Cited by 500Nutrition, Health and Food BehaviorBehavioral Health and InterventionsHealth and Wellbeing Research

Self-regulation, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and social support: Social cognitive theory and nutrition behavior

Anderson, Eileen S., Winett, Richard A., Wojcik, Janet R.·2007·Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Background Understanding the need for and accessibility to healthier foods have not improved the overall diets of the U.S. population. Social cognitive theory (SCT) may explain how other variables, such as self-regulation and self-efficacy, may be key to integrating healthier nutrition into U.S. lifestyles. Purpose To determine how SCT accounts for the nutritional content of food purchases and consumption among adults in a health promotion study. Methods Participants were 712 churchgoers (18% African American, 66% female, 79% overweight or obese) from 14 churches in southwestern Virginia participating in the baseline phase of a larger health promotion study. Data were collected on the nutrition related social support, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and self-regulation components of SCT, as well as on the fat, fiber, fruit, and vegetable content of food-shopping receipts and food frequency questionnaires. These data were used to test the fit of models ordered as prescribed by SCT and subjected to structural equation analysis. Results SCT provided a good fit to the data explaining 35%, 52%, and 59% of observed variance in percent calories from fat, fiber g/1000 kcals and fruit and vegetable servings/1000 kcals. Participants' age, gender, socioeconomic status, social support, self-efficacy, negative outcome expectations, and self-regulation made important contributions to their nutrition behavior -- a configuration of influences consistent with SCT. Conclusions These resul…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02874555

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anderson, E. S., Winett, R. A., & Wojcik, J. R.
Affiliations
  • Virginia Tech (US)
  • Winthrop University (US)
Corresponding author
Anderson, Eileen S.
Venue
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2007-10
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
304-312
ISSN
  • 0742-5554 (ISSN-L)
  • 0883-6612
  • 1532-4796
OpenAlex
W2119338380
Cited by
500
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 27
FWCI
10.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA079469)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Wellbeing Research
Keywords
social cognitive theory, self-regulation, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, social support, nutrition behavior, food purchasing, dietary fat intake, dietary fiber, fruit and vegetable intake, churchgoers, health promotion, overweight and obesity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nutritional Status, Obesity, Psychological Theory, Social Control, Informal, Social Desirability, Social Perception, Social Support, Health Behavior, Self Efficacy

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