Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Over the past few decades, researchers have been developing and refining psychological theories and models to provide solid behavioral frameworks for evidence-based research. Each year new theories and models are created; however, a select few appear to have withstood the test of time and continue to be frequently utilized in present-day research. The objectives of this review are to highlight these psychological theories and models and describe their application to various public health issues and behaviors. Descriptions and example applications of the following theories and models are described in this review: health belief model, theory of reasoned action/planned behavior, social cognitive theory, transtheoretical model, and socioecological model.

Keywords

psychological theory health behavior public health evidenced-based research

‘Change or action theories provide frameworks that guide the development of interventions, translate concepts to messages and strategies, and form a basis for evaluation.’

The application of psychological theories and models to health behavior change research, program development, and policy has become common over the past few decades. Theories and models provide structure for identifying and examining problems, choosing and developing appropriate interventions, and assessing results. These structures enable researchers and program developers to organize key variables related to desired health behavior changes or outcomes.¹ Theories and models are often described as being explanatory theories or change/action theories. Explanatory theories serve as a framework to discover why the problem exists, search for contributing factors, and help determine what can be changed. Change or action theories provide frameworks that guide the development of interventions, translate concepts to messages and strategies, and form a basis for evaluation.^1,2

Similarities can be found among the frequently used theories and models; however, their differences set them apart from one other and make them relatively more or less useful as frameworks through which to understand and/or modify different types of health behaviors. A common similarity involves the overlap of key constructs. For example, the construct of self-efficacy, coined by Albert Bandura, refers to confidence in one’s abilities to successfully perform a particular behavior (ie, walk one mile despite barriers such as bad weather or a busy schedule).^3,4 Although originally introduced in Bandura’s social cognitive theory (SCT), self-efficacy is also found as a construct within the health belief model (HBM), theory of reasoned action (TRA)/theory of planned behavior (TPB), and transtheoretical model (TTM).¹ Apart from constructs, most theories/models incorporate static individual differences (eg, demographic variables), dynamic individual differences (eg, mood/affect), and interpersonal factors (eg, social support), but the degree to which each of these variables is highlighted varies widely from one theory or model to another.

Comprehensive lists and descriptions of theories and models that have been used to guide health behavior research have been described extensively elsewhere.^5,6 We focus here on a select few health behavior change theories commonly seen in the research literature, including the HBM, TRA/TPB, SCT, TTM, and socioecological model (SEM). This article serves as an overview of these theories and models with descriptions of their main components along with examples of their use in the literature. We organized the selected models and theories into three levels of focus: individual, interpersonal, and ecological. As the name suggests, individual level theories/models focus on the individual as the primary driver of change. Thus, their constructs fall within the individual’s realm of control. Interpersonal theories/models focus on the interaction between the individual and his or her relationships with others as the primary drivers of change. Their constructs include a combination of individual and interpersonal factors. Ecological models include components from the individual and interpersonal levels and also extend the focus of change outside of the person into the environment, acknowledging that a variety of factors outside of the individual’s direct control influence his/her behavior change processes and outcomes. As more evidence accumulates that the environment directly and indirectly influences individuals’ behavior, ecological theories/models have become increasingly popular frameworks to use in health behavior research that was previously dominated by individual-based theories/models.

Individual Level

Health Belief Model

The HBM,^7-9 depicted in Figure 1, was initially developed in the 1950s in attempt to understand and explain why many individuals were not participating in preventive health services (eg, tuberculosis screening), even when they were offered at no cost. The HBM proposes that the likelihood that individuals will engage in any given health behavior largely depends on their perceptions of the following variables: the severity of the illness(es) it helps prevent, their susceptibility to the illness(es), the benefits of engaging in the behavior, and the barriers to engaging in the behavior. According to the HBM, individuals are more likely to adopt the target health behavior if they believe the potential illness is serious, that they are highly susceptible to it, and that the benefits of engaging in the behavior outweigh the associated barriers. The construct “cues to action,” which are factors that prompt behavior change (eg, media campaigns, physician reminders), was later added to the model to increase its explanatory power (ie, statistical ability to accurately predict health behavior). Other factors, such as demographic characteristics (eg, age, race, ethnicity, gender) and psychosocial variables (eg, peer influence, mood/affect) also exert considerable influence over individuals’ decisions to engage in a specific health behavior according to the HBM. Self-efficacy, described as behavior-specific self-confidence,^3,4 was also later added to the HBM in attempt to increase its ability to accurately predict health behavior.¹⁰ These modified or extended versions of the HBM have been used in relatively recent research examining the model’s ability to predict short-term behaviors such as breast self-examinations and early diagnosis among women with a family history of breast cancer,¹¹ HPV vaccination initiation among adolescent girls in high-risk communities and undergraduate women, as well as A/H1N1 vaccination intention among higher education students.^12-14 For example, Norman and Brain¹⁵ applied an extended version of the HBM in their assessment of beliefs about breast cancer and breast self-examination among women with a family history of breast cancer. Results of their study suggested that interventions designed to enhance women’s breast self-examination self-efficacy, among other target behaviors stemming from HBM constructs, may encourage more appropriate and effective breast self-examination.¹⁵

Figure 1.

Health Belief Model.

The HBM has since been applied to longer term health behaviors and habits such as smoking cessation, contraceptive use, exercise, and dieting with some success.^16-19 Hill et al¹⁶ measured HBM constructs related to exercise behavior among older adults prior to and 6 months after discharge from the hospital. Results supported the utility of HBM constructs in the prediction of participants’ exercise behavior 6 months after discharge.¹⁶

However, the HBM has received significant criticism and has not held up to rigorous scientific examination in longer term contexts. Specifically, a recent meta-analysis of studies using HBM constructs to longitudinally predict various health behaviors concluded that this model may not be particularly useful because 2 of its primary constructs (perceived severity and perceived susceptibility) only weakly predict long-term behavioral outcomes.²⁰

Although the HBM has been one of the most used models in health behavior research,²¹ concerns about the model remain. For example, the relationships between the model’s constructs are not clearly delineated and measurements of certain constructs, such as cues to action, are not standardized.^20,22 Moreover, whereas recent research supports the use of HBM as a predictive behavior model,^23,24 other models (eg, TTM) have exhibited relatively stronger predictive ability of health behavior.²⁵ Thus, the HBM is found to be most useful when dealing with single or short-term behaviors (eg, receiving a flu vaccination)²⁰ and when it is used as an explanatory rather than an action/change model.

