CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 575Behavioral Health and InterventionsNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorHealth and Wellbeing Research

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Applications of the Self-Report Habit Index to Nutrition and Physical Activity Behaviours

Gardner, Benjamin, de Bruijn, Gert-Jan, Lally, Phillippa·2011·Annals of Behavioral Medicine
DOI 10.1007/s12160-011-9282-0
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health behaviour models typically neglect habitual action. The Self-Report Habit Index (SRHI) permits synthesis of evidence of the influence of habit on behaviour. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to review evidence around mean habit strength, habit-behaviour correlations, and habit x intention interactions, from applications of the SRHI to dietary, physical activity, and active travel behaviour. METHOD: Electronic database searches identified 126 potentially relevant papers. Twenty-two papers (21 datasets) passed eligibility screening. Mean scores and correlations were meta-analysed using fixed, random and mixed effects, and interactions were synthesised via narrative review. RESULTS: Twenty-three habit-behaviour correlations and nine habit x intention interaction tests were found. Typical habit strength was located around the SRHI midpoint. Weighted habit-behaviour effects were medium-to-strong (fixed: r + = 0.44; random: r + = 0.46). Eight tests found that habit moderated the intention-behaviour relation. CONCLUSION: More comprehensive understanding of nutrition and activity behaviours will be achieved by accounting for habitual responses to contextual cues.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized 21 datasets using the Self-Report Habit Index (SRHI) in nutrition, physical activity, inactivity, and active travel. Habit strength was typically near the SRHI midpoint, habit-behaviour correlations were medium-to-strong, and habit moderated the intention-behaviour relation in eight of nine tests.

Key findings

  • Across 22 eligible papers (21 unique datasets), the grand weighted mean SRHI score was near the scale midpoint: fixed-effects 48.61% (random-effects 49.30%). Nutrition habits averaged ~43%, whereas general physical activity/inactivity averaged ~60% and active travel ~55%; nutrition scores were significantly lower than general physical (in)activity scores (Q_B=52.59, p<0.001).
  • The weighted habit-behaviour correlation was medium-to-strong: fixed-effects r+=0.44 and random-effects r+=0.46 (both p<0.001), with failsafe N=7,011 but strong heterogeneity (Q=223.01, p<0.001; I²=91.03). Active travel correlations were stronger (fixed r+=0.65; random r+=0.70) than those for general physical activity or nutrition (Q_B=12.79, p<0.001).
  • Eight of nine tests found that habit moderated the intention-behaviour relationship, such that intention had less impact on behaviour as habit strength increased. One leisure-time activity study found no moderation when controlling for habit, TPB variables, intention stability, and an intention×intention-stability interaction (p=0.12).

Methods

  • Systematic review and meta-analysis using a descendency search of five databases (PsycInfo, Medline, Embase, Web of Knowledge, Scopus) on 29 January 2011, with no date limits; 126 records were screened, and 22 papers (21 datasets) met eligibility criteria.
  • Eligible studies were English-language, peer-reviewed primary-data papers using the 12-item SRHI for dietary intake (excluding alcohol), physical activity/inactivity, or active travel, and reporting a matched or counterhabitual habit-behaviour association or a habit moderation test.
  • Means and bivariate habit-behaviour correlations were meta-analyzed in Comprehensive Meta Analysis using fixed, random, and mixed effects, Fisher’s Z transformations, Q and I² heterogeneity statistics, and Rosenthal’s failsafe N; moderation effects were synthesized narratively because partial correlations across models were not comparable.

Limitations

  • Stated: many included studies were cross-sectional and modelled habit as a predictor of past behaviour, which conflicts with the expected temporal sequence; most behaviour measures were self-reported, and the two objective-measure studies posted lower habit-behaviour correlations, suggesting self-reports may inflate effects.
  • Stated: SRHI items relating to behavioural frequency may inflate habit-behaviour correlations; interaction findings may reflect publication bias, and all interaction studies focused on intention-concordant habits with often strong habit-intention correlations, limiting external validity.
  • Stated/evident: heterogeneity was high and subgroup analyses could not reliably attribute it to methodological characteristics; active travel findings may be an artefact of few studies (k=3), and physical inactivity analyses were underpowered for heterogeneity and precluded failsafe N calculation.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12160-011-9282-0

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 77 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Weighted habit-behaviour effects were medium-to-strong (fixed r+=0.44; random r+=0.46).

