Kremers Stef P J, Visscher Tommy L S, Seidell Jacob C, van Mechelen Willem, Brug Johannes
Department of Health Education and Health Promotion, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Sports Med. 2005;35(11):923-33. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200535110-00001.
The burden of disease as a result of overweight and obesity calls for in-depth examination of the main causes of behavioural actions responsible for weight gain. Since weight gain is the result of a positive energy balance, these behavioural actions are referred to as 'energy balance-related behaviours' (EBRBs). In the broadest sense, there are only two EBRBs: food intake and physical activity. However, both diet and physical activity are complex behavioural categories that involve a variety of actions. This article discusses the potential problems and opportunities related to the assessment of cognitive determinants of energy intake and energy expenditure behaviours. We argue for the necessity of studying determinants of EBRBs within an energy balance approach, i.e. focusing on energy input as well as output, instead of only studying dietary change or physical activity behaviour. As a result, however, theoretically sound questionnaires assessing determinants of EBRBs are likely to annoy respondents. It is especially the measurement of the behaviours and the use of belief-based constructs that cause questionnaires to be long, which may lead to low response rates and invalid data. In this article, we propose a careful and systematic consideration of the inclusion or exclusion of measures of cognitive determinants. First, if studies show that an EBRB is strongly influenced by environmental factors and is not or only to a minor extent under intentional control, measurement of cognitions is of little use. Second, only when we have proof that attitudes, norms and perceived behavioural control predict intentions, should we aim to assess the underlying beliefs. Third, since assessment of beliefs results in similar or better prediction than using belief-valuation combinations, we should not 'annoy' respondents with valuation items. Finally, we argue that the traditional paper-and-pencil survey is still the most reliable and practical data collection method. However, pilot studies applying computerised adaptive methods to determinants of EBRBs are encouraged.
超重和肥胖导致的疾病负担要求深入研究导致体重增加的行为的主要原因。由于体重增加是能量正平衡的结果,这些行为被称为“能量平衡相关行为”(EBRB)。从最广泛的意义上讲,只有两种EBRB:食物摄入和身体活动。然而,饮食和身体活动都是复杂的行为类别,涉及多种行为。本文讨论了与评估能量摄入和能量消耗行为的认知决定因素相关的潜在问题和机遇。我们主张有必要在能量平衡方法中研究EBRB的决定因素,即关注能量输入和输出,而不是仅研究饮食变化或身体活动行为。然而,结果是,理论上合理的评估EBRB决定因素的问卷可能会使受访者感到厌烦。特别是行为的测量和基于信念的结构的使用使得问卷冗长,这可能导致低回复率和无效数据。在本文中,我们建议仔细和系统地考虑认知决定因素测量的纳入或排除。首先,如果研究表明一种EBRB受到环境因素的强烈影响,并且不受有意控制或仅在很小程度上受有意控制,那么认知测量就没什么用。其次,只有当我们有证据表明态度、规范和感知行为控制能够预测意图时,我们才应该旨在评估潜在信念。第三,由于信念评估比使用信念-价值组合能产生相似或更好的预测,我们不应该用价值项目来“烦扰”受访者。最后,我们认为传统的纸笔调查仍然是最可靠和实用的数据收集方法。然而,鼓励开展将计算机自适应方法应用于EBRB决定因素的试点研究。