Determinants of weekly sitting time: construct validation of an initial COM-B model and comparison of its predictive validity with the Theory of Planned Behaviour

In relation to sitting behaviour, to investigate which theoretical domains best formed the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation constructs of the COM-B, and compare the predictive validity to the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), taking habit strength into consideration. Using a prospective desi...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Psychology & health Ročník 36; číslo 1; s. 96 - 114
Hlavní autoři: Howlett, Neil, Schulz, Joerg, Trivedi, Daksha, Troop, Nicholas, Chater, Angel
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: England Routledge 2021
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Témata:
Adult
COM-B
Female
habit
Habits
Humans
Intention
Male
Models, Psychological
Prospective Studies
Psychological Theory
Reproducibility of Results
Sedentary Behavior
sedentary behaviour
Self Report
Sitting Position
Theoretical Domains Framework
Theory of Planned Behaviour: sitting
Time Factors
Validity
sedentary behaviour
COM-B
habit
Theoretical Domains Framework
Theory of Planned Behaviour: sitting
ISSN:0887-0446, 1476-8321, 1476-8321
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:In relation to sitting behaviour, to investigate which theoretical domains best formed the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation constructs of the COM-B, and compare the predictive validity to the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), taking habit strength into consideration. Using a prospective design, 186 adults completed measures capturing domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework for the three COM-B constructs, and habit strength, which were examined using a formative measurement model. Predictive validity was then compared to the TPB. Self-reported sitting behaviour. Self-monitoring (behavioural regulation domain) formed Capability; subjective norm (social influences domain) formed Opportunity; intention (intentions domain), positive affect (emotion domain), and perceived behavioural control (beliefs about capabilities domain), formed Motivation. The COM-B strongly predicted sitting behaviour (27% variance explained), with Capability, Opportunity, and habit strength as key drivers. The TPB explained a large amount of variance (23%) in sitting behaviour, with intention and habit strength as key drivers. The behavioural regulation domain of Capability, the social influences domain of Opportunity, and habit strength were important drivers of sitting behaviour, with comparable variance predicted in the COM-B and TPB. Future research should consider this approach to conceptualise the COM-B for specific populations and behaviours.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0887-0446
1476-8321
1476-8321
DOI:10.1080/08870446.2020.1763994