Theory of Reasoned Action and Theory of Planned Behavior

The TRA, depicted in Figure 2, was developed by Ajzen and Fishbein^26,27 as a derivative of cognitive and social psychology. The TRA posits that individuals’ likelihood of engaging in a particular health behavior can be predicted by the strength of their intentions to engage in that behavior. Intentions represent a combination of one’s own attitudes toward the behavior and their “subjective norms.” According to the TRA, attitudes are formed by individuals’ beliefs about the consequences of the health behavior and the weight they place on those consequences (eg, belief that a regular exercise program will reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease). Likewise, subjective norms are products of individuals’ beliefs about others’ expectations of them regarding the behavior and their motivation to comply with those expectations. For example, if the friends of a teenager believe strongly that text messaging while driving is unsafe, then the teenager might be less likely to text while driving.

Figure 2.

Theory of Reasoned Action.

Research examining the TRA has demonstrated that it is most useful at predicting behaviors under volitional or perceived control²⁸; however, some behaviors are not entirely within an individual’s control. For example, an individual may have the desire to consume a healthy diet, yet because of living in a food desert (ie, limited access to fresh fruits and vegetables) the individual may feel unable to make the desired behavior change. Therefore, Ajzen²⁹ proposed an extension of the TRA called the theory of planned behavior, or TPB, in an attempt to better predict health behaviors. The TPB incorporates TRA constructs and adds a construct called perceived behavioral control, which is defined as individuals’ perceptions of their ability to perform a given behavior.²⁹ The TPB’s perceived behavioral control construct is similar to the concept of self-efficacy^3,4 and defined in terms of control beliefs (the presence or absence of perceived facilitators and barriers associated with a given behavior) and perceived power (the impact of these facilitators and barriers).

Unlike the HBM, the TRA and TPB clearly delineate the relationships between their individual constructs. As a result, research examining the predictive abilities of these theories has generally supported each of them as a whole.²⁵ However, a major concern about TRA/TPB is that they do not incorporate any constructs that allow for affective/emotional or psychosocial variability,³⁰ which has also been a noted concern with the HBM.³¹ Some have proposed extended versions of the TPB to more thoroughly account for the components that are missing from the model, including past behavior, self-identity, and additional social influence variables (group norms, family social support, friends’ social support, and social provisions) without much greater success in the results.³² Furthermore, these theories do not take into account the fact that some behaviors are so habitual that they are not subject to planning or reasoning (eg, years spent driving a car without wearing a seatbelt).³³ In these cases, even the strongest of intentions are not likely powerful enough to overcome the automatic nature of well-established habits.³⁰

Although the TRA and TPB have received less attention in health behavior research than some of the newer models in recent years, they consistently rank among the most used theories in the field and demonstrate considerable predictive value.^34-38 The TRA and/or TPB have been used as guiding frameworks for assessing, understanding, and influencing behavior change in diverse populations with a variety of health behaviors. Some studies have used these theories for preventive measures, such as female condom use among Chinese sex workers³⁹ and alcohol consumption among early adolescents and young adults.^40,41 Others have used the TRA/TPB frameworks for drug-related issues such as HIV-negative methamphetamine users⁴² and quality of nurse care for addictive drug users.⁴³ Zamboanga et al⁴⁰ used TRA constructs to explore mediators related to adolescents’ drinking behavior. Specifically, they measured how participants’ perceptions of their peers’ alcohol use influenced their outcome expectancies and valuations (ie, perceptions of expectancies to be good or bad). Results demonstrated that participants who perceived that their peers approve of alcohol use and regularly consume alcohol were more likely to have a positive history of lifetime alcohol use.⁴⁰

Furthermore, with the growing prevalence of obesity, researchers have also used these theories to better understand dietary and physical activity behaviors: family meal frequency among adolescents,⁴⁴ fruit and vegetable consumption,⁴⁵ social ideological influences on food consumption and physical activity,⁴⁶ and physical activity maintenance,⁴⁷ among others. A recent study by Hunt and Gross³⁵ tested the validity of TPB in the prediction of exercise adherence in bariatric patients at various time points, ranging from preoperative to more than 1 year postoperative. TPB measures assessed attitudes toward regular exercise, affective attitude (ie, enjoyment of physical activity), subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. The International Physical Activity Questionnaire was used to assess exercise behavior. Perceived behavioral control, subjective norms, and attitudes toward exercise predicted exercise intention and self-reported behavior; perceived behavioral control was the best predictor.³⁵

Interpersonal Level

Social Cognitive Theory

Social cognitive theory is one of the most robust health behavior change theories.^5,48 It evolved from social learning theory^5,49 and originally focused on observational learning, or learning by watching others’ behavior (also called modeling), and the reinforcements (both positive and negative, internal and external) that help determine whether or not one will repeat the behavior. Updated by Bandura and colleagues, the SCT posits that behavior change is influenced by internal individual factors (eg, cognitive, affective, biological), as well as the social and physical environment. The model is reciprocal¹ in that each of these factors affects the others in a continuous, dynamic feedback loop called reciprocal determinism (Figure 3).⁵

Figure 3.

Reciprocal Determinism.⁵⁰

Self-efficacy is the main construct of the SCT⁵¹ and, as mentioned previously in this article, a powerful predictor of behavior change that has been incorporated into numerous social and behavior science theories.^5,48 Self-efficacy beliefs have been strongly associated with actual performance of a diverse range of health behaviors.^52,53 According to Bandura, self-efficacy can be increased through mastery experiences, social modeling, improving physical and emotional states, and verbal persuasion.⁴⁸ Mastery experience is gained through succeeding in attainable, yet increasingly challenging health behavior change goals and is considered to have the strongest influence on self-efficacy beliefs.^5,48,54 Modeling, as previously discussed, can be accomplished by watching others perform the desired behavior; it is especially effective when relatable peers perform the behavior. Finally, maintaining an optimal level of physiological intensity (ie, excited but not overly anxious) for performing the specific behavior can increase self-efficacy. Optimal intensity can often be accomplished by using relaxation techniques and positive self-talk as well as receiving encouragement from others.^5,48,54

