BackgroundMobile technology gives researchers unimagined opportunities to design new interventions to increase physical activity. Unfortunately, it is still unclear which elements are useful to initiate and maintain behavior change.ObjectiveIn this meta-analysis, we investigated randomized controlled trials of physical activity interventions that were delivered via mobile phone. We analyzed which elements contributed to intervention success.MethodsAfter searching four databases and science networks for eligible studies, we entered 50 studies with N=5997 participants into a random-effects meta-analysis, controlling for baseline group differences. We also calculated meta-regressions with the most frequently used behavior change techniques (behavioral goals, general information, self-monitoring, information on where and when, and instructions on how to) as moderators.ResultsWe found a small overall effect of the Hedges g=0.29, (95% CI 0.20 to 0.37) which reduced to g=0.22 after correcting for publication bias. In the moderator analyses, behavioral goals and self-monitoring each led to more intervention success. Interventions that used neither behavioral goals nor self-monitoring had a negligible effect of g=0.01, whereas utilizing either technique increased effectiveness by Δg=0.31, but combining them did not provide additional benefits (Δg=0.36).ConclusionsOverall, mHealth interventions to increase physical activity have a small to moderate effect. However, including behavioral goals or self-monitoring can lead to greater intervention success. More research is needed to look at more behavior change techniques and their interactions. Reporting interventions in trial registrations and articles need to be structured and thorough to gain accurate insights. This can be achieved by basing the design or reporting of interventions on taxonomies of behavior change.

No abstract

Stereotypes have pervasive, robust, and often unwanted effects on how people see and behave towards others. Undoing these effects has proven to be a daunting task. Two studies demonstrate that procedurally priming participants to engage in comparative thinking with a generalized focus on differences reduces behavioral and judgmental stereotyping effects. In Study 1, participants who were procedurally primed to focus on differences sat closer to a skinhead – a member of a negatively stereotyped group. In Study 2, participants primed on differences ascribed less gender stereotypic characteristics to a male and female target person. This suggests that comparative thinking with a focus on differences may be a simple cognitive tool to reduce the behavioral and judgmental effects of stereotyping

No abstract

Just observing other people can influence what we do. Under certain conditions, it inspires us to strive for the same goal as the other person. Such goal contagion occurs, because one first automatically infers the goal and then adopts it for oneself. In a series of three experiments (overall N = 840 university students), we investigated personal goal value and the observed person’s effort as moderators of goal contagion, which is mediated by goal inference. In all three experiments, participants read a brief story about a student who either wants to earn money (target goal) or to do an internship (control) and expects to show much or little effort. In Studies 1a and b, goal inference was the dependent variable, whereas in Study 2, we considered the full moderated-mediation model and measured how strongly participants pursue the goal to earn money. We aimed at locating the moderators within this two-step process. We hypothesized that high effort increases goal inference, whereas personal goal value strengthens the relationship between goal inference and goal adoption. Across experiments, we did find evidence for explicit and spontaneous, but not for implicit goal inference. Furthermore, participants did not pursue to earn money to a different degree across conditions and different degrees of goal value. Taken together, neither the moderated-mediation process nor the basic goal contagion effect was supported. Results are discussed in the light of other published studies on goal contagion and the current Replication Crisis.