Can protection motivation theory predict behaviour? A longitudinal test exploring the role of previous behaviour
Abstract
The sufficiency of variables specified by Protection Motivation Theory (Rogers, 1975; 1983) in accounting for performance of breast self-examination was tested in a longitudinal survey. Behaviour was assessed by self-report at a one month follow-up. Intention to perform B.S.E. was associated with coping appraisal, but not threat appraisal. Multivariate analysis showed that self efficacy was a significant independent predictor of B.S.E intentions. Time one intention significantly predicted behaviour at time two. The inclusion of previous behaviour added significantly to the prediction of both intention and behaviour, suggesting that protection motivation theory variables sufficiently explain neither the development of protection motivation nor the translation of intention into action. The results highlight the need for future research to address volitional and self-regulatory processes governing the mediation of previous and future behaviour.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Previous research has indicated a positive impact of past behaviour on intention and future health behaviours.
“Previous research has also indicated the positive impact of past behaviour on intention and future health behaviours,15,16”
From Identifying the key barriers, facilitators and factors associated with cervical cancer screening attendance in young women: A systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [15]
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Shpendi, S., Norman, P., Gibson-Miller, J., & Webster, R. (2025) · Women's Health · doi:10.1177/17455057251324309 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“13,14 Previous research has also indicated the positive impact of past behaviour on intention and future health behaviours, 15,16 underscoring the importance of initial screening attendance and experiences and the effect on subsequent screening attendance.”
- Authors
- Hodgkins, S., & Orbell, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Sheffield (GB)
- ORCID
- Orbell, Sheina
- Venue
- Psychology & Health
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1998-04
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 237-250
- ISSN
- 0887-0446 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-8321
- OpenAlex
- W2047515173
- Cited by
- 119
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 3.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychology and Health (publishedVersion)
- Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Wellbeing Research
- Keywords
- protection motivation theory, breast self-examination, intention-behavior gap, self-efficacy, coping appraisal, threat appraisal, intention-behavior relationship, self-regulation
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