Self-regulation strategies are also used to enhance confidence for behavior change and typically begin with self-monitoring, or systematically observing one’s current health behaviors.⁴⁸ Data are collected with pedometers, food diaries, smoking logs, or other tools, depending on the health behavior being targeted. These objective data can then be reviewed to determine how specific health behaviors might be improved and to identify incremental and long-term behavior change goals. For example, an Internet-based physical activity intervention using self-monitoring techniques (eg, pedometers and step logs) identified select SCT constructs (perceived environment, outcome expectancies, social support, and enjoyment) as predictors of increased physical activity among participants at 12-month follow-up.⁵⁵ Overlapping to a degree with the concept of mastery experience, self-regulation may also include establishing rewards for individuals meeting behavior change goals and enlisting social support from family and friends for performing target behaviors.⁴⁸

Another important determinant of behavior according to the SCT is outcome expectancies.⁵ This construct, defined as the influence that the outcomes anticipated from a health behavior exert on one’s willingness to perform this behavior, makes intuitive sense and has been supported in numerous research studies.⁵⁶ SCT posits that a health behavior is more likely to be performed if positive outcome expectancies are present, whereas negative outcome expectancies reduce the likelihood of the health behavior. For example, individuals will be much more inclined to run a mile if they anticipate that doing so will energize them rather than cause them to feel sore. The relative value of the anticipated outcome also plays an important role in this decision-making process. For example, an individual may view a positive anticipated outcome of smoking a cigarette (feeling more relaxed) as less important than a negative anticipated outcome (smelling like smoke) and thus decide accordingly to forgo the cigarette.

Social cognitive theory offers a comprehensive model of the behavior change process. Some critics suggest that this model is overly broad and has not been tested as a whole in the way other theories are routinely examined.⁴⁸ Rather, studies have shown that specific SCT concepts (eg, self-efficacy) are associated with behaviors, but such research does not confirm the entire theory. Nevertheless, the SCT provides a strong foundation for health promotion research and practice and has been successfully applied to a variety of health behaviors (eg, cardiovascular disease,^57-61 cancer screening,⁶² tobacco use,^63-68 alcohol use,^49,69-71 diet,^72,73 obesity,^74-76 physical activity,^{56,72,73,77-79} diabetes prevention,⁸⁰ condom use,^81,82); in a wide range of ages (eg, children,^73,83-85 teens,⁷⁰ college students,⁸⁶ elderly⁷⁸); in underserved populations (eg, African Americans,⁶⁴ Latinas,^74,80 low-income individuals^73,74); and in several different countries (mostly in the United States, but also in China,⁸¹ Sweden,⁷³ the United Kingdom,⁸⁷ and Australia⁷⁸). For example, a notable Web-based intervention used social cognitive components (social support, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and self-regulation) to gain a better understanding of the demographic, behavioral, and psychosocial influences of participants involved in an online intervention addressing nutrition and physical activity.⁸⁸ Results revealed that participants’ high self-efficacy and outcome expectancy levels did not translate into health behavior change and self-regulatory behaviors, seemingly due to their simultaneous low levels of perceived social support. They concluded that although high self-efficacy may be associated with healthier lifestyles, low levels of social support may serve as a barrier to behavior change that is difficult to overcome.⁸⁸

Transtheoretical Model

The TTM is an integrative model of behavior change developed from many different psychological theories, such as SCT⁵⁰ and learning theory.^49,89 DiClemente et al⁹⁰ first described this model after noting that people vary in terms of motivational readiness to quit smoking and move through specific stages of motivational readiness along the path to behavior change.⁹¹ The 5 stages of change that form the core of the TTM are

Precontemplation, in which change is not being considered

Contemplation, in which change is being considered

Preparation, in which an individual takes small steps toward change

Action, in which the health habit has been recently adopted

Maintenance, in which the change has been sustained for ≥6 months

This model is considered cyclical, accounting for people’s tendency to move back and forth through these stages of change. Individuals may lose resolve and abandon new behavior patterns, feel guilty, lose confidence, and revert to their previous routines, with probable recycling through the earlier stages of precontemplation or contemplation. For example, an individual may adopt a regular exercise routine and then regress back to the precontemplation stage after becoming severely ill. Thus, numerous cycles through the stages often happen before an adopted health behavior becomes a habit.^92,93

The cognitive and behavioral strategies and techniques that people use to advance through these stages of change are described as processes of change (see Table 1). The TTM posits that people use different processes of change at different stages in the change process and are likely to benefit from interventions developed specifically for their level of motivational readiness and most relevant to their current information needs.^5,93 For example, to help move individuals from precontemplation to contemplation, processes such as consciousness raising and dramatic relief should be attempted, whereas people in the action stage are more likely to find contingency management, counter conditioning, and stimulus control helpful.⁹²

Table 1.

Processes of Change Within the Transtheoretical Model.⁹⁰

Process	Definition
Consciousness raising	Increasing information about self and problem
Self reevaluation	Assessing how one feels and thinks about oneself with respect to a problem
Self liberation	Choosing and commitment to act or belief in ability to change
Counterconditioning	Substituting alternatives for problem behaviors
Stimulus control	Avoiding or countering stimuli that elicit problem behaviors
Reinforcement management	Rewarding oneself or being rewarded by others for making changes
Helping relationships	Being open and trusting about problems with someone who cares
Dramatic relief	Experiencing and expressing feelings about one’s problems and solutions
Environmental reevaluation	Assessing how one’s problem affects physical environment
Social liberation	Increasing alternatives for nonproblem behaviors available in society

Theoretical constructs, such as self-efficacy and decisional balance, also play important roles in the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors according to the TTM.^5,92,93 The decisional balance construct comes from Janis and Mann’s decision-making theory⁹⁴ and involves weighing the perceived advantages and disadvantages of behavior change when deciding whether to adopt a new health behavior. Table 2 lists examples of perceived benefits (the “pros”) and perceived costs (the “cons”) of physical activity. Subtracting total standardized cons scores from total standardized pros scores derives a standardized “decisional balance” score.⁹⁵ Decisional balance has been shown to vary as a function of stages.^91,95,96 Early stages (precontemplation and contemplation) are associated with higher ratings of disadvantages (cons) and lower ratings of advantages (pros) of change, whereas later stages (action and maintenance) are associated with lower ratings of disadvantages (cons) and higher ratings of advantages (pros) of change.⁹²

Table 2.

