Medical Research Council, the Welsh Government and the Wellcome Trust [WT087640MA], under the auspices of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration, is gratefully acknowledged.
                Categories
                Review

                behaviour change,health behaviour,theory,behavioural interventions

                Comments

                Comment on this article