CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 435Behavioral Health and InterventionsSmoking Behavior and CessationHealth and Wellbeing Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How to Overcome Health-Compromising Behaviors: The Health Action Process Approach

Schwarzer, Ralf, Luszczynska, Aleksandra·2008·European Psychologist
DOI 10.1027/1016-9040.13.2.141
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Health-compromising behaviors such as cigarette smoking and poor dietary habits are difficult to change. Most social-cognitive theories assume that the intention to change is the best predictor of actual change, but people often do not behave in accordance with their intentions. Unforeseen barriers emerge, or people give in to temptations. Therefore, intentions should be supplemented by more proximal predictors that might facilitate the translation of intentions into action. Some self-regulatory mediators have been identified, such as perceived self-efficacy and strategic planning. They help to bridge the intention-behavior gap. The Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) suggests a distinction between (1) a preintentional motivation process that leads to a behavioral intention and (2) a postintentional volition process that facilitates the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors. In this article, two studies are reported that examine mediators between intentions and two behaviors. One behavior is smoking reduction in young adults, the other is dietary restraint in overweight patients with chronic disease. A structural equation model, specified in terms of the HAPA, was in line with both data sets but it explained more variance of dietary behaviors among middle-aged or older individuals with a health condition whereas variance of smoking reduction in healthy young adults was less well accounted for. The findings contribute to the elucidation of psychological mechanisms in health behavior change and point to the particular role of mediator variables.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1027/1016-9040.13.2.141

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 58 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Abraham C., 2000, Understanding and changing health behavior, 3
  2. Arbuckle J.L., 2003, Amos 5.0 user guide
  3. Luszczynska A., 2005, Predicting health behavior, 127

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 435

Related

Metadata

Authors
Schwarzer, R., & Luszczynska, A.
Affiliations
  • Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
  • University of Sussex, UK, and Warsaw School of Social Psychology, Poland
ORCID
Schwarzer, Ralf
Venue
European Psychologist
Publisher
Hogrefe Publishing Group
Published
2008-01
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
141-151
ISSN
  • 1016-9040 (ISSN-L)
  • 1878-531X
DOI
10.1027/1016-9040.13.2.141
OpenAlex
W1917734991
Cited by
424
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 12
FWCI
10.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
European Psychologist (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Wellbeing Research
Keywords
Health Action Process Approach, intention-behavior gap, smoking reduction, dietary restraint, self-efficacy, strategic planning, volition, health behavior change, young adults, overweight patients, chronic disease

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