    “Weighted habit-behaviour effects were medium-to-strong (fixed: r + =0.44; random: r + =0.46).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Typical habit strength was located around the SRHI midpoint.

    “Typical habit strength was located around the SRHI midpoint.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Eight tests found that habit moderated the intention-behaviour relation.

    “Eight tests found that habit moderated the intention-behaviour relation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    General physical activity habits correlated with behaviour at r+=0.43 (fixed; random: r+=0.44).

    “General physical activity habits correlated with behaviour at r + =0.43 (fixed; random: r + =0.44).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingcitation

    De Bruijn showed that intentions remained significantly predictive of fruit consumption, albeit less strongly so, at higher levels of habit.

    “De Bruijn [31] showed that intentions remained significantly predictive of fruit consumption, albeit less strongly so, at higher levels of habit.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [31] * De Bruijn GJ. Understanding college students' fruit consumption. Integrating habit strength in the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite. 2010; 54: 16–22. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 36
  • May combine two claims. 48

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Five correlations focused on general physical activity, two on inactivity, and three on active travel.

    “Five correlations focused on general physical activity, two on inactivity, and three on active travel.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Title, keyword, and abstract screening removed five papers, and subsequent full-text screening removed a further 99 papers.

    “Title, keyword, and abstract screening against eligibility criteria removed five papers, and subsequent full-text screening removed a further 99 papers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Mean within-dataset sample size (N) was 294.

    “Mean within-dataset sample size (N) was 294.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    A total of 126 potentially relevant papers were identified, including 125 unique citations generated by the database search, and Verplanken and Orbell's paper.

    “A total of 126 potentially relevant papers were identified, including 125 unique citations generated by the database search, and Verplanken and Orbell's paper [27].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [27] * Verplanken B, Orbell S. Reflections on past behavior: A self-report index of habit strength. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2003; 33: 1313–1330. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Four moderation tests related to activity or inactivity, three to nutrition, and two to active travel.

    “Four moderation tests related to activity or inactivity, three to nutrition, and two to active travel.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The 21 datasets reported 23 relevant and unique bivariate habit-behaviour correlations and nine tests of the moderating effect of habit on the intention-behaviour relation.

    “The 21 datasets reported 23 relevant and unique bivariate habit-behaviour correlations and nine tests of the moderating effect of habit on the intention-behaviour relation (see Table 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of 13 diet and nutrition habit-behaviour correlations, four related to healthful and nine to unhealthful dietary habits.

    “Of 13 diet and nutrition habit-behaviour correlations, four related to healthful and nine to unhealthful dietary habits.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    The 22 eligible papers were based on 21 unique datasets.

    “The 22 eligible papers were based on 21 unique datasets.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    De Bruijn et al. observed that fruit consumption intentions correlated most strongly with behaviour where habit was weakest (r=0.32), but remained significantly correlated at moderate and strong levels of habit (both rs=0.23).

    “De Bruijn et al. [15] observed that fruit consumption intentions correlated most strongly with behaviour where habit was weakest (r=0.32),but remained significantly correlated at moderate and strong levels of habit (both rs=0.23).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [15] * De Bruijn GJ, Kremers SPJ, De Vet E, De Nooijer J, Van Mechelen W, Brug J. Does habit strength moderate the intention-behaviour relationship in the Theory of Planned Behaviour? The case of fruit consumption. Psychol Health. 2007; 22: 899–916. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    With the exception of physical inactivity, all weighted correlations were robust (minimum failsafe N=308) and highly heterogeneous (minimum Q=23.21, p=0.001; minimum I2=74.15).

    “With the exception of physical inactivity, all weighted correlations were robust (minimum failsafe N=308) and highly heterogeneous (minimum Q=23.21, p=0.001; minimum I 2 =74.15).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    All habit-behaviour correlations reported below were significant at p<0.001.

    “All habitbehaviour correlations reported below were significant at p<0.001.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    SRHI scores were below the midpoint for healthy and unhealthy eating (both ~43%).

    “Scores were below the midpoint for healthy and unhealthy eating (both ~43%)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    This effect was robust (failsafe N=7,011), but strong heterogeneity was observed around the mean (Q=223.01, p<0.001; I2=91.03).

    “This effect was robust (failsafe N=7,011), but strong heterogeneity was observed around the mean (Q=223.01,p<0.001;I 2 =91.03).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Behaviour was measured via self-report in 19 datasets, of which 13 focused on actual behaviour over a given period and eight on typical behavioural patterns.

