Cited by 7,629Behavioral Health and InterventionsBehavioral and Psychological StudiesHealth Policy Implementation Science

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy (v1) of 93 Hierarchically Clustered Techniques: Building an International Consensus for the Reporting of Behavior Change Interventions

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: CONSORT guidelines call for precise reporting of behavior change interventions: we need rigorous methods of characterizing active content of interventions with precision and specificity. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to develop an extensive, consensually agreed hierarchically structured taxonomy of techniques [behavior change techniques (BCTs)] used in behavior change interventions. METHODS: In a Delphi-type exercise, 14 experts rated labels and definitions of 124 BCTs from six published classification systems. Another 18 experts grouped BCTs according to similarity of active ingredients in an open-sort task. Inter-rater agreement amongst six researchers coding 85 intervention descriptions by BCTs was assessed. RESULTS: This resulted in 93 BCTs clustered into 16 groups. Of the 26 BCTs occurring at least five times, 23 had adjusted kappas of 0.60 or above. CONCLUSIONS: "BCT taxonomy v1," an extensive taxonomy of 93 consensually agreed, distinct BCTs, offers a step change as a method for specifying interventions, but we anticipate further development and evaluation based on international, interdisciplinary consensus.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12160-013-9486-6

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Show all 49 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Michie S, Fixsen D, Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP. Specifying and reporting complex behavior change interventions: The need for a scientific method. Implement Sci. 2009;40:1-6.
  2. Mischel W. Presidential address. Washington: Association for Psychological Science Annual Convention; 2012.
  3. Quinn F. On integrating biomedical and behavioral approaches to activity limitation with chronic pain: Testing integrated models between and within persons. Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen; 2010.
  4. Dixon D, Johnston M. Health behavior change competency framework: Competences to deliver interventions to change lifestyle behaviors that affect health. Edinburgh: Scottish Government; 2012.
  5. Abraham C. Mapping change mechanisms and behaviour change techniques: A systematic approach to promoting behaviour change through text. In: Abraham C, Kools M, eds. Writing Health Communication: An Evidence-Based Guide for Professionals. London: SAGE Publications; 2011.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 1,090

Metadata

Authors
Michie, S., Richardson, M., Johnston, M., Abraham, C., Francis, J., Hardeman, W., Eccles, M. P., Cane, J., & Wood, C. E.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
  • City, University of London (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • University of Kent (GB)
Corresponding author
Michie, Susan
Venue
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2013-03-20
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
81-95
ISSN
  • 0742-5554 (ISSN-L)
  • 0883-6612
  • 1532-4796
OpenAlex
W2169434152
Cited by
7,629
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 644 · 2025: 771 · 2024: 824 · 2023: 846 · 2022: 906 · 2021: 834 · 2020: 757 · 2019: 550 · 2018: 489 · 2017: 325 · 2016: 280 · 2015: 229 · 2014: 130 · 2013: 34
FWCI
342.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
behaviour change techniques, BCT taxonomy, behaviour change interventions, intervention reporting, interobserver agreement, consensus development, hierarchical clustering
MeSH terms
Behavior Therapy, Consensus Statements as Topic, Humans, Cluster Analysis, Treatment Outcome

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