An Attributional Model Applied to Health Behaviour Change

Abstract

Weiner's (1986) attributional model was adapted to a study of health behaviour change among hospital workers (N=102). It was predicted that, following success or failure, attributions would influence affective reactions and efficacy expectation, which in turn would influence intention, which in turn would influence subsequent performance. In year 1 and year 2, subjects rated their current performance, efficacy expectation, and intention to perform each of ten behaviours. In year 2, they indicated whether they had succeeded or failed in relation to each year 1 intention. They selected their greatest success and their greatest failure, and for both of these completed measures of attributions and affective reactions. In regression analyses, attributional dimensions did predict affective reactions, efficacy (in the failure condition), and intention (in the success condition). However, many of the specific associations were not what Weiner's model would hypothesize. The personal controllability dimension was particularly prominent as a predictor. Also of note were the interactive effects of attributional dimensions, always involving the stability dimension.

Attributions and Self-regulatory Efficacy for Health-related Physical Activity

“…While identification of these attributional causes was deemed important, it was further argued by Weiner (1986) that the underlying dimensions of the causes, conceptualized in terms of the dimensions of locus of causality, controllability and stability, were the key factors influencing emotions, motivation and expectations of future outcomes. Research in physical activity and health areas have provided some support for Weiner's model (Courneya & McAuley, 1993Ingledew, Hardy, & Cooper, 1996;McAuley, 1991;Shields, Brawley, & Lindover, 2005. Further, research examining attributions and self-efficacy in the activity setting has found a positive relationship between the two constructs (McAuley, 1991).…”

“…Although the relationships among constructs from both self-efficacy theory and attribution theory have received some support in previous exercise studies, with the exception of a few studies (e.g. Ingledew et al, 1996), the behaviours of interest were primarily concerned with adherence to prescribed activity programmes (e.g. McAuley, 1991) or exercise frequency (e.g.…”

Varying the cause of a challenge to exercise identity behaviour: Reactions of individuals of differing identity strength

“…outcome-dependent affect), with successful outcomes associated with more positive emotions McAuley, 1993, 1996;Nickel and Spink, in press). Similarly, attribution-dependent affect relationships also have emerged in activity settings wherein attributional dimensions have been associated with emotions (Ingledew et al, 1996;McAuley, 1991;McAuley et al, 1990;Nickel and Spink, in press).…”

The main and interactive effects of immediate and reflective attributions upon subsequent self‐efficacy

“…For instance, attributing failures to uncontrollable causes may only lead to lower levels of self-efficacy when causes are also stable (unlikely to change), or global (likely to affect a wide range of situations), or personal (unique to the individual) (Rees et al, 2005). Although main effects for attribution dimensions upon selfefficacy have been reported (e.g., Gernigon & Delloye, 2003), only a few studies (e.g., Ingledew, Hardy, & Cooper, 1996) have examined their interactive relationships (see Carver, 1989). Such interactions may be of great relevance to sport.…”

“…A number of problems have been levelled at the CDSII. Using confirmatory factor analysis, Crocker and colleagues (Crocker, Eklund, & Graham, 2002) and Ingledew et al (1996) reported poor fits for the CDSII with an individual sport sample and with hospital workers in a failure condition, respectively. These results suggest that there is cause for concern regarding the factor structure of the CDSII.…”