    “Behaviour was measured via selfreport in 19 datasets, of which 13 focused on actual behaviour over a given period and eight on typical behavioural patterns.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Most samples were university-based (14 datasets).

    “Most samples were university-based (14 datasets).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    In six studies, habit, intention, and other variables derived from the Theory of Planned Behaviour were partialled out of the moderated multiple regression models.

    “In six studies, habit, intention, and other variables derived from the Theory of Planned Behaviour (attitudes [subdivided into instrumental attitude and affective attitude in two studies], subjective norms, perceived behavioural control) were partialled out of the moderated multiple regression models.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Four of the nine studies investigating the effect of habit on the intention-behaviour relation used cross-sectional, and five prospective, designs.

    “Four of the nine studies investigating the effect of habit on the intention-behaviour relation used cross-sectional, and five prospective, designs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    Two datasets used objective behaviour measures (observed food choice in a lab setting).

    “Two datasets used objective behaviour measures (observed food choice in a lab setting [37, study 2; 56]).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [37] * Conner M, Perugini M, O'Gorman R, Ayres K, Prestwich A. Relations between implicit and explicit measures of attitudes and measures of behaviour: Evidence of moderation by individual difference variables. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007: 33; 1727–40. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [56] * Brug J, de Vet E, de Nooijer J, Verplanken B. Predicting fruit consumption: Cognitions, intention, and habits. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2006; 38: 73–81. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    SRHI scores were above the midpoint for studies of physical activity or inactivity (both ~60%) and active travel (~55%).

    “but above the midpoint for studies of physical activity or inactivity (both ~60%) and active travel (~55%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    This effect was underpinned by correlations of r+≈0.42 (fixed: r+=0.43; random: r+=0.44) for activity habits, and r+=0.47 (both fixed and random) for inactivity habits.

    “This effect was underpinned by correlations of r + ≈0.42 (fixed: r + =0.43; random: r + =0.44) for activity habits, and r + = 0.47 (both fixed and random) for inactivity habits.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Correlations did not differ by study quality, sample, design, whether actual or typical behaviour was measured, or whether behaviour was self-reported or objective (maximum QB=2.31, p=0.13).

    “Correlations did not differ by study quality, sample, design, whether actual or typical behaviour was measured, or whether behaviour was self-reported or objective (maximum Q B =2.31, p=0.13).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Neither study design (QB=0.18, p=0.68) nor sample (QB=0.82, p=0.66) explained variation in mean scores.

    “Neither study design (Q B =0.18, p=0.68) nor sample (Q B =0.82, p=0.66) explained variation in mean scores.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Fourteen datasets used prospective designs, and seven were cross-sectional.

    “Fourteen datasets used prospective designs, and seven were cross-sectional.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The average weighted correlation between habit and behaviour across all studies was r+=0.44 using a fixed model (p<0.001), and r+=0.46 using a random effects model (p<0.001), indicating a moderate to strong effect.

    “The average weighted correlation between habit and behaviour across all studies was estimated at r + =0.44 using a fixed model (p<0.001), and r + =0.46 using a random effects model (p<0.001),indicating a moderate to strong effect (see Table 2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    Habit measures showed satisfactory alphas within all datasets (minimum α=0.84).

    “Habit measures showed satisfactory alphas within all datasets (minimum α=0.84).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Two studies controlled for intention and habit only.

    “Two studies controlled for intention and habit only.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was considerable between-study variation in mean habit scores and in habit-behaviour correlations, but subgroup analyses could not reliably attribute heterogeneity to methodological characteristics.

    “We found considerable between-study variation in mean habit scores and in habit-behaviour correlations, but subgroup analyses could not reliably attribute heterogeneity to methodological characteristics.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Chatzisarantis and Hagger showed that intentions to engage in vigorous physical activity or active sports became less associated with behaviour as habit strength increased, but beta weights were not provided to illustrate this effect.

    “Chatzisarantis and Hagger ([59] studies 1 and 2) showed that intentions to engage in vigorous physical activity or active sports became less associated with behaviour as habit strength increased, but beta weights were not provided to illustrate this effect.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [59] * Chatzisarantis NLD, Hagger MS. Mindfulness and the intention-behavior relationship within the Theory of Planned Behavior. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007; 33: 663–76. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Weighted mean habit-behaviour correlations were typically medium to large in size, and active travel correlations were strongest.