Pros (Advantages) and Cons (Disadvantages) of Increasing Exercise Behavior.⁹⁵

Pros

• I would be healthier if I exercised more regularly

• I would feel better about myself if I exercised more regularly

• Other people would respect me more if I exercised more regularly

Cons

• I would probably be sore and uncomfortable if I exercised more regularly

• If I exercised more regularly, my family and friends would get to spend less time with me

• I would feel that I was wasting my time if I exercised more regularly

Although the TTM originated in the addictions research field, it has since been applied to numerous health behaviors (eg, fruit and vegetable consumption,^97,98 weight control,⁹⁹ eating disorders,¹⁰⁰ alcohol and drug use,¹⁰¹ condom and oral contraceptive use,^102,103 sunscreen use,¹⁰⁴ medical compliance,¹⁰⁵ cervical cancer and mammography screening,^106,107 cardiovascular risk reduction,¹⁰⁸ stress management,¹⁰⁹ intimate partner violence,^110,111 and exercise,^112-115); in diverse populations (eg, college students,¹¹⁶ African American adolescents,^97,98,117 patients with severe mental illness,¹¹⁸ tuberculosis,¹¹⁹ HIV,¹²⁰ and multiple sclerosis¹⁰⁵); and in many countries (eg, Australia,⁷² Mexico,¹²¹ Taiwan,¹⁰⁷ Nepal,¹²⁰ and Malaysia¹¹⁹).

Papandonatos et al¹¹⁴ assessed the TTM constructs self-efficacy, decisional balance, and processes of change as mediators of change in the context of a motivationally tailored physical activity promotion intervention for sedentary adults. Results revealed that processes of change and self-efficacy, but not decisional balance, predicted increases in physical activity.¹¹⁴ Gillespie and Lenz¹⁰⁸ used the TTM to design a health-related intervention tool for a cardiovascular risk reduction program, which provides a patient-centered plan related to several behaviors (eg, diet, exercise, sleep success, etc). Patients are given a “readiness to change” questionnaire to determine their baseline stage of change and a “confidence to change” questionnaire to evaluate their change-related self-confidence. Using the results of these assessments, practitioners are able to tailor the lifestyle medication program by identifying key target behaviors (eg, exercise) and setting achievable goals specific to the individual.

Despite the TTM’s support, several criticisms of this model have been raised.^122,123 For example, the complexity of health behaviors is an issue when considering stage-based behavior change theories. Staging algorithms typically ask about physical activity or diet in general, but motivational readiness for change may vary for subcategories not fully captured by these algorithms (eg, interested in walking and vegetable consumption but not strength training or reducing fat intake). The TTM also focuses on stage progression as a significant outcome, but this is not always associated with actual behavior change.^124,125 Nevertheless, the TTM has been a highly influential theoretical framework composed of a number of useful organizing constructs that have been shown to be meaningfully related in empirical data and psychometric studies.

Ecological Level

Socioecological Model

In more recent years, psychological theories and models have increasingly incorporated the broader contexts that affect health behaviors, recognizing that these external factors are often as influential as internal factors. Socioecological models, or SEMs,^126-128 are based on 4 fundamental principles that are critical to understanding their application to health behavior change: (a) the environmental and personal factors that influence health behavior dynamically interact with each other; (b) environments are multidimensional and complex; (c) people are multidimensional and complex, and intervention designs should consider both the individual and the groups with which the individual is affiliated; and (d) people–environment interactions exert multiple levels of influence, such that individuals often modify their settings, and settings influence individuals. The socioecological framework suggests that both person-focused and environment-focused strategies can be applied to health behavior change.¹²⁷ For example, person-focused strategies may include preventive screening programs, individual counseling, or participation in lifestyle interventions. Environmental strategies include both geographic (eg, mixed use communities) and sociocultural aspects (eg, integrating target health behaviors into organizational structures/cultures).

The SEM has recently grown in popularity, particularly in the public health realm. The SEM differs from more traditional psychological models in that it explicitly incorporates not only the individual’s immediate external influences (eg, interpersonal relationships) but also more peripheral factors (eg, community, environment). Furthermore, rather than predicting a specific order or direction in which influences exert themselves, the SEM depicts the individual in the center of increasingly broader circles of influence, which interact with one another in an ongoing process (see Figure 4).¹²⁶

Figure 4.

Socioecological Model.¹²⁶

The SEM has been applied in assessment and intervention research on a variety of health behaviors and/or in diverse populations.^129-131 A noteworthy approach by Donenberg et al¹³¹ examined the effects of multiple influences (peer, family, partner, and mental health) on sexual behavior among children attending therapeutic day schools (ie, schools that provide health risk education and address mental health issues). Results of self-reported surveys revealed that sexual behaviors were predicted by peer influence (which was also reflective of family dysfunction) and conduct problems among both males and females.¹³¹ This example demonstrates how examining multiple levels of influence within the SEM can increase our level of understanding of factors that may influence health risks.

Socioecological model–framed studies include chronic diseases (eg, obesity^132,133 and diabetes self-management¹³⁴), dietary and exercise behaviors,^135-137 physical activity assessment in various populations,^137-139 health care access (eg, access and use of oral health services¹⁴⁰), and interventions conducted through organizations (eg, church-based health promotion interventions¹⁴¹) and within communities (eg, community-based participatory research¹⁴²), among others. One study examined the social ecological influences (social, environmental, and behavioral) of oral health service access and use among low-income Latino children.¹⁴⁰ Face-to-face interviews of Latino mothers regarding their children’s dental health revealed that (a) initial dental care was affected by the mother’s beliefs regarding the importance and benefits of preventive oral health, (b) household income and availability of oral health services were associated with planned dental visits, and (c) regular dental visits were more likely if the mother believed they were necessary and if she reported good communication with the dental provider.¹⁴⁰

As with all of the aforementioned theories and models, some challenges arise in the application of the SEM to health behavior change interventions. Because the model is exceptionally comprehensive, its application is inherently complex. For example, addressing the SEM’s multiple levels of influence, including regional (eg, neighborhoods), structural (eg, physical environment), and institutional (eg, government, worksite, family) factors, on health behaviors is challenging due in large part to limitations on control over these external variables. Also, additional research is required to help determine which of the model’s multiple components are critical in the behavior change process. Despite its complexity, the SEM appears to be a promising model for an increasingly transdisciplinary scientific community.

