The Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy (v1) of 93 Hierarchically Clustered Techniques: Building an International Consensus for the Reporting of Behavior Change Interventions
CONSORT guidelines call for precise reporting of behavior change interventions: we need rigorous methods of characterizing active content of interventions with precision and specificity.
The objective of this study is to develop an extensive, consensually agreed hierarchically structured taxonomy of techniques [behavior change techniques (BCTs)] used in behavior change interventions.
In a Delphi-type exercise, 14 experts rated labels and definitions of 124 BCTs from six published classification systems. Another 18 experts grouped BCTs according to similarity of active ingredients in an open-sort task. Inter-rater agreement amongst six researchers coding 85 intervention descriptions by BCTs was assessed.
This resulted in 93 BCTs clustered into 16 groups. Of the 26 BCTs occurring at least five times, 23 had adjusted kappas of 0.60 or above.
“BCT taxonomy v1,” an extensive taxonomy of 93 consensually agreed, distinct BCTs, offers a step change as a method for specifying interventions, but we anticipate further development and evaluation based on international, interdisciplinary consensus.
KeywordsBehavior change techniques Taxonomy Behavior change interventions
- 1.Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008:337.Google Scholar
- 2.Michie S, Fixsen D, Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP. Specifying and reporting complex behavior change interventions: The need for a scientific method. Implement Sci. 2009;40:1-6.Google Scholar
- 9.Mischel W. Presidential address. Washington: Association for Psychological Science Annual Convention; 2012.Google Scholar
- 13.Michie S, Johnston M. Behavior change techniques. In: Gellman MD, Turner JR, eds. Encyclopedia of behavioral medicine. New York: Springer; 2011.Google Scholar
- 17.Abraham C, Good A, Warren MR, Huedo-Medina T, Johnson B. Developing and testing a SHARP taxonomy of behavior change techniques included in condom promotion interventions. Psychol Health. 2011;26(Supplement 2):299.Google Scholar
- 18.Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, et al. Audit and feedback: Effects on professional practice and patient outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; (6): CD000259.Google Scholar
- 22.Quinn F. On integrating biomedical and behavioral approaches to activity limitation with chronic pain: Testing integrated models between and within persons. Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen; 2010.Google Scholar
- 23.Cahill K, Moher M, Lancaster T. Workplace interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008; (4): CD003440.Google Scholar
- 25.Dixon D, Johnston M. Health behavior change competency framework: Competences to deliver interventions to change lifestyle behaviors that affect health. Edinburgh: Scottish Government; 2012.Google Scholar
- 26.Abraham C. Mapping change mechanisms and behaviour change techniques: A systematic approach to promoting behaviour change through text. In: Abraham C, Kools M, eds. Writing Health Communication: An Evidence-Based Guide for Professionals. London: SAGE Publications; 2011.Google Scholar
- 28.de Bruin M, Viechtbauer W, Hospers HJ, Schaalma HP, Kok G. Standard care quality determines treatment outcomes in control groups of HAART-adherence intervention studies: Implications for the interpretation and comparison of intervention effects. Health Psychol. 2009;28:668-674.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Vandenbos GR. APA dictionary of psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2006.Google Scholar
- 33.Brock G, Pihur V, Datta S, Datta S. Package ‘clvalid’: Validation of clustering results. J Statistical Software. 2008;25:1-22.Google Scholar
- 39.American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Text Revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.Google Scholar
- 40.World Health Organisation. ICD-10 international statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. Geneva, Switzerland: Illu; 1992.Google Scholar
- 41.Miller GA. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Essential Sources in the Scientific Study of Consciousness. Cambridge: A Bradford Book; 2003:357-372.Google Scholar