Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina Charlotte, 9201 University City Boulevard, Charlotte, NC, 28223, USA.
Yale Univeristy, New Haven, USA.
J Behav Med. 2018 Dec;41(6):757-770. doi: 10.1007/s10865-018-9923-x. Epub 2018 Apr 18.
The current study compares the effectiveness of interventions that attempted to uniquely influence hypothesized determinants of behavior in the Theory of Planned Behavior versus some optimal combination of constructs (three constructs vs. four) to increase condom use among intentions and behavior college students. 317 participants (M = 19.31; SD = 1.31; 53.3% female; 74.1% Caucasian) were randomly assigned to one of seven computer-based interventions. Interventions were designed using the Theory of Planned Behavior as the guiding theoretical framework. 196 (61.8%) completed behavioral follow-up assessments 3-month later. We found that the four construct intervention was marginally better at changing intentions (estimate = - .06, SE = .03, p = .06), but the single construct interventions were more strongly related to risky sexual behavior at follow-up (estimate = .04, SE = .02, p = .05). This study suggests that these constructs may work together synergistically to produce change (ClinicalTrials.gov Number NCT# 02855489).
本研究比较了试图单独影响计划行为理论中行为假设决定因素的干预措施与(三个构念与四个构念相比)某些最佳组合的构念的效果,以增加有意愿和有行为的大学生使用避孕套。317 名参与者(M = 19.31;SD = 1.31;53.3%为女性;74.1%为白种人)被随机分配到七种基于计算机的干预措施之一。干预措施是使用计划行为理论作为指导理论框架设计的。196 名(61.8%)在 3 个月后完成了行为随访评估。我们发现,四构念干预措施在改变意图方面略有优势(估计值 = - .06,SE = .03,p = .06),但单一构念干预措施与随访时的危险性行为更相关(估计值 = .04,SE = .02,p = .05)。这项研究表明,这些构念可能会协同作用产生变化(临床试验编号 NCT# 02855489)。