Behavior Change Techniques and Their Mechanisms of Action: A Synthesis of Links Described in Published Intervention Literature

Abstract Background Despite advances in behavioral science, there is no widely shared understanding of the “mechanisms of action” (MoAs) through which individual behavior change techniques (BCTs) have their effects. Cumulative progress in the development, evaluation, and synthesis of behavioral inte...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of behavioral medicine 2018-10, Vol.53 (8), p.693-707
Hauptverfasser: Carey, Rachel N, Connell, Lauren E, Johnston, Marie, Rothman, Alexander J, de Bruin, Marijn, Kelly, Michael P, Michie, Susan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Background Despite advances in behavioral science, there is no widely shared understanding of the “mechanisms of action” (MoAs) through which individual behavior change techniques (BCTs) have their effects. Cumulative progress in the development, evaluation, and synthesis of behavioral interventions could be improved by identifying the MoAs through which BCTs are believed to bring about change. Purpose This study aimed to identify the links between BCTs and MoAs described by authors of a corpus of published literature. Methods Hypothesized links between BCTs and MoAs were extracted by two coders from 277 behavior change intervention articles. Binomial tests were conducted to provide an indication of the relative frequency of each link. Results Of 77 BCTs coded, 70 were linked to at least one MoA. Of 26 MoAs, all but one were linked to at least one BCT. We identified 2,636 BCT–MoA links in total (mean number of links per article = 9.56, SD = 13.80). The most frequently linked MoAs were “Beliefs about Capabilities” and “Intention.” Binomial test results identified up to five MoAs linked to each of the BCTs (M = 1.71, range: 1–5) and up to eight BCTs for each of the MoAs (M = 3.63, range: 1–8). Conclusions The BCT–MoA links described by intervention authors and identified in this extensive review present intervention developers and reviewers with a first level of systematically collated evidence. These findings provide a resource for the development of theory-based interventions, and for theoretical understanding of intervention evaluations. The extent to which these links are empirically supported requires systematic investigation. This study produced a large dataset of hypothesised links between behaviour change techniques and the processes through which they change behaviour, as described in a set of published research reports. These findings can be used in the design of behaviour change interventions, and in furthering our understanding of how interventions have their effects.
ISSN:0883-6612
1532-4796
DOI:10.1093/abm/kay078