Theories that have contributed to health psychology research
Harmonizing to Colman ( 2009 ) , Attribution Theory was designed to explicate how people perceive, infer, or ascribe causes to their ain and other people ‘s behavior. TheA theoryA was formulated by Fritz Heider and it was developed by Edward Ellsworth Jones and Harold H. Kelley. Self efficaciousness in other manus is an ability to accomplish desired consequences. The construct was developed by Albert Bandura and was elaborated more by Ralf Schwarzer. Health Locus of Control is aA cognitive styleA or personalityA traitA characterized by a generalised anticipation about the relationship between behavior and the subsequent happening ofA support in the signifier of wages and penalty. The construct was introduced by the E. Jerry Phares. Julian B ( ernard ) Rotter introduced the internal-external graduated table to mensurate it.
Attribution Theory foretelling Health Behaviour Change
In conformity to Ogden ( 2008 ) , by understanding the cause of an event, one may besides get down to understand the significance of the event and what it symbolizes about one ‘s life. However in certain instances like malignant neoplastic disease, no 1 knows the true cause of it, and malignant neoplastic disease patients do seek to understand why they developed malignant neoplastic disease. In instances like fleshiness, corpulent people will understand whether they are corpulent because of dieting or inherited.
Few surveies conducted in correlativity of ascription theory and foretelling wellness behavior alteration. The research conducted by Courneya et.al ( 2004 ) concluded that ascription theory may hold the public-service corporation for understanding postprogram exercising motive and attachment in malignant neoplastic disease subsisters. Furthermore, the findings stated that there was correlational analyses indicated that plan exercising, perceived success, expected exercising and affectional reactions were strong forecasters of postprogram exercising. Cancer subsisters who had high perceptual experiences of success attributed to a personally governable cause reported the highest outlooks of success and lowest negative consequence. However, from these surveies, we can see that non all malignant neoplastic disease patients will hold a high ascription. It depends on how these patients think about their unwellness. Some of them accepted the unwellness with unfastened head, others will deny. It is greater by opportunity if malignant neoplastic disease patients try to deny and did non accept their unwellness, they will hold low ascriptions and they deny any sort of intervention including exercisings. They will believe it is non deserving it to make exercise because they will decease anyhow.
Another research was tested to happen the effects of intelligence narratives that offer familial, behavioral, or complex accounts of fleshiness and the moderating function of preexistent general wellness control beliefs ( Jeong, 2007 ) . The research suggested people who had higher anterior wellness control beliefs maintained high perceptual experiences of controllability and duty regardless of the intelligence narrative they read. In contrast, people who had lower anterior wellness control beliefs reported lower degrees of perceived controllability and duty after reading intelligence studies that suggested familial accounts, and higher degrees after reading intelligence studies that offered behavioral or complex accounts. The research besides found out that people with higher anterior control beliefs seem to treat familial information more critically. Besides, people with higher perceived control reported higher purposes to eat a healthy diet regardless of the hazard information. Again, it depends on how people react at the first topographic point. Attribution theory might be the strong forecaster of wellness behavioral alteration, but there is no grounds how far ascription theory can foretell it.
A research done by Mitchell ( 1982 ) sing Attributions and Actions: A note of Caution, it stated that a figure of societal, undertaking and situational factors seem to be as of import in foretelling this behavior as ascriptions. However, the research concludes that ascriptions are lone portion of the image and it plays a minor function. In many other scenes it appears that contextual, undertaking, societal and cost/benefit type factors are every bit of import as or more of import than ascriptions may be weakly related to action at best. However, is ascriptions theory is truly a note of cautiousness? Based on the research reported above, we can see that ascriptions are non a strong forecaster to foretell cautiousnesss.
Two surveies by Stuart and Blanton ( 2003 ) , participants were exposed either to a positively-framed or negatively-framed communicating recommending for specific wellness behavior. The surveies reported that participants who read a wellness communicating rated healthy behaviors as less common when positive properties were associated with healthy picks than when negative properties were associated with unhealthy picks. This shows that participants are cognizant and influenced more when they read healthy behaviors. However, participants that read unhealthy behaviors are they more attempt to follow unhealthy behaviors or they put that as their guidelines?
