Known knowns and known unknowns on behavior change interventions and mechanisms of action

Abstract

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses play an important role in summarizing current research on the efficacy of behavior change interventions and their mechanisms of action. The reviews in this special issue represent a 'step change' in evaluating current evidence on behavior change interventions and mechanisms. This article outlines the findings and emerging issues identified in the reviews ('known knowns'), and summarizes evidence gaps to be addressed in future research ('known unknowns'). Findings indicate that tests of mechanisms of behavior change interventions are not routinely conducted in primary studies and research syntheses; reviews and studies do not sufficiently account for study quality; substantive variability exists in descriptions of intervention content and putative mediators implicated in their mechanisms of action; limited data is available on the efficacy of many behavior change techniques; and moderators of intervention effects and mechanisms are seldom taken into account. Possible solutions include testing effects of isolated behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action; routine evaluation of study quality in behavioral intervention research; development of an evidence base linking behavior change techniques with theory-based constructs that comprise mechanisms of action; adoption of fit-for-purpose methods for synthesizing behavioral intervention mechanisms of action; and routine testing of moderators in intervention research.

Using an integrated social cognition model to predict COVID‐19 preventive behaviours

“…Current findings may contribute to efforts to increase populationlevel participation in preventive behaviours by signposting the constructs that should be targeted in behavioural interventions. Research that identifies constructs that are reliably related to behaviour form an important part of the process by which interventionists develop behavioural interventions (Hagger, Moyers, McAnally, & McKinley, 2020;Rothman, Klein, & Sheeran, 2020). This can be coupled with recent research that has linked these constructs with sets of methods or techniques purported to change them based on theory and previous evidence.…”

The common sense model of illness self-regulation: a conceptual review and proposed extended model

“…Detecting, processing, and responding to information signaling a potential threat to health are fundamental processes that are not only necessary for maintenance of everyday functioning, but for survival. Understanding these processes is a priority concern for healthcare organizations interested in developing models of care aimed at promoting health, and preventing and managing illness (Hagger, Moyers, et al, 2020;Johnson & Acabchuk, 2018;Leventhal et al, 2008). As illness management moves away from inpatient care to selfmanagement, patients bear an increasing burden of the responsibility for their own treatment.…”

Predicting Change in Middle School Students’ Leisure-Time Physical Activity Participation: A Prospective Test of the Trans-Contextual Model

“…Researchers in behavioral science and applied psychology have, consequently, adopted psychological theories and models to predict and understand PA participation in young people, with the view of identifying the potential targets for intervention (Hagger, Cameron, Hamilton, Hankonen, & Lintunen, 2020;Hagger, Moyers, McAnally, & McKinley, 2020;Sheeran, Klein, & Rothman, 2017). In addition to identifying these targets, researchers have also been mindful of the key contexts, in which interventions to promote PA will have maximum benefit and reach (Messing et al, 2019).…”