Cited by 186Behavioral Health and InterventionsNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorHealth and Lifestyle Studies

Understanding college students’ fruit consumption. Integrating habit strength in the theory of planned behaviour

de Bruijn, Gert-Jan·2010·Appetite

Abstract

The additive and interactive effect of habit strength in the explanation of young adults' fruit consumption was studied within the context of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB). Additionally, behavioural and control beliefs were modelled as predictors of profile membership based on current fruit consumption, motivation and habit strength towards fruit consumption. Cross-sectional data were available from undergraduate students (n=538; mean age=21.19; S.D.=2.57) who completed measures of fruit consumption, habit strength, TPB-concepts, and behavioural and control beliefs. Data were analyzed using stepwise regression analysis, simple slope analysis, and discriminant function analysis. Results showed that, based on a significant intention x habit interaction (beta=.13), the intention-fruit consumption relationship was more than twice as strong at low levels of habit strength (beta=.39) than at high levels of habit strength (beta=.16). Furthermore, beliefs regarding health and weight management were relatively unable to distinguish profiles created from motivation, habit strength and current fruit consumption. Rather, beliefs about controllability of fruit consumption were amongst the most consistent discriminating beliefs. Findings suggest that stronger fruit consumption habits make fruit consumption less intentional and that interventions aiming to increase fruit consumption may need to develop persuasive messages focusing on situational beliefs, rather than emphasizing health outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.appet.2009.08.007

Cites

50 of 50 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.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
de Bruijn, G.-J.
Venue
Appetite
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-02
Volume
54
Issue
1
Pages
16-22
ISSN
0195-6663 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2102120235
Cited by
186
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 12
FWCI
12.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Appetite (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • 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 Lifestyle Studies
Keywords
fruit consumption, habit strength, theory of planned behavior, university students, young adults, behavioral beliefs, control beliefs, intention, motivation, health beliefs, persuasive messages, dietary behavior change
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude to Health, Cross-Sectional Studies, Feeding Behavior, Female, Fruit, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Motivation, Netherlands, Psychological Theory, Surveys and Questionnaires, Students, Health Behavior, Discriminant Analysis, Comprehension, Intention, Young Adult

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