Summary

In this article, we summarized only a few of the numerous psychological theories and models that guide health behavior change interventions. We chose to focus on some of the most frequently used models and theories in the literature as well as to represent the range of general categories by which they are organized (ie, individual, interpersonal, ecological). Over the past few decades, the fields of behavioral medicine, public health, and medicine (among others) have been gradually shifting from a sole focus on the individual to a progressively greater focus on the local and, to a growing extent, global environment in which the individual resides.^1,126 Although this shift recognizes and better accounts for the increasingly globalized world that undoubtedly influences individuals’ behavior more than ever before, these new ecological theories and models are quite complex and somewhat generic.^126-128 Their numerous and relatively broadly defined variables are often difficult to measure, rendering these models as a whole difficult to assess. However, they relieve individuals of at least some of the overwhelming amount of personal responsibility placed on them by the individual and, to a somewhat lesser but still considerable degree, interpersonal theories and models, which explicitly or implicitly assert that individuals should engage in target health behaviors regardless of the external barriers they may face. Moreover, the health problems and challenges for which health behavior change interventions are designed have also shifted from primarily acute and/or short-term illnesses (eg, deadly viruses and infections) to predominantly chronic diseases (eg, cardiovascular disease and diabetes). As mentioned previously in the article, one-time or short-term problems appear to be adequately addressed by the individual-focused theories and models (HBM, TRA/TPB), whereas interventions for longer term problems are often more appropriately designed using interpersonal (and presumably ecological) frameworks (SCT, TTM, SEM).

Many other theories not included in this article also incorporate key concepts that help explain and predict health behaviors. Perhaps the 2 biggest challenges facing the various disciplines involved in health behavior change research are (a) to match specific goal health behaviors with the theories and models that incorporate the most relevant and appropriate constructs to design and implement effective interventions and (b) to systematically incorporate and account for the wide range of ecological factors that clearly influence health behavior to an increasingly greater extent in the modern, global world.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Emma Claire Jones for her assistance with the extensive list of references for this article.

References

National Cancer Institute. Theory at a Glance: A Guide for Health Promotion Practice. Bethesda, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute; 2005.

Green

. The role of theory in evidence-based health promotion practice. Health Educ Res. 2000;15:125-129.

Bandura

. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84:191-215.

Bandura

. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, NY: Freeman; 1997.

Glanz

Rimer

, National Cancer Institute. Theory at a Glance: A Guide for Health Promotion Practice. Bethesda, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute; 1997.

Glanz

Bishop

. The role of behavioral science theory in development and implementation of public health interventions. Annu Rev Public Health. 2010;31:399-418.

Rosenstock

. Historical origins of the health belief model. Health Educ Monogr. 1974;2:328-335.

Becker

Maiman

. Sociobehavioral determinants of compliance with health care and medical care recommendations. Med Care. 1975;13:10-24.

Rosenstock

. Why people use health services. Milbank Memorial Fund Q. 1966;44:94-127.

10.

Rosenstock

Strecher

Becker

. Social learning theory and the health belief model. Health Educ Q. 1988;15:175-183.

11.

Ersin

Bahar

. Effect of health belief model and health promotion model on breast cancer early diagnosis behavior: a systematic review. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2011;12:2555-2562.

12.

Reiter

Brewer

Gottlieb

McRee

A-L

Smith

. Parents’ health beliefs and HPV vaccination of their adolescent daughters. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69:475-480.

13.

Krawczyk

Perez

Lau

. Human papillomavirus vaccination intentions and uptake in college women. Health Psychol. 2012;31:685-693.

14.

Teitler-Regev

Shahrabani

Benzion

. Factors Affecting intention among students to be vaccinated against A/H1N1 influenza: a health belief model approach. Adv Prev Med. 2011;2011:353207.

15.

Norman

Brain

. An application of an extended health belief model to the prediction of breast self-examination among women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Health Psychol. 2005;10:1-16.

16.

Hill

Hoffmann

McPhail

. Factors associated with older patients’ engagement in exercise after hospital discharge. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92:1395-1403.

17.

Pentecost

Taket

. Understanding exercise uptake and adherence for people with chronic conditions: a new model demonstrating the importance of exercise identity, benefits of attending and support. Health Educ Res. 2011;26:908-922.

18.

Leiferman

Swibas

Koiness

Marshall

Dunn

. My baby, my move: examination of perceived barriers and motivating factors related to antenatal physical activity. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2011;56:33-40.

19.

Carpenter

. A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of health belief model variables in predicting behavior. Health Commun. 2010;25:661-669.

20.

Carpenter

. A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of health belief model variables in predicting behavior. Health Commun. 2010;25:661-669.

21.

Painter

Borba

Hynes

Mays

Glanz

. The use of theory in health behavior research from 2000 to 2005: a systematic review. Ann Behav Med. 2008;35:358-362.

22.

Harrison

Mullen

Green

. A meta-analysis of studies of the health belief model with adults. Health Educ Res. 1992;7:107-116.

23.

Gammage

Klentrou

. Predicting osteoporosis prevention behaviors: health beliefs and knowledge. Am J Health Behav. 2011;35:371-382.

24.

Park

. Utilizing the health belief model to predicting female middle school students’ behavioral intention of weight reduction by weight status. Nutr Res Pract. 2011;5:337-348.

25.

Zimmerman

Vernberg

. Models of preventative health behavior: comparison, critique, and meta-analysis. Adv Med Sociol. 1994;4:45-67.

26.

Fishbein

Ajzen

. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.

27.

Ajzen

Fishbein

. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1980.

28.

Glanz

Rimer

Viswanath

, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2008.

29.

Ajzen

. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In: Kuhl

Beckmann

, eds. Action-Control: From Cognition to Behavior. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer; 1985:11-39.

30.

Manstead

ASR

. The benefits of a critical stance: a reflection on past papers on the theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour. Br J Soc Psychol. 2011;50:366-373.

31.

Kiviniemi

Voss-Humke

Seifert

. How do I feel about the behavior? The interplay of affective associations with behaviors and cognitive beliefs as influences on physical activity behavior. Health Psychol. 2007;26:152-158.

32.

Hamilton

White

. Extending the theory of planned behavior: the role of self and social influences in predicting adolescent regular moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2008;30:56-74.

33.

Verplanken

. Beyond frequency: habit as mental construct. Br J Soc Psychol. 2006;45(pt 3):639-656.

34.

Armitage

Conner

. Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol. 2001;40:471-499.

35.

