桥接锻炼意向与行为鸿沟的研究与思考
详细信息 查看官网全文
- 英文论文题名：Reaserch and reflection on bridging the intention-behavior gap in physical activities
- 论文作者：程程 ; 毛志雄
- 英文论文作者：Cheng Cheng ; Mao Zhi-xiong ; Beijing Sport University
- 年：2015
- 作者机构：北京体育大学;北京体育大学运动心理教研室;
- 论文关键词：意向-行为鸿沟 ; 身体活动 ; 理论模型 ; 行为影响因素
- 英文论文关键词：intention-behavior gap ; physical activity ; theoretical model ; determinant of behavior
- 会议召开时间：2015-10-16
- 会议录名称：第十八届全国心理学学术会议摘要集——心理学与社会发展
- 英文会议录名称：Proceedings of the 18th National Academic Congress of Psychology
- 语种：中文
- 分类号：G804.8
- 学会代码：ZGXG
- 会议名称：第十八届全国心理学学术会议
- 会议地点：中国天津
- 主办单位：中国心理学会
- 学会名称：中国心理学会
- 页数：2
- 文件大小：767k
- 原文格式：D
- 会议级别：全国
摘要
本文针对身体活动或锻炼行为中知而不行的问题,在分析了国内外近五年文献的基础上,将它们分为预测性研究、分类研究和实验干预研究,并将桥接意向-行为的影响因素分为人格、动机因素、社会环境因素、习惯、自我效能、自我认同、技能水平和意志因素八种类型,并具体分析每一研究类型下弥补意向-行为鸿沟的方法及行为的影响因素。预测性研究是最主要的研究类型,有加入新变量的原始模型检验和意向-行为间第三变量检验两种方式。以往研究使用到的理论模型有:计划行为理论(TPB)、健康行为过程取向理论(HAPA)、自我决定理论(SDT)和保护动机理论(PMT)。TPB因其简洁和易操作的特点依然是模型研究的热点,过往研究加入了习惯、自我认同、个体内动机因素和意志因素来提高模型的解释力,但较之第三变量检验,缺乏对新变量在模型中具体位置的研究;每种理论模型都各有优缺,因此可以长短互补的整合模型也受到了研究者的青睐,通过对比发现HAPA行动计划和应对计划对行为的解释力要大于SDT动机因素;第三变量的检验已从单一的调节或中介变量检验向复杂的调节式中介或中介式调节的第三变量交互作用的方向发展,检验的中介变量均来自意志因素,计划在意向-行为间的部分中介作用更成为调节式中介研究的基础,这为起部分中介作用的变量提供了深化研究的思路。分类研究使用判别函数分析方法,检验加入新变量后是否提高了对成功意向者的识别,从一个新的角度检验了新变量是否提高了锻炼行为的解释力。加入习惯或自我认同单一的影响变量只能平均正确区分57.7%的实际行动者,需要至少再加入一个其他影响因素。实验干预研究可能因其实验操纵的难度,在三类文献中数量最少,关于执行意向的实验干预研究开始受到重视,但对6个月后干预效果的结论存在不一致。最后本文提出了未来研究可以借鉴的两个新兴模型:熟虑-冲动模型和社会生态模型,用以弥补传统行为模型中忽略自动化加工和身体活动环境变量的缺陷,以及提出应该在未来深化研究执行意向的机制及其调节变量。
This paper focuses on solving the problem that people know exercise is good, but they do not follow through their good intention. Based on the analysis of domestic and foreign literature in the past five years, all researches are divided into three categories: prediction study, classification study and experimental intervention study. Determinants of exercise behaviors are separated into eight types: personality factors, motivational factors, social environment factors, habit, self-efficacy, self-identity, levels of skill and volitional factors. After that it makes a detailed analysis of specific methods and factors to implement intention-behavior gap in each type of studies. Through adding a new variable into previous models and testing the third variables between intention-behavior, these two ways help the main prediction studies to bridging the gap. The theoretical models employed in the literature are: Theory of Planned Behavior(TPB), The Health Action Process Approach(HAPA), Self-Determination Theory(SDT) and Protection Motivation Theory(PMT). TPB is still the most favorable model because of its simplicity and ease of operation. Previous studies add habit strength, self-identity, within-person motivational factors and volitional factors to increase the explanatory power of models, but in the absence of researches about specific location of new variables in the models and its additional contributions; all theories have their own strengths and limitations, so integration of two models has also been favored by researchers. After comparison it is found that integrating action planning and coping planning of HAPA have greater explanatory power than motivational factors in SDT; The third variable model change from a single moderator or mediator test to complex moderated mediation test or mediated moderation test. All mediators in single mediation model come from volitional factors. Especially that moderated mediation models are based on partial mediation effects of planning. It provides an inspiration for the other mediators that play the same partial mediation effects between intention and behavior. Classification studies use discriminant function analysis to test whether it correctly classifies more successful intenders after adding a new variable. They are to test whether new variables increase the explanatory power of exercise behavior from another perspective. Adding habit or self-identity into intention-behavior profiling only correctly classifies average 57.7% of cases, and therefore at least another factor are needed. Experimental Intervention studies are the least well-researched. Among them, implementation intention starts to receive recognition, but whether it could be still working after six months does not reach a consistency. Finally, it proposes two new models for future research—reflective-impulsive model and social ecological model—to make up for the drawbacks in traditional behavioral models, as well as put forward that researches on mechanism of implementation intention and its moderators should fully analyzed in the future.
This paper focuses on solving the problem that people know exercise is good, but they do not follow through their good intention. Based on the analysis of domestic and foreign literature in the past five years, all researches are divided into three categories: prediction study, classification study and experimental intervention study. Determinants of exercise behaviors are separated into eight types: personality factors, motivational factors, social environment factors, habit, self-efficacy, self-identity, levels of skill and volitional factors. After that it makes a detailed analysis of specific methods and factors to implement intention-behavior gap in each type of studies. Through adding a new variable into previous models and testing the third variables between intention-behavior, these two ways help the main prediction studies to bridging the gap. The theoretical models employed in the literature are: Theory of Planned Behavior(TPB), The Health Action Process Approach(HAPA), Self-Determination Theory(SDT) and Protection Motivation Theory(PMT). TPB is still the most favorable model because of its simplicity and ease of operation. Previous studies add habit strength, self-identity, within-person motivational factors and volitional factors to increase the explanatory power of models, but in the absence of researches about specific location of new variables in the models and its additional contributions; all theories have their own strengths and limitations, so integration of two models has also been favored by researchers. After comparison it is found that integrating action planning and coping planning of HAPA have greater explanatory power than motivational factors in SDT; The third variable model change from a single moderator or mediator test to complex moderated mediation test or mediated moderation test. All mediators in single mediation model come from volitional factors. Especially that moderated mediation models are based on partial mediation effects of planning. It provides an inspiration for the other mediators that play the same partial mediation effects between intention and behavior. Classification studies use discriminant function analysis to test whether it correctly classifies more successful intenders after adding a new variable. They are to test whether new variables increase the explanatory power of exercise behavior from another perspective. Adding habit or self-identity into intention-behavior profiling only correctly classifies average 57.7% of cases, and therefore at least another factor are needed. Experimental Intervention studies are the least well-researched. Among them, implementation intention starts to receive recognition, but whether it could be still working after six months does not reach a consistency. Finally, it proposes two new models for future research—reflective-impulsive model and social ecological model—to make up for the drawbacks in traditional behavioral models, as well as put forward that researches on mechanism of implementation intention and its moderators should fully analyzed in the future.
引文