Applying the behaviour change technique (BCT) taxonomy v1: a study of coder training

Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1 (BCTTv1) has been used to detect active ingredients of interventions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate effectiveness of user training in improving reliable, valid and confident application of BCTTv1 to code BCTs in intervention descriptions. One hundre...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Translational behavioral medicine Vol. 5; no. 2; pp. 134 - 148
Main Authors: Wood, Caroline E, Richardson, Michelle, Johnston, Marie, Abraham, Charles, Francis, Jill, Hardeman, Wendy, Michie, Susan
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: New York Oxford University Press 01.06.2015
Springer US
Subjects:
Agreements
Confidence
Cross Cultural Psychology
Family Medicine
General Practice
Health Promotion and Disease Prevention
Health Psychology
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Original Research
Public Health
Taxonomy
User training
Training methods
Taxonomy
Behaviour change techniques
ISSN:1869-6716, 1613-9860
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1 (BCTTv1) has been used to detect active ingredients of interventions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate effectiveness of user training in improving reliable, valid and confident application of BCTTv1 to code BCTs in intervention descriptions. One hundred sixty-one trainees (109 in workshops and 52 in group tutorials) were trained to code frequent BCTs. The following measures were taken before and after training: (i) inter-coder agreement, (ii) trainee agreement with expert consensus, (iii) confidence ratings and (iv) coding competence. Coding was assessed for 12 BCTs (workshops) and for 17 BCTs (tutorials). Trainees completed a course evaluation. Methods improved agreement with expert consensus (p < .05) but not inter-coder agreement (p = .08, p = .57, respectively) and increased confidence for BCTs assessed (both p < .05). Methods were as effective as one another at improving coding competence (p = .55). Training was evaluated positively. The training improved agreement with expert consensus, confidence for BCTs assessed, coding competence but not inter-coder agreement. This varied according to BCT.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:1869-6716
1613-9860
DOI:10.1007/s13142-014-0290-z