    “Weighted mean habit-behaviour correlations were typically medium to large in size, and active travel correlations were strongest.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The SRHI-behaviour correlation (r=0.86) was attenuated using the abbreviated index (r=0.80), and marginally lower mean scores were observed (M=69.67 vs 67.50), but reliability and habit×intention interaction coefficients were identical.

    “The SRHI-behaviour correlation (r= 0.86) was attenuated using the abbreviated index (r=0.80),and marginally lower mean scores were observed (expressed as percentages of maximum scores, M=69.67 vs 67.50, respectively), but reliability and habit×intention interaction coefficients were identical.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Two studies which used objective measures posted lower habit-behaviour correlations, suggesting that self-reports of action may inflate true effects.

    “Two studies which used objective measures posted lower habit-behaviour correlations, suggesting that self-reports of action may inflate true effects.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Self-reports of behaviour are prone to inaccuracy.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Habit scores varied by around twenty percentage points between behaviours, with significantly higher scores observed for physical activity than nutritional behaviour.

    “Habit scores varied by around twenty percentage points between behaviours, with significantly higher scores observed for physical activity than nutritional behaviour.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Health behaviour models typically neglect habitual action.

    “Health behaviour models typically neglect habitual action.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The SRHI offers a standardised and reliable measure to assess habitual action and so permits evidence synthesis across behaviours and populations.

    “The SRHI offers a standardised and reliable measure to assess habitual action and so permits evidence synthesis across behaviours and populations [28].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [28] Verplanken B, Myrbakk V, Rudi E. The measurement of habit. In: Betsch T, Haberstroh S, eds. The routines of decision making. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2005: 231–47.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Approaches to behaviour change have traditionally been based on reasoned action models.

    “Approaches to behaviour change have traditionally been based on reasoned action models [7].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [7] Conner M, Norman P. Predicting health behaviour: A social cognition approach. In: Conner M & Norman P, eds. Predicting health behaviour: Research and practice with social cognition models. 2nd ed. Buckingham: Open University Press; 2005: 1–27.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The Theory of Planned Behaviour and the Health Action Process Approach posit that behaviour follows directly from a conscious decision to act, which summarises beliefs around the favourability and controllability of action.

    “For example, the Theory of Planned Behaviour [8] and the Health Action Process Approach [9] posit that behaviour follows directly from a conscious decision to act, which summarises beliefs around the favourability and controllability of action.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [8] Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Dec. 1991; 50: 179–211. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [9] Schwarzer R. Modeling health behavior change: How to predict and modify the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors. Appl Psychol—Int Rev. 2008; 57: 1–29.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Recent work has pointed to habit as a key automaticity-based determinant of action.

    “Recent work has pointed to habit as a key automaticity-based determinant of action [15][16][17].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [15] * De Bruijn GJ, Kremers SPJ, De Vet E, De Nooijer J, Van Mechelen W, Brug J. Does habit strength moderate the intention-behaviour relationship in the Theory of Planned Behaviour? The case of fruit consumption. Psychol Health. 2007; 22: 899–916. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [16] Kremers SPJ, De Bruijn GJ, Visscher TLS, van Mechelen W, de Vries NK, Brug J. Environmental influences on energy balance-related behaviors: A dual-process view. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2006; 3: 9. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [17] Lally P, van Jaarsveld E, Potts HWW, Wardle J. How are habits formed? Modelling habit formation in the real world. Eur J of Soc Psychol. 2010; 40: 998–1009. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Habits are behavioural patterns learned through context-dependent repetition; repeated performance in unvarying settings reinforces context-behaviour associations such that encountering the context is sufficient to automatically cue the habitual response.

    “Habits are behavioural patterns learned through context-dependent repetition [17][18][19][20]: repeated performance in unvarying settings reinforces context-behaviour associations such that, subsequently, encountering the context is sufficient to automatically cue the habitual response [21].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [17] Lally P, van Jaarsveld E, Potts HWW, Wardle J. How are habits formed? Modelling habit formation in the real world. Eur J of Soc Psychol. 2010; 40: 998–1009. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [18] Aarts H, Paulussen T, Schaalma H. Physical exercise habit: on the conceptualization and formation of habitual health behaviours. Health Educ Res. 1997; 12: 363–74. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [21] Orbell S, Verplanken B. The automatic component of habit in health behavior: Habit as cue-contingent automaticity. Health Psychol. 2010; 29: 374–83. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Reasoned action models portray behaviour as the outcome of conscious deliberation and emphasise concepts such as intentions, attitudes, and self-efficacy.

