You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Misleading tests of health behavior theories
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Behavioral Medicine, February 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1207/s15324796abm3301_1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Neil D. Weinstein |
| Abstract |
Most tests of cognitively oriented theories of health behavior are based on correlational data. Unfortunately, such tests are often biased, overestimating the accuracy of the theories they seek to evaluate. These biases are especially strong when studies examine health behaviors that need to be performed repeatedly, such as medication adherence, diet, exercise, and condom use. Several misleading data analysis procedures further exaggerate the theories' predictive accuracy. Because correlational designs are not adequate for deciding whether a particular construct affects behavior or for testing one theory against another, most of the literature aiming to test these theories tells us little about their validity or completeness. Neither does the existing empirical literature support decisions to use these theories to design interventions. In addition to discussing problems with correlational data, this article offers ideas for alternative testing strategies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 339 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 12 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | <1% |
| Unknown | 310 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 74 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 52 | 15% |
| Researcher | 39 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 28 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 7% |
| Other | 64 | 19% |
| Unknown | 57 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 102 | 30% |
| Social Sciences | 57 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 21 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 14 | 4% |
| Other | 40 | 12% |
| Unknown | 70 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 April 2014.
All research outputs
#15,298,293
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#1,078
of 1,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,427
of 160,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#11
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,389 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.4. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 160,533 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.