Cited by 1,604Behavioral Health and InterventionsMedia Influence and HealthHealth and Wellbeing Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Health Belief Model Variables in Predicting Behavior

Carpenter, Christopher J.·2010·Health Communication

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The Health Belief Model (HBM; Rosenstock, 1966) was constructed to explain which beliefs should be targeted in communication campaigns to cause positive health behaviors. The model specifies that if individuals perceive a negative health outcome to be severe, perceive themselves to be susceptible to it, perceive the benefits to behaviors that reduce the likelihood of that outcome to be high, and perceive the barriers to adopting those behaviors to be low, then the behavior is likely for those individuals. A meta-analysis of 18 studies (2,702 subjects) was conducted to determine whether measures of these beliefs could longitudinally predict behavior. Benefits and barriers were consistently the strongest predictors. The length of time between measurement of the HBM beliefs and behavior, prevention versus treatment behaviors, and drug-taking regimens versus other behaviors were identified as moderators of the HBM variables' predictive power. Based on the weakness of two of the predictors, the continued use of the direct effects version of the HBM is not recommended.

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 · 10.1080/10410236.2010.521906

Cites

36 of 36 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 37 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 999

Metadata

Authors
Carpenter, C. J.
Affiliations
Western Illinois University (US)
Corresponding author
Carpenter, Christopher J.
Venue
Health Communication
Published
2010-11-30
Volume
25
Issue
8
Pages
661-669
ISSN
  • 1041-0236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7027
OpenAlex
W2102635611
Cited by
1,604
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 138 · 2025: 133 · 2024: 118 · 2023: 173 · 2022: 166 · 2021: 190 · 2020: 164 · 2019: 108 · 2018: 75 · 2017: 78 · 2016: 93 · 2015: 53 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 24
FWCI
2.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health Communication (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media Influence and Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Wellbeing Research
Keywords
Health Belief Model, health behavior prediction, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, health campaigns, longitudinal prediction
MeSH terms
Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Models, Psychological, Health Behavior, Health Communication

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