↓ Skip to main content

Is the intention-behaviour gap greater amongst the more deprived? A meta-analysis of five studies on physical activity, diet, and medication adherence in smoking cessation

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Health Psychology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
31 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Is the intention-behaviour gap greater amongst the more deprived? A meta-analysis of five studies on physical activity, diet, and medication adherence in smoking cessation
Published in
British Journal of Health Psychology, August 2015
DOI 10.1111/bjhp.12152
Pubmed ID
Authors

Milica Vasiljevic, Yin-Lam Ng, Simon J. Griffin, Stephen Sutton, Theresa M. Marteau

Abstract

Unhealthy behaviour is more common amongst the deprived, thereby contributing to health inequalities. The evidence that the gap between intention and behaviour is greater amongst the more deprived is limited and inconsistent. We tested this hypothesis using objective and self-report measures of three behaviours, both individual- and area-level indices of socio-economic status, and pooling data from five studies. Secondary data analysis. Multiple linear regressions and meta-analyses of data on physical activity, diet, and medication adherence in smoking cessation from 2,511 participants. Across five studies, we found no evidence for an interaction between deprivation and intention in predicting objective or self-report measures of behaviour. Using objectively measured behaviour and area-level deprivation, meta-analyses suggested that the gap between self-efficacy and behaviour was greater amongst the more deprived (B = .17 [95% CI = 0.02, 0.31]). We find no compelling evidence to support the hypothesis that the intention-behaviour gap is greater amongst the more deprived. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Unhealthy behaviour is more common in those who are more deprived. This may reflect a larger gap between intentions and behaviour amongst the more deprived. The limited evidence to date testing this hypothesis is mixed. What does this study add? In the most robust study to date, combining results from five trials, we found no evidence for this explanation. The gap between intentions and behaviour did not vary with deprivation for the following: diet, physical activity, or medication adherence in smoking cessation. We did, however, find a larger gap between perceived control over behaviour (self-efficacy) and behaviour in those more deprived. These findings add to existing evidence to suggest that higher rates of unhealthier behaviour in more deprived groups may be reduced by the following: ◦ Strengthening behavioural control mechanisms (such as executive function and non-conscious processes) or ◦ Behaviour change interventions that bypass behavioural control mechanisms.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Greece 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 96 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 25%
Student > Bachelor 18 18%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 12%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 3 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 33%
Social Sciences 14 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 11 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 30 April 2019.
All research outputs
#804,326
of 14,762,550 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Health Psychology
#85
of 603 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,422
of 233,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Health Psychology
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,762,550 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 603 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 233,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.