    “These models portray behaviour as the outcome of conscious deliberation and emphasise concepts such as intentions, attitudes, and self-efficacy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The SRHI has been found to conform to theoretical predictions by correlating with behavioural frequency, and moderating the intention-behaviour relation.

    “The measure has been found to conform to theoretical predictions by correlating with behavioural frequency, and moderating the intention-behaviour relation [29,30].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [29] * Gardner B. Modelling motivation and habit in stable travel mode contexts. Transport Res F – Traf. 2009; 12: 68–76. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [30] * Kremers SPJ, Brug J. Habit strength of physical activity and sedentary behavior among children and adolescents. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2008; 20: 5–17. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A multiplicative combination of performance frequency and cue stability appears to offer a useful habit index, but depends upon prior identification of relevant cues.

    “a multiplicative combination of performance frequency ('how often do you do behavior X?') and cue stability ('when you do behavior X, how often is cue Y present?') appears to offer a useful habit index, but depends upon prior identification of relevant cues [25,26].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [25] Ouellette JA, Wood W. Habit and intention in everyday life: The multiple processes by which past behavior predicts future behavior. Psychol Bull. 1998; 124: 54–74. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [26] Wood W, Tam L, Witt MG. Changing circumstances, disrupting habits. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005: 88, 918–33. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Dual-process theories suggest that behaviour can be initiated through two competing pathways: a deliberative route and an automatic route.

    “Dual-process theories suggest that behaviour can be initiated through two competing pathways: a deliberative route, which entails prior thought and cognitive effort (as depicted by reasoned action accounts), and an automatic route, which is characterised by environmentally cued responses which proceed in the absence of effort, volitional control, and awareness [13,14].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [13] Bargh JA. The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in social cognition. In: Wyer RS, Srull TK, eds. Handbook of social cognition. Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1996: 1–40.

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [14] Strack F, Deutsch R. Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behaviour. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2004; 8: 220–47. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    The multiplicative measure may fail to detect habits prompted by temporal cues where only location cue stability is measured, making integration of evidence across behaviours and contexts problematic.

    “The measure may thereby fail to detect, for example, habits prompted by temporal cues where only location cue stability is measured, making integration of evidence across behaviours and contexts problematic.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    For prospective studies, habit data were taken from the earliest timepoint, and behaviour data from the earliest follow-up timepoint, so as to observe the causal sequence of habit-behaviour relationships.

    “Where habit or behaviour was measured on multiple occasions, habit data were taken from the earliest timepoint, and behaviour data from the earliest follow-up timepoint, so as to observe the causal sequence of habit-behaviour relationships [22].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22] Triandis H. Interpersonal behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole; 1977.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Potential between-study sources of bias were assessed by coding for four methodological variables pertaining to study design, behaviour measure, and sample.

    “Potential between-study sources of bias were assessed by coding for four methodological variables pertaining to study design (whether cross-sectional or prospective), behaviour measure (self-report or objective; actual or typical behaviour), and sample (university-based, school-based or general adult population).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    If unwanted habitual health-risk behaviours proceed without forethought, then shifts in motivation may fail to change behaviour.

    “If unwanted habitual health-risk behaviours proceed without forethought, then shifts in motivation may fail to change behaviour [33].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33] Verplanken B, Wood W. Interventions to break and create consumer habits. J Public Policy Mark. 2006; 25: 90–103. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Estimation of typical strength of habits for specific health behaviours would be informative for intervention design, because behaviour change interventions may be most effective when tailored to habit strength of the focal behaviour.

    “Estimation of typical strength of habits for specific health behaviours would be informative for intervention design, because behaviour change interventions may be most effective when tailored to habit strength of the focal behaviour [33].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33] Verplanken B, Wood W. Interventions to break and create consumer habits. J Public Policy Mark. 2006; 25: 90–103. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    A priori power analysis indicated power to detect a small effect (r=0.10) using a fixed-effects model was 0.97, assuming 15 datasets, mean within-study N of 80, and significance 0.05; power using random effects was 0.80 assuming high between-study heterogeneity.