Self Efficacy foretelling Health Behaviour Change
Peoples ‘s beliefs that they can actuate themselves and modulate their ain behavior plays a important function in, whether they even consider altering detrimental wellness wonts or prosecuting rehabilitative activities ( Bandura, 1997 ) . If people has less consciousness of their ain wonts will impact their wellness, they will be given to go on their bad wonts.
Few surveies have addressed the linked between ego efficaciousness and foretelling wellness behavior alteration. Research workers have found that the anticipations of eating behavior would be improved by the usage of ego efficaciousness ( Strachan and Brawley, 2009 ) . Self efficaciousness beliefs are besides thought to hold of import deductions for behavior through their influence on end pick. In add-on, self efficacy beliefs are a strong forecaster of the ingestion of both wellness and unhealthy types of nutrients. What is more, Schwarzer and Renner ( 2000 ) reported that the more self-efficacious persons on norm, better nutrition behavior. However, harmonizing to them once more, the behavioral purpose was good predicted by outcome anticipations and perceived self efficaciousness, but less so by hazard perceptual experience. Peoples are less cognizant of the hazard for cases, “ I might acquire ill if I eat excessively much debris nutrient. ” Peoples are more cognizant of: “ I want to eat healthy nutrient because I want to remain healthy. ” Apart from that besides, we might bury about different dietetic demands from different civilizations. Some nutrient are said to be healthy to one civilization but might be non to other civilizations. Besides, some people they think they eat healthy nutrient because they seems so fit. However, they are non good concerned about what kind of healthy it should be.
A survey conducted by Scholz et.al ( 2009 ) towards smoking and nutrition behavior showed that alteration in ego efficaciousness was an of import forecaster of alteration in purposes and of alteration in behavior. By holding a high ego efficaciousness, it will somehow divert bad purposes into good 1s. For case, people tell themselves how wellness they will be without smoking. So, if they are tempted to smoke, with high ego efficaciousness, they will deviate their bad purposes and take masticating gums alternatively. Another survey is correlating of self-efficacy among rural tobacco users ( Berg et.al, 2008 ) . The research found that there is a important correlativity between older age and quit smoke. In add-on, household and friends are great influence to higher self efficaciousness of quit smoke. What about immature age tobacco users? It seems that immature age tobacco users are less cognizant of the unsafe of smoking because they are still immature, deficiency of cognition and they have non yet suffer any unwellness from smoke.
Besides, 10 surveies conducted in the USA, Canada, the Netherlands and Taiwan ( Hyde, J. et Al, 2008 ) aiming baccy smoke, intoxicant and illicit drug usage. Seven of the 10 surveies reported an consequence of intercession on self-efficacy and two surveies reported a important consequence of intercession on behavior. Besides, the surveies came out with a decision that self-efficacy can be increased utilizing a scope of methods. However, there is an absence of grounds sing the extent to which self efficacy leads to behaviour alteration.
Health venue of Control foretelling Health Behaviour Change
Harmonizing to Ogden ( 2007 ) the internal versus external dimension of ascription theory has been specifically applied to wellness in footings of the construct of a wellness venue of control. Persons differ as to whether they tend to see events as governable by them ( an internal venue of control ) or unmanageable by them ( an external venue of control ) .
Few wellness psychological science researches have been done to analyze to what extent wellness venue of control can foretell wellness behavior alteration. Bennett et. Al ( 1997 ) had examined 11,401 people to finish a questionnaire mensurating wellness venue of control, value of wellness and smoke frequence. The interaction between opportunity wellness venue of control and value for wellness was a important forecaster of smoking position, proposing that wellness value may chair the relationship between wellness venue of control and smoke position. The findings reported that tobacco users were found to hold stronger internal, powerful others, and opportunity wellness venue of control beliefs than non-smokers and stronger internal and opportunity wellness venue of control beliefs than ex-smokers. This is because tobacco users had come across the feeling of being a tobacco user before and they need to command their enticement. Whereby, non tobacco users may had less venue of control because they might be hold no enticement to even seek to smoke.
