|Appears in Collections:||Psychology Journal Articles|
|Title:||Form of delivery as a key ‘active ingredient’ in behaviour change interventions (Editorial)|
|Author(s):||Dombrowski, Stephan U|
|Citation:||Dombrowski SU, O'Carroll R & Williams B (2016) Form of delivery as a key ‘active ingredient’ in behaviour change interventions (Editorial), British Journal of Health Psychology, 21 (4), pp. 733-740. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12203.|
|Abstract:||First paragraph: The form of delivery (FoD) is a vital part of any behaviour change intervention and not merely a by-product of operationalising theory and behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Behaviour change interventions consist of three broad groups of interconnected components: (1) BCTs (i.e., the content of the intervention); (2) theory (i.e., the processes throughwhich the intervention is believed to influence behaviour); and (3) the FoD (i.e., the way in which the intervention is delivered). Behaviour change science has made significant progress in specifying BCTs (Abraham & Michie, 2008; Michie et al., 2013), and understanding the behaviour change processes (Hall & Fong, 2010; Rothman, Sheeran, & Wood, 2009; Strack & Deutsch, 2004; West, 2006), with healthy critical debates helping advance theoretical innovation and testing (Sniehotta, Presseau, & Araujo-Soares, 2013). Some BCTs and associated theories specify some FoD elements. For instance, financial incentives and learning theory make several predictions about scheduling (Johnston, 2016). However, the majority of FoD elements and features are insufficiently specified to allow full operationalization and replication of an intervention (see Adams, Giles, McColl, & Sniehotta, 2014 for the example of financial incentives).|
|Rights:||The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.|
|British Journal of Health Psychology 2016 Domb.pdf||Fulltext - Published Version||148.59 kB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 2999-12-06 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.