2015
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00122
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cognitive control and the non-conscious regulation of health behavior

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
17
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…(see Schwarzer, 2014;Sniehotta, Presseau, & Araújo-Soares, 2014) as it does to the development of new methods to tap implicit processes (Nosek & Banaji, 2001;Nosek, Greenwald, & Banaji, 2007) and research disciplines that have attempted to identify the neural correlates of action (Heatherton, 2011;Rebar, Loftus, & Hagger, 2015). Measures such as the implicit association test (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000) and research using neuroscientific methods to explore brain function and social action (Heatherton & Wagner, 2011) have all contributed to the proliferation of research into non-conscious determinants of action and the increased detail and sophistication of dualprocess models of behaviour in social contexts.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(see Schwarzer, 2014;Sniehotta, Presseau, & Araújo-Soares, 2014) as it does to the development of new methods to tap implicit processes (Nosek & Banaji, 2001;Nosek, Greenwald, & Banaji, 2007) and research disciplines that have attempted to identify the neural correlates of action (Heatherton, 2011;Rebar, Loftus, & Hagger, 2015). Measures such as the implicit association test (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000) and research using neuroscientific methods to explore brain function and social action (Heatherton & Wagner, 2011) have all contributed to the proliferation of research into non-conscious determinants of action and the increased detail and sophistication of dualprocess models of behaviour in social contexts.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This study, as a pilot study, did not incorporate testing of automatic or non-conscious self-regulatory processes. A complete conceptualization of self-regulatory capacity must include more basic, automatic aspects of self-control (52,53). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the model variables fail to explain any unique variance in behaviour, then it suggests that habit or behavioural frequency is the sole determinant of behaviour rendering the model redundant as it provides no explanatory value above past behavioural frequency (Ajzen 2002b;Ouellette and Wood 1998). In such cases behaviour may either be a function of habitual or automatic processes or some other unmeasured constructs unaccounted for by the redundant model (Gardner 2015;Hagger et al 2015;Rebar et al 2015).…”
Section: Behavioural Adherencementioning
confidence: 91%
“…This design meant that we could explicitly model the unique effects of the psychological constructs on behaviour change independent of habit and automatic processes that are likely to be accounted for by the effects of past behaviour (Gardner 2015;Hagger et al 2015;Rebar et al 2015). However, future studies should adopt randomised controlled designs that test whether the manipulation of the autonomy support of lecturers may lead to changes in motivational, social cognitive, and behavioural outcomes proposed in the model (Hagger andChatzisarantis 2009a, 2012).…”
Section: Limitation and Future Directionsmentioning
confidence: 93%