↓ Skip to main content

Predicting maintenance of attendance at walking groups: Testing constructs from three leading maintenance theories.

Overview of attention for article published in Health Psychology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
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.
Title
Predicting maintenance of attendance at walking groups: Testing constructs from three leading maintenance theories.
Published in
Health Psychology, January 2014
DOI 10.1037/hea0000015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aikaterini Kassavou, Andrew Turner, Thomas Hamborg, David P. French

Abstract

Objective: Little is known about the processes and factors that account for maintenance, with several theories existing that have not been subject to many empirical tests. The aim of this study was to test how well theoretical constructs derived from the Health Action Process Approach, Rothman's theory of maintenance, and Verplanken's approach to habitual behavior predicted maintenance of attendance at walking groups. Method: 114 participants, who had already attended walking groups in the community for at least 3 months, completed a questionnaire assessing theoretical constructs regarding maintenance. An objective assessment of attendance over the subsequent 3 months was gained. Multilevel modeling was used to predict maintenance, controlling for clustering within walking groups. Results: Recovery self-efficacy predicted maintenance, even after accounting for clustering. Satisfaction with social outcomes, satisfaction with health outcomes, and overall satisfaction predicted maintenance, but only satisfaction with health outcomes significantly predicted maintenance after accounting for clustering. Self-reported habitual behavior did not predict maintenance despite mean previous attendance being 20.7 months. Conclusions: Recovery self-efficacy, and satisfaction with health outcomes of walking group attendance appeared to be important for objectively measured maintenance, whereas self-reported habit appeared not to be important for maintenance at walking groups. The findings suggest that there is a need for intervention studies to boost recovery self-efficacy and satisfaction with outcomes of walking group attendance, to assess impact on maintenance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Italy 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 60 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 19%
Student > Master 10 16%
Unspecified 7 11%
Other 6 9%
Other 16 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 42%
Unspecified 12 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 9%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Sports and Recreations 5 8%
Other 8 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 July 2014.
All research outputs
#3,212,921
of 12,343,671 outputs
Outputs from Health Psychology
#710
of 2,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,886
of 211,749 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Psychology
#6
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,343,671 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 211,749 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 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 66% of its contemporaries.