Another survey ( Norman et. Al, 1998 ) mensurating wellness venue of control, wellness value and a figure of wellness behaviors ; smoke, intoxicant ingestion, exercising and diet. A strong belief that one ‘s wellness is under one ‘s control was related to the public presentation of a greater figure of wellness behaviors. The strongest correlativity was between opportunity of wellness venue of control and wellness behavior, such that those who held a strong belief that one ‘s wellness is due to opportunity or destine were less likely to execute the behaviors under consideration. In this survey besides showed a strong belief in the function of powerful others were related to the public presentation of fewer wellness behavior. Some grounds was found to propose that wellness value moderates the relationship between wellness venue of control and wellness behavior, although overall the wellness venue of control concept was found to be a weak forecaster of wellness behavior.
Steptoe & A ; Wardle ( 2001 ) reported based on their research on immature grownups from 18 states. The research examined the relationships between internal powerful others and opportunity wellness venue of control, wellness values, and ten wellness related behavior ; physical exercising, smoke, intoxicant ingestion, breakfast, tooth-brushing, place belt usage, and ingestion of fruit, fat, fiber and salt. The four behaviors ( exercising, eating fiber, salt and fat ingestion ) did demo important positive correlativities with internal venue of control, stronger effects were evident among participants with higher venue of control evaluations. Furthermore, high internal venue of control was associated with an increased of healthier behavior. The earlier hypothesis was, internal venue of control would be the most relevant to behaviours that are carried out preponderantly for wellness related grounds was merely partially fulfilled. As expected, the result showed that internal venue of control was unrelated to smoking and intoxicant ingestion. Whereby, higher internal tonss were associated with eating fiber, avoiding fat and regular tooth brushing. Furthermore, the anticipation that opportunity beliefs would peculiarly relevant to wellness hazard behaviors ( smoking and intoxicant ingestion ) and to healthy feeding was confirmed.
As a decision, ascription theory, self efficacy and wellness venue of control predict wellness behavior alteration. However, there are still some restrictions of their parts to wellness psychological science research. Attribution theory for illustration, it truly depends on persons, how they think. Some people take the experiences as a new attitude toward life. Others take the experiences as ego cognition or ego alteration and non everyone can be positive from the experiences they had gone through ( Ogden, 2008 ) . It all depends on how people think and react separately.
Harmonizing to Bandura ( 1997 ) , effectual ego ordinance is non achieved through an act of will. It requires the development of self-regulatory accomplishments. They must larn how to supervise the behavior they seek to alter, put short scope come-at-able subgoals to actuate and direct their attempts. This shows that self efficacy can non be done without acquisition, monitoring and developing self regulative accomplishments.
The function of wellness venue of control is the weakest one and the sum of discrepancy is low with concurrence with wellness value. In peculiar it shows that venue of control is merely one facet of a individual ‘s control beliefs and is distinguishable from their belief in the handiness of the agencies of control and theoretically from their sense of control this broader apprehension of control beliefs puts a duty on research workers to take carefully their steps of control beliefs ( Baken & A ; Stephens, 2005 ) .
“ ascription theoryA n. ” A A A Dictionary of Psychology. Edited by Andrew M. Colman. Oxford University Press 2009.A Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press.A A University of Bedfordshire.A A 20 November 2009A A & lt ; hypertext transfer protocol: //0-www.oxfordreference.com.brum.beds.ac.uk/views/ENTRY.html? subview=Main & A ; entry=t87.e730 & gt ;
Baken, D. & A ; Stephens, C. ( 2005 ) ‘More Dimenstions for the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control: Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Competing Models of the Structure of Control Beliefs ‘ ‘Journal of Health Psychology ‘ , 10 ( 5 ) pp.643-656.