Hunt

Gross

. Prediction of exercise in patients across various stages of bariatric surgery: a comparison of the merits of the theory of reasoned action versus the theory of planned behavior. Behav Modif. 2009;33:795-817.

36.

Noonan

Kulbok

Yan

. Intention to smoke tobacco using a waterpipe among students in a southeastern U.S. college. Public Health Nurs. 2011;28:494-502.

37.

Demyan

Anderson

. Effects of a brief media intervention on expectations, attitudes, and intentions of mental health help seeking. J Couns Psychol. 2012;59:222-229.

38.

Joel Hillhouse

Thompson

Jacobsen

Hillhouse

. Investigating the role of appearance-based factors in predicting sunbathing and tanning salon use. J Behav Med. 2009;32:532-544.

39.

Lau

JTF

Chen

. Using the theory of planned behavior to investigate condom use behaviors among female injecting drug users who are also sex workers in China. AIDS Care. 2009;21:967-975.

40.

Zamboanga

Schwartz

Ham

Jarvis

Olthuis

. Do alcohol expectancy outcomes and valuations mediate peer influences and lifetime alcohol use among early adolescents? J Genet Psychol. 2009;170:359-376.

41.

Zimmermann

Sieverding

. Young adults’ social drinking as explained by an augmented theory of planned behaviour: the roles of prototypes, willingness, and gender. Br J Health Psychol. 2010;15(pt 3):561-581.

42.

Mausbach

Semple

Strathdee

Patterson

. Predictors of safer sex intentions and protected sex among heterosexual HIV-negative methamphetamine users: an expanded model of the theory of planned behavior. AIDS Care. 2008;21:17-24.

43.

Natan

Beyil

Neta

. Nurses’ perception of the quality of care they provide to hospitalized drug addicts: testing the theory of reasoned action. Int J Nurs Pract. 2009;15:566-573.

44.

Eto

Koch

Contento

Adachi

. Variables of the theory of planned behavior are associated with family meal frequency among adolescents. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2011;43:525-530.

45.

Blanchard

Kupperman

Sparling

. Do ethnicity and gender matter when using the theory of planned behavior to understand fruit and vegetable consumption? Appetite. 2009;52:15-20.

46.

Wang

Worsley

Cunningham

. Social ideological influences on food consumption, physical activity and BMI. Appetite. 2009;53:288-296.

47.

Armitage

. Can the theory of planned behavior predict the maintenance of physical activity? Health Psychol. 2005;24:235-245.

48.

McAlister

Perry

Parcel

. How individuals, environments, and health behaviors interact: social cognitive theory. In: Glanz

Rimer

Viswanath

, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2008:167-188.

49.

Bandura

. Principles of Behavior Modification. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston; 1969.

50.

Bandura

. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Thoery. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1986.

51.

Bandura

. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84:191-215.

52.

O’Leary

. Self-efficacy and health. Behav Res Ther. 1985;23:437-451.

53.

Stretcher

McEvoy-DaVellis

Becker

. The role of self-efficacy in achieving health behavior change. Health Educ Q. 1986;13:73-91.

54.

Pekmezi

Jennings

Marcus

. Evaluating and enhancing self-efficacy for physical activity. ACSMS Health Fit J. 2009;13(2):16-21.

55.

Marcus

Lewis

Williams

. Step into Motion: a randomized trial examining the relative efficacy of Internet vs. print-based physical activity interventions. Contemp Clin Trials. 2007;28:737-747.

56.

Williams

Anderson

Winett

. A review of the outcome expectancy construct in physical activity research. Ann Behav Med. 2005;29:70-79.

57.

Farquhar

Fortmann

Flora

. Effects of communitywide education on cardiovascular disease risk factors. The Stanford Five-City Project. JAMA. 1990;264:359-365.

58.

Puska

McAlister

Niemensivu

Piha

Wiio

Koskela

. A television format for national health promotion: Finland’s “Keys to Health”. Public Health Rep. 1987;102:263-269.

59.

Puska

. Successful prevention of noncommunicable disease: twenty-five year experience with the North Karelia project. Public Health Med. 2002;4:5-7.

60.

McAlister

Puska

Salonen

Tuomilehto

Koskela

. Theory and action for health promotion illustrations from the North Karelia Project. Am J Public Health. 1982;72:43-50.

61.

Perry

Kelder

Klepp

. Communitywide cardiovascular disease prevention with young people: long-term outcomes of the class of 1989 study. Eur J Public Health. 1994;4:188-194.

62.

Ramirez

Villarreal

McAlister

Gallion

Suarez

Gomez

. Advancing the role of participatory communication in the diffusion of cancer screening among hispanics. J Health Commun. 1999;4:31-36.

63.

Shegog

McAlister

Ford

Meshack

Peters

. Use of interactive health communication to affect smoking intentions in middle school students: a pilot test of the “Headbutt” Risk Assessment Program. Am J Health Promot. 2005;19:334-338.

64.

Houston

Cherrington

Coley

. The art and science of patient storytelling-harnessing narrative communication for behavioral interventions: the ACCE project. J Health Commun. 2011;16:686-697.

65.

McAlister

Rabius

Geiger

Glynn

Huang

Todd

. Telephone assistance for smoking cessation: one year cost effectiveness estimations. Tob Control. 2004;13:85-86.

66.

Meshack

Pallonen

McAlister

Gottlieb

Huang

. Texas Tobacco Prevention Pilot Initiative: processes and effects. Health Educ Res. 2004;19:657-668.

67.

Van Zundert

RMP

Nijhof

Engels

RCME

. Testing social cognitive theory as a theoretical framework to predict smoking relapse among daily smoking adolescents. Addict Behav. 2009;34:281-286.

68.

Mason

Gilbert

Sutton

. Effectiveness of web-based tailored smoking cessation advice reports (iQuit): a randomised trial. Addiction. 2012;107:2183-2190.

69.

Worden

Flynn

Merril

Waller

Haugh

. Preventing alchohol-impaired driving through communty self-regulation training. Am J Public Health. 1989;79:287-290.

70.

Perry

Williams

Komro

. Project Northland high school interventions: community action to reduce adolescent alcohol use. Health Educ Behav. 2000;27:29-49.

71.

Perry

Williams

Komro

. Project Northland: long-term outcomes of community action to reduce adolescent alcohol use. Health Educ Res. 2002;17:117-132.

72.

