Advertisement

International Journal of Public Health

, Volume 56, Issue 1, pp 97–105 | Cite as

Evaluating the decisional balance construct of the Transtheoretical Model: are two dimensions of pros and cons really enough?

  • Chantal Kroll
  • Roger Keller
  • Urte Scholz
  • Sonja Perren
Original Article

Abstract

Objectives

The Transtheoretical Model of behavior change (TTM) postulates that behavior change is a process involving progress through five distinct stages of change (SOC). One of the key components for progress to a later stage is decisional balance (pros and cons of changing to the target behavior). The goal of the present study is to test the two dimensions of decisional balance as postulated in the TTM in the context of exercising behavior.

Methods

The analyses are based on data from an online survey of 266 freshman students at the University of Zurich; participants self-reported their frequency of exercising and their weighing of the importance of 49 pros and cons of exercising.

Results

The results indicate that a two-dimensional solution of decisional balance is insufficient. The analysis of pros and cons of exercising yielded a seven-factor solution with in part different progressions through the SOC.

Conclusions

With the subdivision into different pros and cons, intervention programs can be developed that better match the needs of participants in terms of fostering and decreasing the most important pros and cons of exercising.

Keywords

Decisional balance Transtheoretical model Exercise Pros Cons Behavior change 

References

  1. Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Basler HD, Jäkle C, Keller S, Baum E (1999) Selbstwirksamkeit, Entscheidungsbalance und die Motivation zu sportlicher Aktivität—Eine Untersuchung zum transtheoretischen Modell der Vehaltensänderung. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie 20(3):203–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bortz J (1999) Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler (5th revised edn). Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. Cavill N, Kahlmeier S, Racioppi F (2006) Physical activity and health in Europe: evidence for action. World Health Organization, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  5. Fuchs R (2003) Sport, Gesundheit und public health. Hogrefe, GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  6. Janis IL, Mann L (1977) Decision making: a psychological analysis of conflict chance and commitment. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Jordan PJ, Nigg CR, Norman GJ, Rossi JS, Benisovich SV (2002) Does the transtheoretical model need an attitude adjustment? Integrating attitude with decisional balance as predictors of stage of change for exercise. Psychol Sport Exerc 3(1):65–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lamprecht M, Stamm H (2006) Bewegung, Sport, Gesundheit. Fakten und Trends aus den Schweizerischen Gesundheitsbefragungen 1992, 1997, 2002. Bundesamt für Statistik, NeuchâtelGoogle Scholar
  9. Marcus BH, Rakowski W, Rossi JS (1992) Assessing motivational readiness and decision making for exercise. Health Psychol 11(4):257–261CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Myers RS, Roth DL (1997) Perceived benefits of and barriers to exercise and stage of exercise adoption in young adults. Health Psychol 16(3):277–283CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Nigg CR, Courneya KS (1998) Transtheoretical model: examining adolescent exercise behavior. J Adolesc Health 22(4):214–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC (1983) Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. J Consult Clin Psychol 51(3):390–395CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Rossi JS, Goldstein MG, Marcus BH, Rakowski W, Fiore C, Harlow LL, Redding CA, Rosenbloom D (1994) Stages of change and decisional balance for 12 problem behaviors. Health Psychol 13(1):39–46CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Prochaska JO, Redding CA, Evers KE (1997) The transtheoretical model and stages of change. In: Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK (eds) Health behavior and health education. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 60–84Google Scholar
  15. Sallis JF, Owen N (1999) Physical activity and behavioral medicine. SAGE Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  16. Schoenborn CA, Adams PF, Barnes PM, Vickerie JL, Schiller HS (2004) Health behaviors of adults: United States, 1999–2001. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital health Stat 10 219:1–79Google Scholar
  17. Sechrist KR, Walker SN, Pender NJ (1987) Development and psychometric evaluation of the Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale. Res Nurs Health 10(6):357–365CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Sniehotta FF, Scholz U, Schwarzer R (2005) Bridging the intention–behaviour gap: planning, self-efficacy, and action control in the adoption and maintenance of physical exercise. Psychol Health 20(2):143–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sutton S (2001) Back to the drawing board? A review of applications of the transtheoretical model to substance use. Addiction 96:175–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Swiss Federal Statistical Office (2005) Gesundheit und Gesundheitsverhalten in der Schweiz 1992–2002 (Swiss Health Survey 2002), Publication #231-0206. Available via http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/de/index/infothek/publ.html?publicationID=1951. Accessed 6 Oct 2008

Copyright information

© Swiss School of Public Health 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chantal Kroll
    • 1
  • Roger Keller
    • 1
  • Urte Scholz
    • 1
  • Sonja Perren
    • 2
  1. 1.Social and Health Psychology, Department of PsychologyUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Jacobs Center for Productive Youth DevelopmentUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations