The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Self-efficacy and the stages of self-change of smoking
Open accessAbstract
Efficacy expectations are postulated to mediate all behavior change. This study examined the construct of self-efficacy in the self-change of smoking behavior. A 31-item measure of self-efficacy was used that included ratings of both temptation (cue strength) and confidence (efficacy). The subjects were 957 volunteers representing five stages of self change: (1) immotives, (2) contemplators, (3) recent quitters, (4) long-term quitters, and (5) relapsers. Subjects were assessed initially and at a 3- to 5-month follow-up. The self-efficacy scale proved to be an extremely reliable and coherent instrument with identifiable but not clearly interpretable subcomponents. Groups of subjects demonstrated significant differences in total self-efficacy scores. Efficacy expectations demonstrated small but significant relationships with smoking history variables and the pros and cons of smoking, but not with demographic, life stress, or persistence measures. Subject's efficacy evaluations at the initial assessment were related to changes in status for recent quitters and contemplators at the follow-up. The relationship between temptation and efficacy ratings is complex and varies for subjects in the various stages of change. Correlations between total self-efficacy and temptation scores were largest for contemplators (r = −.65) and relapsers (r = −.67) and smallest for the recent quitters (r = −.18). Finally, the magnitude of the difference between temptation and efficacy increased with length of abstinence for subjects in maintenance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency
Bandura, A. (1982) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.37.2.122 · Cited by 15,975
Transtheoretical therapy: Toward a more integrative model of change.
Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1982) · Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice · doi:10.1037/h0088437 · Cited by 3,922
Self-citationAssessing the impact of life changes: Development of the Life Experiences Survey.
Sarason, I. G., Johnson, J. H., & Siegel, J. M. (1978) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.46.5.932 · Cited by 2,788
Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.41.3.586 · Cited by 2,675 · cited 1×
“Perceived selfefficacy successfully predicts the degree of change in a variety of phobic responses (Biran & Wilson, 1981; Bourque & Ladouceur, 1980; Bandura, Adams, & Beyer, 1977), stress reactions and physiological arousal (Bandura, 1982), physical stamina (Weinberg, Yukelson, & Jackson, 1980), and achievement strivi…”
BackgroundDetermining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations
Velicer, W. F. (1976) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02293557 · Cited by 2,438
Modeling and attributional effects on children's achievement: A self-efficacy analysis.
Schunk, D. H. (1981) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.73.1.93 · Cited by 781
Tests of the generality of self-efficacy theory
Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., Hardy, A. B., & Howells, G. N. (1980) · Cognitive Therapy and Research · doi:10.1007/bf01173354 · Cited by 723
Cited by
In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors.
Prochaska, J. O., DiClemente, C. C., & Norcross, J. C. (1992) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.47.9.1102 · Cited by 8,596
Self-citationToward a Comprehensive Model of Change
Prochaska, J. O., & Diclemente, C. C. (1986) · Treating Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-2191-0_1 · Cited by 1,877
Self-citationThe precaution adoption process.
Weinstein, N. D. (1988) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037//0278-6133.7.4.355 · Cited by 1,459
Pilot study of the 5-HT 2A R agonist psilocybin in the treatment of tobacco addiction
Johnson, M. W., Garcia-Romeu, A., Cosimano, M. P., & Griffiths, R. R. (2014) · Journal of Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1177/0269881114548296 · Cited by 914
“The Smoking Abstinence Self-Efficacy scale (SASE) provides a measure of smokers’ confidence to abstain from smoking in 20 hypothetical situations, and temptation to smoke in those situations, and has been found to correlate with smoking cessation outcomes (DiClemente and Prochaska, 1985; DiClemente et al., 1985).”
BackgroundRelationships between perceived stress and health behaviors in a sample of working adults
Ng, D. M., & Jeffery, R. W. (2003) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.22.6.638 · Cited by 663
Metadata
- Authors
- DiClemente, C. C., Prochaska, J. O., & Gibertini, M.
- Venue
- Cognitive Therapy and Research
- Published
- 1985-04
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 181-200
- ISSN
- 0147-5916 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-2819
- OpenAlex
- W2010214743
- Cited by
- 562
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 6.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.