A3- Theories Flashcards
The Theories
- Health Belief model
- Locus of control
- Theory of planned behaviour
- Self-efficacy theory
- Transtheoretical model
The Health Belief Model
(HBM)
The HBM tries to explain why people do or do not engage in healthy behaviour through:
- perceived seriousness
- perceived susceptibility
- cost benefit analysis
Perceived seriousness
whether a person changes their behaviour or not depends on how severe they think the consequences will be if they do not change
Perceived susceptibility
If you believe you’re not likely to get a disease, you wont change your behaviour to prevent this
Cost-Benefit analysis
Cost = Obstacles/ barriers
Benefit = perceived health benefits
Perceived benefits
in order for the person to act they have to believe the action will benefit them
Perceived barriers
the obstacles we believe are preventing is from doing the action
Modifying Behaviours
- Demographic variables
- Cues to action
- Self-efficacy
Demographic variables
The HBM is influenced by:
- age, gender, culture etc.
This explains why 2 people who experience the same health problems differ in their perception
- one may change their behaviour
- one may not
Cues to action
Information presented to an individual may predispose them to ‘readiness to act’ and affect their perception
Cues can be internal (symptoms/pain) or external (campaigns/awareness)
These cues are crucial in shifting the person from thinking about changing to actually changing
Evaluation
- strength
Strong Credibility
- The HBM was developed by health researchers
- is based on real life experiences
- this makes HBM a credible explanation that is accepted by people who use it
Evaluation
- weakness
How rational?
- how often do we weigh up the costs + benefits, we do things out of habit and emotion instead of thinking rationally
- this suggests there are other psychological factors that are more important in changing behaviour than the HBM
Locus of control
(LoC)
Internal LoC = explain behaviour (success/failure etc) in terms of their own efforts
External LoC = explains behaviour as a result of luck, believe things are not in their control
LoC is a continuum (spectrum)
Attributions + Health behaviour
↓ ↑
Attribution = the process of explaining behaviour with internal + external causes
Internal LoC = Addiction chance ↓, Health ↑
External LoC = Addiction chance ↑, Health ↓
Evaluation
- strength
Practical application
- link between internals and health is useful
- an internal LoC in childhood offers protection against poor health in adulthood
- interventions aimed at developing internal LoC can help gain health benefits.
Evaluation
- weakness
Limited role of LoC
- role of LoC in resisting influence may be exaggerated
- it has little effect on our behaviour in familiar situations where previous experience is more important
- someone influenced in the past is likely to be influenced again
Intention
Intention = willingness
behaviour can be predicted from our intentions to behave
If you have intentions to do something, you’re likely to do it
Theory of Planned behaviour
(TPB)
tries to explain how people exercise control over their behaviour
3 key sources to form intention
- personal attitudes
- subjective norms
- perceived behavioural control (PBC)
Personal attitudes
refers to an individuals favourable and unfavourable beliefs about their behaviour
- their overall attitude is formed from the balance of positive and negative judgements of their own behaviour.
e.g.
‘I overeat because I enjoy food’ vs
‘overeating makes me anxious’
Subjective norms
the individuals beliefs about whether the people who matter most to them approve or disapprove of their behaviour
e.g.
if your family will disapprove, =
you’re less likely to intend to do =
less likely to
Perceived behavioural control
(PBC)
concerns how much control we believe we have over behaviour
PBC can influence behaviours/intentions:
Indirectly = the more control I believe I have, strong intentions
Directly = the more control I believe I have the longer + harder I will try
Perceived behavioural control
(PBC) Example
‘does an obese person believe losing weight is hard’
- this depends on their perception of available resources
Evaluation
- strength
Research Support
- support for some of its predictions
- the research predicted based on peoples intentions if they were going to drink the recommended limit or not
- outcomes were all as the theory predicted
Evaluation
- weakness
Not a full explanation
- TPB cannot account for the intention - behaviour gap
- they couldn’t predict reduction of gambling intentions to give up
- TPB cannot predict behaviour change
Self - efficacy
a persons belief in their own competence
If a person has a low sense of self- efficacy in that they’re unable to change their behaviour it will affect the likelihood they engage in this health behaviour
Self- efficacy theory
People with high S-E, believe they will be successful, and increase their effort to ensure success
People with low S-E believe they will fail and avoid such challenges
How self- efficacy is affected/influenced
- mastery experiences
- vicarious reinforcement
- social persuasion
- emotional state
Mastery experiences
practicing a task over and over until you’re very skilled.
Self efficacy by mastery ↑ =
we know we are capable of the task
If we fail at a task =
self - efficacy by mastery ↓
Vicarious Reinforcement
Self-efficacy is affected by observing another person (model) performing a task
If you observe a models success =
self-efficacy ↑
If you observe a models failure =
self- efficacy ↓
the model is influential if you identify as similar with them
Social persuasion
encouragement/discouragement from others have impacts on our self-efficacy
- the effects of social persuasion depend on the perceived credibility of the persuader
Emotional states
emotional states influence self-efficacy
- stress, anxiety, fear all decrease self- efficacy
- if you expect to fail, your S-E is reduced and causes you to fail
Evaluation
- strength
Support from research
- experiment showed self-efficacy affects behaviour change, it is a reliable predictor of short and long term health related behaviour change
Evaluation
- weakness
Measurement issues
- cross over and confusion with self-esteem
- self-efficacy is hard to measure
- meaning supposed evidence may not be valid
Transtheoretical Model
(TTM)
tries to explain behavioural change to overcome addiction
- 4 assumptions
- 5 stages
4 Assumptions
- people change their addictive behaviour through a series of stages
- change doesn’t happen quickly or linear its a cyclical process
- people differ in how ready they are to change
- effectiveness of interventions change throughout stages
Precontemplation
People are not thinking about changing
- denial
- demotivation
Intervention, should focus on helping client consider the need for change
5 Stages
1) Precontemplation
2) Contemplation
3) Preparation
4) Action
5) Maintenance
Contemplation
- considering change in next 6 months
- more aware of cost/need of change
- creates discomfort (cognitive dissonance)
Intervention, is useful to emphasise the benefits of change
Preparation
- believe benefits of change outweigh costs
- they decide to change within a month
- unsure how + when to change
Intervention, support in constructing a plan or presenting options
Maintenance
- maintained a change for more than 6 months
- more confident the change can continue because it becomes a way of life
Intervention, focuses on relapse prevention by applying learned coping skills
Action
- have done something to change in last 6 months
- therapy, getting rid of substance etc
- the action must substantially reduce risk
Intervention, develop coping skills the client will need to maintain this behaviour in the future
Evaluation
- strength
Practical application
- has positive views of relapse, saying it is inevitable
- suggests intervention to help
- more accepted as it is realistic
Evaluation
- weakness
Arbitrary stages
- little research for stages, hard to distinguish cut off points
- interventions are so different
- little usefulness
