Improving fruit and vegetable consumption: a self-efficacy intervention compared with a combined self-efficacy and planning intervention
Abstract
Effects of interventions targeting self-efficacy alone or combined with action plans were examined in the context of fruit and vegetable consumption. E-mail messages were sent to a self-efficacy group, a combined self-efficacy and action planning group and a control group. At a 6-month follow-up, 200 adults reported their fruit and vegetable consumption, along with current levels of self-efficacy and planning. The two experimental groups gained equally from the interventions, as documented by changes in behavior. In both intervention groups, change in respective cognitions predicted change in fruit and vegetable consumption. Parsimonious interventions might contribute to health behavior change.
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?
The majority of studies do not assess the mechanism for an intervention's success.
“Given that the majority of studies do not assess the mechanism for an intervention’s success [32]”
Other intervention studies applying planning techniques found changes in self-regulatory skills over short and long periods.
“This is comparable to other intervention studies that have applied planning techniques, in which changes in self-regulatory skills were found over a short [30, 31] and long period of time [32].”
This is the first study to show that a planning technique within a habit intervention improves self-regulatory skills.
“However, this is the first study to show that a planning technique within a habit intervention improves self-regulatory skills.”
The finding that changes in self-regulation and automaticity mediate the intervention effect suggests the intervention works as intended.
“Given that the majority of studies do not assess the mechanism for an intervention’s success [32], this is an important finding which suggests the intervention works as it is intended to.”
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 30 · Cited by 231
- Authors
- Luszczynska, A., Tryburcy, M., & Schwarzer, R.
- Affiliations
- Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
- ORCID
- Schwarzer, R.
- Venue
- Health Education Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-10-23
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 630-638
- ISSN
- 0268-1153 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-3648
- OpenAlex
- W2164589399
- Cited by
- 231
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 11.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Health Education Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Media Influence and Health
- Keywords
- fruit and vegetable intake, self-efficacy, action planning, health behavior change, dietary behavior, cognitive change
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Cognition, Diet, Female, Fruit, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Vegetables, Self Efficacy, Intention, Electronic Mail
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