    “Assuming the availability of 15 datasets, each with a mean within-study N of 80, and statistical significance set at 0.05, power to detect a small effect (r=0.10 [46]) using a fixed-effects model was 0.97.Assuming also high between-study heterogeneity, power to detect a small effect using random effects procedures was 0.80.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [45] Hedges LV, Pigott TD. The power of statistical tests in meta-analysis. Psychol Methods. 2001; 3: 203–217. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [46] Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992; 112: 155–159. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Thirty-five percent of datasets were second-coded by an independent coder, with 97% agreement found.

    “Thirty five percent of datasets (including published and unpublished material) were second-coded by an independent coder (PL), with 97% agreement found.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    A dichotomous indicator of study quality was created that treated studies as low quality where they were cross-sectional and based on self-reported and typical behaviour, and all other studies as acceptable quality.

    “On these bases, we created a dichotomous indicator of study quality for analysis of correlations, which treated studies as low quality where they were (a) cross-sectional and based on (b) selfreported and (c) typical behaviour, and all other studies as acceptable quality.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    A second reviewer independently filtered 20% of papers at both screening stages, and 100% agreement was found between reviewers.

    “A second reviewer (PL) independently filtered 20% of papers at both screening stages, and 100% agreement was found between reviewers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Forming habits for health-promoting behaviours may prevent relapse and aid maintenance of behaviour change beyond the duration of an intervention.

    “Additionally, forming habits for health-promoting behaviours may prevent relapse and aid maintenance of behaviour change beyond the duration of an intervention [33,35].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [33] Verplanken B, Wood W. Interventions to break and create consumer habits. J Public Policy Mark. 2006; 25: 90–103. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [35] Rothman AJ, Sheeran P, Wood W. Reflective and automatic processes in the initiation and maintenance of dietary change. Ann Behav Med. 2009; 38 (S1):S4–S17 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    Publication bias was assessed by calculating Rosenthal's failsafe N.

    “Publication bias was assessed by calculating Rosenthal's failsafe N, which estimates the number of studies needed to reduce weighted habit-behaviour correlations to statistical non-significance (p>0.05[53]).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [53] Rosenthal R. Meta-analytic procedures for social research. London: Sage; 1984.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Applications of the SRHI have shown dietary behaviours, physical activity, and sedentary behaviours to have a habitual component for many people, with habit predicting behaviour over and above reasoned concepts such as intentions, behavioural control, attitudes, and social norms.

    “Applications of the SRHI have shown dietary behaviours, physical activity, and sedentary behaviours to have a habitual component for many people, with habit predicting behaviour over and above reasoned concepts such as intentions, behavioural control, attitudes, and social norms [29][30][31][32].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [29] * Gardner B. Modelling motivation and habit in stable travel mode contexts. Transport Res F – Traf. 2009; 12: 68–76. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [30] * Kremers SPJ, Brug J. Habit strength of physical activity and sedentary behavior among children and adolescents. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2008; 20: 5–17. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [31] * De Bruijn GJ. Understanding college students' fruit consumption. Integrating habit strength in the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite. 2010; 54: 16–22. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Sensitivity analyses explored whether interpretation of meta-analytic coefficients differed according to alternative treatment of two datasets; no differences were found: correlation coefficients varied by a maximum of 0.015 and subgroup analyses yielded stable results across all treatments.

    “No differences were found: correlation coefficients varied by a maximum of 0.015 and subgroup analyses yielded stable results across all treatments.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The small number of available studies (k=2) is likely to have underpowered heterogeneity analyses, and precluded calculation of failsafe Ns.

    “the small number of available studies (k=2) is likely to have underpowered heterogeneity analyses [56], and precluded calculation of failsafe Ns.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [56] * Brug J, de Vet E, de Nooijer J, Verplanken B. Predicting fruit consumption: Cognitions, intention, and habits. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2006; 38: 73–81. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    All studies in which habit interacted with intention focused on intention-concordant habits and many reported strong habit-intention correlations.

    “Additionally, all studies in which habit interacted with intention focused on intentionconcordant habits and many reported strong habit-intention correlations (e.g.[29]).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [29] * Gardner B. Modelling motivation and habit in stable travel mode contexts. Transport Res F – Traf. 2009; 12: 68–76. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    A more comprehensive model of nutrition and activity behaviour may also require a temporal element, so as to acknowledge that frequent performance of reasoned action leads to habit formation.