Bandura, A. ( 1997 ) Self Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Bennett, P. et. Al ( 1997 ) ‘Health Locus of Control and Value for Health in Smokers and Non-smokers ‘ ‘Health Psychology ‘ , 16 ( 2 ) pp.179-182.
Berg, C.J. et Al ( 2008 ) ‘Correlates of Self-efficacy Among Rural Smokers ‘ ‘Journal of Health Psychology ‘ , 13 ( 3 ) pp.416-421.
Courneya, K.S. et Al ( 2004 ) ‘Exercise Motivation and Adherence in Cancer Survivors after Participation in a Randomized Controlled Trial: An Attribution Theory Perspective ‘ ‘International Journal of Behavioural Medicine ‘ , 11 ( 1 ) pp.8-17.
Hyde, J. et Al ( 2008 ) ‘Interventions to Increase Self-efficacy in the Context of Addiction Behaviours ‘ ‘Journal of Health Psychology ‘ , 13 ( 5 ) pp.607-623.
Jeong, S.H. ( 2007 ) ‘Effects of News about Genetics and Obesity on Controllability Attribution and Helping Behaviour ‘ ‘Health Communications ‘ , 22 ( 3 ) pp.221-228.
“ venue of controlA n. ” A A A Dictionary of Psychology. Edited by Andrew M. Colman. Oxford University Press 2009.A Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press.A A University of Bedfordshire.A A 20 November 2009A A & lt ; hypertext transfer protocol: //0-www.oxfordreference.com.brum.beds.ac.uk/views/ENTRY.html? subview=Main & A ; entry=t87.e4701 & gt ;
Mitchell, T.R ( 1982 ) ‘Attributions and Actions: A Note of Caution ‘ ‘Journal of Management ‘ , 8 ( 1 ) pp.65-74.
Norman, P. et. Al ( 1998 ) ‘Health Locus of Control and Health Behaviour ‘ ‘Journal of Health Psychology ‘ , 3 ( 2 ) pp.171-180.
Ogden, J. ( 2007 ) Health Psychology: a Textbook. 4th edn. England: Open University Press.
Ogden, J. ( 2008 ) Essential Readings in Health Psychology. England: Open University Press.
Scholz, U. et Al ( 2009 ) ‘Changes in Self-regulatory Cognitions as Forecasters of Changes in Smoking and Nutrition Behaviour ‘ ‘Psychology & A ; Health ‘ , 24 ( 5 ) pp.545-561.
Schwarzer, R. & A ; Renner, B. ( 2009 ) ‘Social-Cognitive Forecasters of Health: Action Self-Efficacy and Coping Self-Efficacy ‘ ‘Health Psychology ‘ , 19 ( 5 ) pp.487-495.
“ self-efficacyA n. ” A A A Dictionary of Psychology. Edited by Andrew M. Colman. Oxford University Press 2009.A Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press.A A University of Bedfordshire.A A 20 November 2009A A & lt ; hypertext transfer protocol: //0-www.oxfordreference.com.brum.beds.ac.uk/views/ENTRY.html? subview=Main & A ; entry=t87.e9254 & gt ;
Steptoe, A. & A ; Wardle, J. ( 2001 ) ‘Locus of Control and wellness Behaviour Revisited: A Multivariate Analysis of Young Adult from 18 States ‘ ‘British Journal of Psychology ‘ , 92 pp.659-672.
Strachan, S.M. & A ; Brawley, L.R. ( 2009 ) ‘Healthy-eater Identity and Self-efficacy Predict Healthy Eating Behaviour ‘ ‘Journal of Health Psychology ‘ , 14 ( 5 ) pp.684-695.
Stuart, A.E & A ; Blanton, H. ( 2003 ) ‘The Effectss of Message Framing on Behavioural Prevalence Assumptions ‘ ‘European Journal of Social Psychology ‘ , 22 pp.92-102.