{"title":"Understanding the effects of counterfactual thinking with protective behavioral strategies on healthy eating using the COM-B framework","authors":"Percy Gresham, Sherecce Fields, Emily Beebe, Rachel Smallman","doi":"10.1016/j.appet.2025.107953","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Healthy eating is often necessary to improve health outcomes, but many individuals don't consistently make healthy food choices. Previous intervention work has found that personally relevant interventions that identify actions to achieve goals are effective in changing behaviors. Counterfactual thinking (e.g. “if only … then …”) can be utilized to identify causal relationships and personally relevant behaviors to achieve health goals. Additionally, counterfactual thinking has been shown to increase goal-relevant domains such as motivation and intentions. The present study developed and evaluated an eating-based counterfactual reflection task that incorporated protective behavioral strategies (PBS) and measured capability, opportunity, and motivation to eat healthy. The results indicated that counterfactual thinking (vs. control) significantly increased self-efficacy and intentions to use specific PBS. Additionally, those in the counterfactual condition with less capability had a larger increase in their willingness to change their eating habits. Future research will refine the counterfactual task to be more relevant and effective for a wider range of individuals.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":242,"journal":{"name":"Appetite","volume":"209 ","pages":"Article 107953"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Appetite","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666325001060","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Understanding the effects of counterfactual thinking with protective behavioral strategies on healthy eating using the COM-B framework
Healthy eating is often necessary to improve health outcomes, but many individuals don't consistently make healthy food choices. Previous intervention work has found that personally relevant interventions that identify actions to achieve goals are effective in changing behaviors. Counterfactual thinking (e.g. “if only … then …”) can be utilized to identify causal relationships and personally relevant behaviors to achieve health goals. Additionally, counterfactual thinking has been shown to increase goal-relevant domains such as motivation and intentions. The present study developed and evaluated an eating-based counterfactual reflection task that incorporated protective behavioral strategies (PBS) and measured capability, opportunity, and motivation to eat healthy. The results indicated that counterfactual thinking (vs. control) significantly increased self-efficacy and intentions to use specific PBS. Additionally, those in the counterfactual condition with less capability had a larger increase in their willingness to change their eating habits. Future research will refine the counterfactual task to be more relevant and effective for a wider range of individuals.
期刊介绍:
Appetite is an international research journal specializing in cultural, social, psychological, sensory and physiological influences on the selection and intake of foods and drinks. It covers normal and disordered eating and drinking and welcomes studies of both human and non-human animal behaviour toward food. Appetite publishes research reports, reviews and commentaries. Thematic special issues appear regularly. From time to time the journal carries abstracts from professional meetings. Submissions to Appetite are expected to be based primarily on observations directly related to the selection and intake of foods and drinks; papers that are primarily focused on topics such as nutrition or obesity will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution to the understanding of appetite in line with the journal's aims and scope.