| Title |
Meta-Analysis of the Reasoned Action Approach (RAA) to Understanding Health Behaviors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Behavioral Medicine, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12160-016-9798-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rosemary McEachan, Natalie Taylor, Reema Harrison, Rebecca Lawton, Peter Gardner, Mark Conner |
| Abstract |
Reasoned action approach (RAA) includes subcomponents of attitude (experiential/instrumental), perceived norm (injunctive/descriptive), and perceived behavioral control (capacity/autonomy) to predict intention and behavior. To provide a meta-analysis of the RAA for health behaviors focusing on comparing the pairs of RAA subcomponents and differences between health protection and health-risk behaviors. The present research reports a meta-analysis of correlational tests of RAA subcomponents, examination of moderators, and combined effects of subcomponents on intention and behavior. Regressions were used to predict intention and behavior based on data from studies measuring all variables. Capacity and experiential attitude had large, and other constructs had small-medium-sized correlations with intention; all constructs except autonomy were significant independent predictors of intention in regressions. Intention, capacity, and experiential attitude had medium-large, and other constructs had small-medium-sized correlations with behavior; intention, capacity, experiential attitude, and descriptive norm were significant independent predictors of behavior in regressions. The RAA subcomponents have utility in predicting and understanding health behaviors. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 24% |
| Spain | 4 | 24% |
| Angola | 1 | 6% |
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 8 | 47% |
| Members of the public | 7 | 41% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 12% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 564 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 560 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 86 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 74 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 60 | 11% |
| Researcher | 49 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 34 | 6% |
| Other | 103 | 18% |
| Unknown | 158 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 87 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 62 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 52 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 47 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 28 | 5% |
| Other | 107 | 19% |
| Unknown | 181 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,841,196
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#313
of 1,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,035
of 326,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,503 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,571 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.