Cited by 100Behavioral Health and InterventionsHealth Policy Implementation ScienceMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Applying the behaviour change technique (BCT) taxonomy v1: A study of coder training

Open access
Wood, Caroline E, Richardson, Michelle, Johnston, Marie, Abraham, Charles, Francis, Jill, Hardeman, Wendy, Michie, Susan·2015·Translational Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1 (BCTTv1) has been used to detect active ingredients of interventions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate effectiveness of user training in improving reliable, valid and confident application of BCTTv1 to code BCTs in intervention descriptions. One hundred sixty-one trainees (109 in workshops and 52 in group tutorials) were trained to code frequent BCTs. The following measures were taken before and after training: (i) inter-coder agreement, (ii) trainee agreement with expert consensus, (iii) confidence ratings and (iv) coding competence. Coding was assessed for 12 BCTs (workshops) and for 17 BCTs (tutorials). Trainees completed a course evaluation. Methods improved agreement with expert consensus (p < .05) but not inter-coder agreement (p = .08, p = .57, respectively) and increased confidence for BCTs assessed (both p < .05). Methods were as effective as one another at improving coding competence (p = .55). Training was evaluated positively. The training improved agreement with expert consensus, confidence for BCTs assessed, coding competence but not inter-coder agreement. This varied according to BCT.

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/s13142-014-0290-z

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [2]National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Health systems and health-related behavior change: a review of primary and secondary evidence 2007 London National Institute for Health and Care Excellence

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wood, C. E., Richardson, M., Johnston, M., Abraham, C., Francis, J., Hardeman, W., & Michie, S.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • City, University of London (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Translational Behavioral Medicine
Published
2014-11-19
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
134-148
ISSN
  • 1613-9860 (ISSN-L)
  • 1869-6716
OpenAlex
W2137044719
Cited by
100
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6
FWCI
8.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Translational Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (acceptedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Medical Research Council (G0901474/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
behaviour change techniques, coder training, inter-coder agreement, expert consensus, intervention description, training evaluation

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