Predicting adherence to COVID-19 behavioural guidelines: a comparison of Protection Motivation Theory and the Theory of Planned Behaviour.

IF 2.4 3区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Psychology & Health Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-05 DOI:10.1080/08870446.2023.2196994

Gabriel Nudelman

{"title":"Predicting adherence to COVID-19 behavioural guidelines: a comparison of Protection Motivation Theory and the Theory of Planned Behaviour.","authors":"Gabriel Nudelman","doi":"10.1080/08870446.2023.2196994","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the utility of Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) and the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) for understanding diversity in adherence to COVID-19 behavioural guidelines.Methods and measures: A representative sample (N = 600) completed two online questionnaires: One that included measurements of PMT and TPB components that predict behaviour, and another (after one week) consisting of adherence to COVID-19 behavioural guidelines. TPB was represented by a single model, while PMT was represented by three models: Model 1, which did not include a measure of protection motivation; Model 2, which included protection motivation - represented by behavioural intentions; and Model 3, which was similar to Model 2 and included a direct link from self-efficacy to behaviour.Results: The TPB model displayed the best fit-to-complexity ratio (i.e. information criterion), and its capacity to explain adherence was similar to PMT Models 1 and 2, but lower than Model 3.Conclusion: The findings highlight the need to reach a consensus regarding the definition and measurement of protection motivation. While the TPB model exhibited superior fit-to-complexity ratio, variance was better explained when self-efficacy was included, and interventions may benefit from targeting different constructs depending on the context.","PeriodicalId":20718,"journal":{"name":"Psychology & Health","volume":" ","pages":"1689-1705"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology & Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2023.2196994","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the utility of Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) and the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) for understanding diversity in adherence to COVID-19 behavioural guidelines.

Methods and measures: A representative sample (N = 600) completed two online questionnaires: One that included measurements of PMT and TPB components that predict behaviour, and another (after one week) consisting of adherence to COVID-19 behavioural guidelines. TPB was represented by a single model, while PMT was represented by three models: Model 1, which did not include a measure of protection motivation; Model 2, which included protection motivation - represented by behavioural intentions; and Model 3, which was similar to Model 2 and included a direct link from self-efficacy to behaviour.

Results: The TPB model displayed the best fit-to-complexity ratio (i.e. information criterion), and its capacity to explain adherence was similar to PMT Models 1 and 2, but lower than Model 3.

Conclusion: The findings highlight the need to reach a consensus regarding the definition and measurement of protection motivation. While the TPB model exhibited superior fit-to-complexity ratio, variance was better explained when self-efficacy was included, and interventions may benefit from targeting different constructs depending on the context.

查看原文本刊更多论文

预测 COVID-19 行为指南的遵守情况：保护动机理论与计划行为理论的比较。

目的比较保护动机理论（PMT）和计划行为理论（TPB）对理解 COVID-19 行为指南遵守情况多样性的实用性：具有代表性的样本（N = 600）完成了两份在线问卷：其中一份问卷包括对预测行为的 PMT 和 TPB 成分的测量，另一份问卷（一周后）包括 COVID-19 行为指南的遵守情况。TPB由一个模型表示，而PMT由三个模型表示：模型 1 不包括保护动机的测量；模型 2 包括保护动机--以行为意向为代表；模型 3 与模型 2 相似，包括从自我效能到行为的直接联系：结果：TPB 模型显示出最佳的拟合-复杂比（即信息标准），其解释坚持治疗的能力与 PMT 模型 1 和 2 相似，但低于模型 3：研究结果突出表明，有必要就保护动机的定义和测量达成共识。虽然 TPB 模型显示出更高的拟合度-复杂度比率，但如果将自我效能感包括在内，则能更好地解释方差，而且根据具体情况，针对不同的结构进行干预可能会更有益处。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Psychology & Health Multiple-

CiteScore

7.30

自引率

3.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Psychology & Health promotes the study and application of psychological approaches to health and illness. The contents include work on psychological aspects of physical illness, treatment processes and recovery; psychosocial factors in the aetiology of physical illnesses; health attitudes and behaviour, including prevention; the individual-health care system interface particularly communication and psychologically-based interventions. The journal publishes original research, and accepts not only papers describing rigorous empirical work, including meta-analyses, but also those outlining new psychological approaches and interventions in health-related fields.