    “A more comprehensive model of nutrition and activity behaviour may also require a temporal element, so as to acknowledge that frequent performance of reasoned action leads to habit formation [17,20].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [17] Lally P, van Jaarsveld E, Potts HWW, Wardle J. How are habits formed? Modelling habit formation in the real world. Eur J of Soc Psychol. 2010; 40: 998–1009. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [20] Lally P, Wardle J, Gardner B. Experiences of habit formation: A qualitative study. Psychol Health Med (in press)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The failure of intention to translate into action where habit is strong suggests that motivation change will not change unhealthful habits, and so the cue-response association underpinning habitual action must be disrupted.

    “The failure of intention to translate into action where habit is strong suggests that motivation change, while likely to be necessary for behaviour change, will not change unhealthful ('bad') habits, and so the cue-response association underpinning habitual action must be disrupted [33].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33] Verplanken B, Wood W. Interventions to break and create consumer habits. J Public Policy Mark. 2006; 25: 90–103. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The predictive and explanatory utility of models may be increased by incorporating habit as a determinant of action situated on a parallel, cue-driven pathway to behaviour and a variable which can bypass deliberation and obstruct the translation of intention into action.

    “The predictive and explanatory utility of these models may be increased by incorporating habit as a determinant of action situated on a parallel, cue-driven pathway to behaviour and a variable which can bypass deliberation and obstruct the translation of intention into action [14,62].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [14] Strack F, Deutsch R. Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behaviour. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2004; 8: 220–47. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [62] Verplanken B, Aarts H, van Knippenberg A. Habit, information acquisition and the process of making travel mode choices. Eur J of Soc Psychol. 1997; 27: 539–560. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The cross-sectional modelling of habit as a predictor of past behaviour fails to acknowledge the expected temporal sequence between habit and behaviour and is conceptually problematic given that repeated action strengthens habit.

    “This fails to acknowledge the expected temporal sequence between habit and behaviour [62], and is also conceptually problematic given that, at least in early stages of habit formation, repeated action strengthens habit [17].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [62] Verplanken B, Aarts H, van Knippenberg A. Habit, information acquisition and the process of making travel mode choices. Eur J of Soc Psychol. 1997; 27: 539–560. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [17] Lally P, van Jaarsveld E, Potts HWW, Wardle J. How are habits formed? Modelling habit formation in the real world. Eur J of Soc Psychol. 2010; 40: 998–1009. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Many of the studies used cross-sectional designs, and so modelled habit as a predictor of past behaviour.

    “Many of the studies used cross-sectional designs, and so modelled habit as a predictor of past behaviour.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    A more comprehensive understanding of nutrition and activity behaviours, and how they might be changed, will be achieved by integrating habitual responses to contextual cues into theoretical accounts of behaviour.

    “A more comprehensive understanding of nutrition and activity behaviours, and how they might be changed, will be achieved by integrating habitual responses to contextual cues into theoretical accounts of behaviour.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Some SRHI items relate to behavioural frequency, and so are likely to inflate the habit-behaviour correlation.

    “Some SRHI items relate to behavioural frequency (e.g.'[Behaviour X…] is something I do frequently', 'is something I have been doing for a long time'), and so are likely to inflate the habit-behaviour correlation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Some researchers have removed frequency items when applying the SRHI, with no apparent losses in reliability.

    “Some researchers have removed frequency items when applying the SRHI, with no apparent losses in reliability [17,29].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [17] Lally P, van Jaarsveld E, Potts HWW, Wardle J. How are habits formed? Modelling habit formation in the real world. Eur J of Soc Psychol. 2010; 40: 998–1009. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [29] * Gardner B. Modelling motivation and habit in stable travel mode contexts. Transport Res F – Traf. 2009; 12: 68–76. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Between-study variation in habit strength may be attributable to covariates pertaining to the populations studied.

    “Alternatively, between-study variation in habit strength may be attributable to covariates pertaining to the populations studied.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Active travel habits were predominantly documented in the Netherlands, where bicycling is the main mode of transport for short journeys, which may make bicycle habit formation more likely.

    “Active travel habits, for example, were predominantly documented in the Netherlands, where bicycling is the main mode of transport for short journeys [65], which may make bicycle habit formation more likely.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [65] Statistics Netherlands. Kernresultaten mobiliteit [Main Results Mobility]. 7th ed. Statistics Netherlands: Voorburg; 2002, pp12-13.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    We synthesised evidence using the 12-item SRHI for the purpose of between-study consistency.

    “Various subscales have been proposed, and we synthesised evidence using the 12-item SRHI for the purpose of between-study consistency.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Concerns have been raised around the validity of the SRHI for modelling habit-behaviour correlations.