Monteiro

Jancey

Howat

. The protocol of a randomized controlled trial for playgroup mothers: Reminder on Food, Relaxation, Exercise, and Support for Health (REFRESH) Program. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:648.

73.

Nyberg

Sundblom

Norman

Elinder

. A healthy school start—parental support to promote healthy dietary habits and physical activity in children: design and evaluation of a cluster-randomised intervention. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:185.

74.

Drieling

Stafford

. Evaluating clinic and community-based lifestyle interventions for obesity reduction in a low-income Latino neighborhood: Vivamos Activos Fair Oaks Program. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:98.

75.

Collins

Morgan

Jones

. A 12-week commercial web-based weight-loss program for overweight and obese adults: randomized controlled trial comparing basic versus enhanced features. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(2):e57.

76.

Annesi

. Supported exercise improves controlled eating and weight through its effects on psychosocial factors: extending a systematic research program toward treatment development. Perm J. 2012;16:7-18.

77.

Keller

Fleury

Gregor-Holt

Thompson

. Predictive ability of social cognitive theory in exercise research: an integrated literature review. Online J Knowl Synth Nurs. 1999;6:2.

78.

Gardiner

Eakin

Healy

Owen

. Feasibility of reducing older adults’ sedentary time. Am J Prev Med. 2011;41:174-177.

79.

Carr

Dunsiger

Lewis

. Randomized controlled trial testing an Internet physical activity intervention for sedentary adults. Health Psychol. 2013;32:328-336.

80.

Trevino

Pugh

Hernandez

Menchaca

Ramirez

Mendoza

. Bienestar: a diabetes risk-factor prevention program. J Sch Health. 1998;68:62-67.

81.

Zhang

Mao

Zhao

Stanton

. Effect of social cognitive theory-based HIV education prevention program among high school students in Nanjing, China. Health Educ Res. 2011;26:419-431.

82.

Bandura

. Social cognitive theory and exercise of control over HIV infection. In: DiClemente

Peterson

, eds. Preventing AIDS: Theories and Methods of Behavioral Interventions. New York, NY: Plenum; 1994:25-59.

83.

Breslin

Brennan

Rafferty

Gallagher

Hanna

. The effect of a healthy lifestyle programme on 8-9 year olds from social disadvantage. Arch Dis Child. 2012;97:618-624.

84.

Branscum

Sharma

. After-school based obesity prevention interventions: a comprehensive review of the literature. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2012;9:1438-1457.

85.

Staiano

Calvert

. Digital gaming and pediatric obesity: at the intersection of science and social policy. Soc Issues Policy Rev. 2012;6:54-81.

86.

Dennis

Potter

Estabrooks

Davy

. Weight gain prevention for college freshmen: comparing two social cognitive theory-based interventions with and without explicit self-regulation training. J Obes. 2012;2012:803769.

87.

Fjeldsoe

Miller

Marshall

. Social cognitive mediators of the effect of the MobileMums intervention on physical activity [published online May 21, 2012]. Health Psychol. doi:10.1037/a0027548.

88.

Anderson-Bill

Winett

Wojcik

. Social cognitive determinants of nutrition and physical activity among web-health users enrolling in an online intervention: the influence of social support, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and self-regulation. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(1):e28.

89.

Skinner

. Science and Human Behavior. New York, NY: Free Press; 1953.

90.

DiClemente

Prochaska

Fairhurst

. The process of smoking cessation: an analysis of the precontemplation, contemplation, and preparation stages of change. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1991;59:295-304.

91.

Prochaska

DiClemente

Norcross

. In search of how people change: applications to addictive behaviors. Am Psychol. 1992;47:1102-1114.

92.

Prochaska

Redding

Evers

. The transtheoretical model and stages of change. In: Glanz

Rimer

Viswanath

, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 4th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2008:97-122.

93.

Pekmezi

Barbera

Marcus

. Using the transtheoretical model to promote physical activity. ACSMS Health Fit J. 2010;14(4):8-13.

94.

Janis

Mann

. Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice, and Commitment. New York, NY: Collier Macmillan; 1977.

95.

Marcus

Owen

. Motivational readiness, self-efficacy, and decision making for exercise. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1992;22:3-16.

96.

Prochaska

Velicer

Rossi

. Stages of change and decisional balance for 13 problem behaviors. Health Psychol. 1994;13:39-46.

97.

Di Noia

Schinke

Prochaska

Contento

. Application of the transtheoretical model to fruit and vegetable consumption among economically disadvantaged African-American adolescents: preliminary findings. Am J Health Promot. 2006;20:342-348.

98.

Di Noia

Thompson

. Processes of change for increasing fruit and vegetable consumption among economically disadvantaged African American adolescents. Eat Behav. 2012;13:58-61.

99.

Tuah

Amiel

Qureshi

Car

Kaur

Majeed

. Transtheoretical model for dietary and physical exercise modification in weight loss management for overweight and obese adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(10):CD008066.

100.

Dray

Wade

. Is the transtheoretical model and motivational interviewing approach applicable to the treatment of eating disorders? A review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012;32:558-565.

101.

Evers

Paiva

Johnson

. Results of a transtheoretical model-based alcohol, tobacco and other drug intervention in middle schools. Addict Behav. 2012;37:1009-1018.

102.

Redding

Brown-Peterside

Noar

Koblin

Rossi

. One session of TTM-tailored condom use feedback: a pilot study among at-risk women in the Bronx. AIDS Care. 2011;23:10-15.

103.

Dempsey

Johnson

Westhoff

. Prediction oral contraceptive continuation using the transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2011;43:23-29.

104.

Falk

Magnusson

. Sun protection advice mediated by the general practitioner: an effective way to achieve long-term change of behaviour and attitudes related to sun exposure? Scand J Prim Health Care. 2011;29:135-143.

105.

Berger

Liang

Hudmon

. Evaluation of software-based telephone counseling to enhance medication persistency among patients with multiple sclerosis. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2005;45:466-472.

106.

Tung

Nguyen

Tran

. Applying the transtheoretical model to cervical cancer screening in Vietnamese-American women. Int Nurs Rev. 2008;55:73-80.

107.

Lin

Effken

Kuo

. Designing a tailored Web-based educational mammography program. Comput Inform Nurs. 2011;29:16-23.

108.

Gillespie

Lenz

. Implementation of a tool to modify behavior in a chronic disease management program. Adv Prev Med. 2011;2011:215842.

109.

