Using the Health Belief Model to Explain Mothers’ and Fathers’ Intention to Participate in Universal Parenting Programs

Using the Health Belief Model (HBM) as a theoretical framework, we studied factors related to parental intention to participate in parenting programs and examined the moderating effects of parent gender on these factors. Participants were a community sample of 290 mothers and 290 fathers of 5- to 10-year-old children. Parents completed a set of questionnaires assessing child emotional and behavioral difficulties and the HBM constructs concerning perceived program benefits and barriers, perceived child problem susceptibility and severity, and perceived self-efficacy. The hypothesized model was evaluated using structural equation modeling. The results showed that, for both mothers and fathers, perceived program benefits were associated with higher intention to participate in parenting programs. In addition, higher intention to participate was associated with lower perceived barriers only in the sample of mothers and with higher perceived self-efficacy only in the sample of fathers. No significant relations were found between intention to participate and perceived child problem susceptibility and severity. Mediation analyses indicated that, for both mothers and fathers, child emotional and behavioral problems had an indirect effect on parents’ intention to participate by increasing the level of perceived benefits of the program. As a whole, the proposed model explained about 45 % of the variance in parental intention to participate. The current study suggests that mothers and fathers may be motivated by different factors when making their decision to participate in a parenting program. This finding can inform future parent engagement strategies intended to increase both mothers’ and fathers’ participation rates in parenting programs. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11121-016-0696-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.


Analyses of Measurement Equivalence
All models based on N = 570 (N = 284 fathers and N = 286 mothers) WLSMV χ 2 = chi-square statistic from the robust weighted least squares estimator, df = degrees of freedom, CFI = comparative fit index, RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation, CI = confidence interval, SDQ = Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire ***p < .001 a as compared with the free estimated model b as compared with the metric equivalence model c subsequent tests did not provide support for partial scalar invariance Table A1 The SDQ The analysis indicated that the 5-factor, 17-item model fitted the data satisfactorily for both mothers and fathers. Eight items needed to be removed from the original model due to insignificant factor loadings or lack of associations with other items. 1 The results supported partial metric invariance across mothers and fathers. 2

Summary of the results presented in
The perceived benefits scale The analysis indicated that the 1-factor, 11-item model showed satisfactory fit for both mothers and fathers. The results supported full metric and partial scalar invariance across mothers and fathers.
The perceived barriers scale The analysis indicated that the 3-factor, 7-item model fitted the data well for both fathers and mothers. One item needed to be removed from the model, due to insignificant factor loading. 1 The results supported full metric and scalar invariance across mothers and fathers.
The perceived severity scale The CFA revealed that the 2-factor, 9-item model fitted the data well for both fathers and mothers. One item needed to be removed from the model due to insignificant factor loadings. 1 The results supported full metric and scalar invariance across mothers and fathers.
The perceived susceptibility scale The analysis showed that the 2-factor, 9-item model fitted the data well for both fathers and mothers. One item needed to be removed from the model due to insignificant factor loadings. 1 The results supported full metric and scalar invariance across mothers and fathers.
The perceived self-efficacy scale The analysis indicated that the 1-factor, 7-item model fitted the data well for both groups. Three items needed to be removed for the models due to insignificant factor loadings. The results supported full metric and scalar invariance across mothers and fathers.
2. I can reduce the risk of my child developing problem behaviors later in life.
3. I will learn to encourage positive behavior in my child.
4. I will have a better relationship with my child.
5. I will learn to handle problems that my child may have.
6. I can help my child be more self-confident.
7. I can help my child do better at school.
8. My child will be less likely to have problems as a teenager.
9. I will be a better parent.
10. I will feel more confident as a parent.
11. I will have more tools to use while parenting. There are many reasons why parents might not attend a parenting program. Below is a list of some common ones. For each item, please indicate how much it would stop you from attending.
5. I can't attend meetings that are held in the evenings.
6. The meetings clash with other activities (e.g., my work or my child's sport activities).