Skip Navigation



Health Education Research Advance Access published online on April 8, 2008
Health Education Research, doi:10.1093/her/cyn014
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wright, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Prochaska, J. O.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wright, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Prochaska, J. O.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Testing the predictive power of the transtheoretical model of behavior change applied to dietary fat intake

Julie A. Wright1,*, Wayne F. Velicer2 and James O. Prochaska2

1 Boston University Medical Center, General Internal Medicine, Boston, MA 02118, USA
2 Cancer Prevention Research Center, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, Canada

Correspondence to: * Correspondence to: J. A. Wright. E-mail: jwright{at}bu.edu

This study evaluated how well predictions from the transtheoretical model (TTM) generalized from smoking to diet. Longitudinal data were used from a randomized control trial on reducing dietary fat consumption in adults (n =1207) recruited from primary care practices. Predictive power was evaluated by making a priori predictions of the magnitude of change expected in the TTM constructs of temptation, pros and cons, and 10 processes of change when an individual transitions between the stages of change. Generalizability was evaluated by testing predictions based on smoking data. Three sets of predictions were made for each stage: Precontemplation (PC), Contemplation (C) and Preparation (PR) based on stage transition categories of no progress, progress and regression determined by stage at baseline versus stage at the 12-month follow-up. Univariate analysis of variance between stage transition groups was used to calculate the effect size [omega squared ({omega}2)]. For diet predictions based on diet data, there was a high degree of confirmation: 92%, 95% and 92% for PC, C and PR, respectively. For diet predictions based on smoking data, 77%, 79% and 85% were confirmed, respectively, suggesting a moderate degree of generalizability. This study revised effect size estimates for future theory testing on the TTM applied to dietary fat.

Received on September 24, 2007; revision received on January 9, 2008; accepted on February 11, 2008


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.