Evers

Prochaska

Johnson

Mauriello

Padula

Prochaska

. A randomized clinical trial of a population- and transtheoretical model-based stress-management intervention. Health Psychol. 2006;25:521-529.

110.

Cismaru

Lavack

. Campaigns targeting perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2011;12:183-197.

111.

Babcock

Canady

Senior

Eckhardt

. Applying the transtheoretical model to female and male perpetrators of intimate partner violence: gender differences in stages and processes of change. Violence Vict. 2005;20:235-250.

112.

Plow

Finlayson

Cho

. Correlates of stages of change for physical activity in adults with multiple sclerosis. Res Nurs Health. 2011;34:378-388.

113.

Nowlis

Greenberg

. Empirical description of effects of exercise on mood. Percept Mot Skills. 1979;49:1001-1002.

114.

Papandonatos

Williams

Jennings

. Mediators of physical activity behavior change: findings from a 12-month randomized controlled trial. Health Psychol. 2012;31:512-520.

115.

Tuah

Amiel

Qureshi

Car

Kaur

Majeed

. Transtheoretical model for dietary and physical exercise modification in weight loss management for overweight and obese adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(10):CD008066.

116.

Ward

Schielke

. Assessing the predictive ability of the transtheoretical model’s heavy episodic drinking constructs among a population of underage students. Subst Use Misuse. 2011;46:1179-1189.

117.

Di Noia

Mauriello

Byrd-Bredbenner

Thompson

. Validity and reliability of a dietary stages of change measure among economically disadvantaged African-American adolescents. Am J Health Promot. 2012;26:381-389.

118.

Bezyak

Berven

Chan

. Stages of change and physical activity among individuals with severe mental illness. Rehabil Psychol. 2011;56:182-190.

119.

Awaisu

Nik Mohamed

Mohamad Noordin

. The SCIDOTS Project: evidence of benefits of an integrated tobacco cessation intervention in tuberculosis care on treatment outcomes. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2011;6:26.

120.

Amiya

Poudel

Poudel-Tandukar

Kobayashi

Pandey

Jimba

. Physicians are a key to encouraging cessation of smoking among people living with HIV/AIDS: a cross-sectional study in the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:677.

121.

Escalante-Guerrero

Roca-Chiapas

Macías-Cervantes

. Knowledge, attitudes, and behavior concerning nutrition and physical activity in Mexican children. Am J Health Behav. 2012;36:424-431.

122.

Adams

White

. Why don’t stage-based activity promotion interventions work? Health Educ Res. 2005;20:237-243.

123.

Adams

White

. Are activity promotion interventions based on the transtheoretical model effective? A critical review. Br J Sports Med. 2003;37:106-114.

124.

Norris

Grothaus

Buchner

Pratt

. Effectiveness of physician-based assessment and counseling for exercise in a staff model HMO. Prev Med. 2000;30:513-523.

125.

Callaghan

Taylor

Cunningham

. Does progressive stage transition mean getting better? A test of the transtheoretical model in alcoholism recovery. Addiction. 2007;102:1588-1596.

126.

Stokols

. Establishing and maintaining healthy environments: toward a social ecology of health promotion. Am Psychol. 1992;47:6-22.

127.

Stokols

. Social ecology and behavioral medicine: implications for training, practice, and policy. Behav Med. 2000;26:129-138.

128.

Stokols

Allen

Bellingham

. The social ecology of health promotion: implications for research and practice. Am J Health Promot. 1996;10:247-251.

129.

Robinson

. Applying the socio-ecological model to improving fruit and vegetable intake among low-income African Americans. J Community Health. 2008;33:395-406.

130.

Brogan

Idalski Carcone

Jen

Ellis

Marshall

Naar-King

. Factors associated with weight resilience in obesogenic environments in female African-American adolescents. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012;112:718-724.

131.

Donenberg

Emerson

Brown

Houck

Mackesy-Amiti

. Sexual experience among emotionally and behaviorally disordered students in therapeutic day schools: an ecological examination of adolescent risk. J Pediatr Psychol. 2012;37:904-913.

132.

Williams

Kabukuru

Mayo

Griffin

. Commentary: a social-ecological perspective on obesity among Latinos. Ethn Dis. 2011;21:467-472.

133.

Yin

Moore

Johnson

Vernon

Grimstvedt

Gutin

. Micro- and macro-level correlates of adiposity in children. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2012;18:445-452.

134.

Vaccaro

Feaster

Lobar

Baum

Magnus

Huffman

. Medical advice and diabetes self-management reported by Mexican-American, Black- and White-non-Hispanic adults across the United States. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:185.

135.

Lubans

Morgan

Weaver

. Rationale and study protocol for the supporting children’s outcomes using rewards, exercise and skills (SCORES) group randomized controlled trial: a physical activity and fundamental movement skills intervention for primary schools in low-income communities. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:427.

136.

Richard

Gauvin

Raine

. Ecological models revisited: their uses and evolution in health promotion over two decades. Annu Rev Public Health. 2011;32:307-326.

137.

Rhodes

Nasuti

. Trends and changes in research on the psychology of physical activity across 20 years: a quantitative analysis of 10 journals. Prev Med. 2011;53:17-23.

138.

Casey

Eime

Payne

Harvey

. Using a socioecological approach to examine participation in sport and physical activity among rural adolescent girls. Qual Health Res. 2009;19:881-893.

139.

Nelson

Abbott

Macdonald

. Indigenous Austalians and physical activity: using a social-ecological model to review the literature. Health Educ Res. 2010;25:498-509.

140.

Telleen

Rhee Kim

Chavez

Barrett

Hall

Gajendra

. Access to oral health services for urban low-income Latino children: social ecological influences. J Public Health Dent. 2012;72:8-18.

141.

Campbell

Hudson

Resnicow

Blakeney

Paxton

Baskin

. Church-based health promotion interventions: evidence and lessons learned. Ann Rev Public Health. 2007;28:213-234.

142.

Zoellner

Zanko

Price

Bonner

Hill

. Exploring community gardens in a health disparate population: findings from a mixed methods pilot study. Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2012;6:153-165.

Applying Psychological Theories to Promote Healthy Lifestyles

Abstract

Keywords

Individual Level

Health Belief Model

Theory of Reasoned Action and Theory of Planned Behavior

Interpersonal Level

Social Cognitive Theory

Transtheoretical Model

Ecological Level

Socioecological Model

Summary

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

References