    “Concerns have been raised around the validity of the SRHI for modelling habit-behaviour correlations [31].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [31] * De Bruijn GJ. Understanding college students' fruit consumption. Integrating habit strength in the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite. 2010; 54: 16–22. source

      Not checked in the free run.

69 of 69

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No systematic review of applications of the SRHI to dietary and physical activity habits is available.

    “Despite growing theoretical and empirical research interest in the relevance of habit to health behaviour [16,17,31], no systematic review of applications of the SRHI to dietary and physical activity habits is available.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The everyday contexts that support habits remain stable and are regularly encountered.

    “First, assuming the everyday contexts that support habits remain stable and are regularly encountered, habit strength will correlate with behavioural frequency.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Within-study habit score distributions are normal.

    “assuming normal within-study habit score distributions”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Self-reports of behaviour are prone to inaccuracy.

    “which are prone to inaccuracy”
4 of 4

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Actions performed regularly apparently became habitual and persisted with little guidance from intentions.

    “Actions performed regularly apparently became habitual and persisted with little guidance from intentions (see also Gardner et al. 2011).”

    From Psychology of Habit. (2016) · cites this paper as Gardner et al. 2011

    The Abstract says repetition in unvarying settings can establish habits that are cued automatically, with intention having little or no impact in familiar settings. But it also cautions that frequency alone cannot distinguish habitual from deliberative action. The claim omits that condition when it suggests regularly performed actions became habitual. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The majority of studies on exercise habit are cross-sectional.

    “For example, the majority of the studies on exercise habit are cross-sectional (Gardner et al., 2011).”

    From Exercise habit formation in new gym members: a longitudinal study (2015) · cites this paper as Gardner et al., 2011

  • Habit correlates r = .43 with physical activity behavior, similar to the intention-behavior relationship.

    “Overall, habit has demonstrated predictive validity in the physical activity domain; for example, a recent meta-analysis found it to correlate r = .43 with behavior which is similar to the magnitude of the intention-behavior relationship (Gardner et al., 2011).”

    From Exercise habit formation in new gym members: a longitudinal study (2015) · cites this paper as Gardner et al., 2011

  • The Lally and Gardner (2013) habit model proposes four antecedents of habit that have individually been found to correlate with habit.

    “Second, the habit model proposed by Lally and Gardner (2013) presents a strong case of four antecedents of habit which have individually been found to correlate with habit in various studies (Gardner et al., 2011).”

    From Exercise habit formation in new gym members: a longitudinal study (2015) · cites this paper as Gardner et al., 2011

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Claimed minimum failsafe N exceeds the active-travel value

    Minor

    The text states that the minimum failsafe N outside physical inactivity was 308, but Table 2 reports 267 for active travel.

  • Physical-activity correlations differ from Table 2

    Minor

    The narrative gives fixed and random correlations of 0.43 and 0.44 for physical-activity habits; the Physical activity row of Table 2 gives 0.41 and 0.43.

  • Claimed minimum heterogeneity I2 exceeds the table value

    Minor

    The stated minimum I2 is 74.15, but Table 2 reports 72.96 for unhealthful-diet correlations.

  • Claimed minimum heterogeneity Q exceeds the table value

    Minor

    The stated minimum Q is 23.21, but Table 2 reports Q=22.10 for physical-activity correlations.

4 of 4

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD Health Data 2010. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 2010.
  2. World Health Organisation. WHO Mega Country Health Promotion Network: Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance Guide. Genera: World Health Organisation; 2002.
  3. Craig R, Mindell J, Harani V. Health Survey for England 2008. London: NHS Information Centre; 2009.
  4. Hedges LV, Olkin I. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando: Academic Press; 1985.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gardner, B., de Bruijn, G.-J., & Lally, P.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2011-05-28
Volume
42
Issue
2
Pages
174-187
ISSN
  • 0742-5554 (ISSN-L)
  • 0883-6612
  • 1532-4796
DOI
10.1007/s12160-011-9282-0
OpenAlex
W2074638810
Cited by
574
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 111 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 10
FWCI
4.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Wellbeing Research
Keywords
Self-Report Habit Index, habit strength, habitual behavior, dietary behaviour, physical activity, active travel, intention-behavior relationship, health behavior models, contextual cues
MeSH terms
Habits, Humans, Motor Activity, Nutritional Status, Travel, Health Behavior, Self Report

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

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