ORCID Profile
0000-0002-6229-8143
Current Organisation
University of Leeds
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2021
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2017
DOI: 10.1016/J.SOCSCIMED.2017.03.037
Abstract: The question-behaviour effect (QBE) refers to the finding that survey questions about a behaviour can change that behaviour. However, little research has tested how the QBE can be maximized in behavioural medicine settings. The present research tested manipulations of cognitive targets (questions about anticipated regret or beneficence) and survey return rates (presence vs. absence of a sticky note requesting completion of the questionnaire) on the magnitude of the QBE for influenza vaccination in older adults. Participants (N = 13,803) were recruited from general practice and randomly allocated to one of eight conditions: control 1 (no questionnaire) control 2 (demographics questionnaire) intention and attitude questionnaire (with or without a sticky note) intention and attitude plus anticipated regret questionnaire (with or without a sticky note) intention and attitude plus beneficence questionnaire (with or without a sticky note). Objective records of subsequent influenza vaccination from general practice records formed the dependent variable. Intention-to-treat analyses indicated that receiving an influenza vaccination questionnaire significantly increased vaccination rates compared to the no questionnaire, OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.01, 1.36 and combined control conditions, OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.01, 1.25. Including the sticky note significantly increased questionnaire return rates, OR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.04, 1.50. However, there were no differences in vaccination rates between questionnaires containing different cognitive targets, a sticky note or not, and no interactions. There were no significant differences in the per-protocol analyses, i.e. among respondents who completed and returned the questionnaires. The QBE is a simple, low-cost intervention to increase influenza vaccination rates. Increasing questionnaire return rates or asking anticipated regret or beneficence questions in addition to intention and attitude questions did not enhance the QBE.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 16-06-2009
Abstract: The School Fruit and Vegetable Scheme (SFVS) is an important public health intervention. The aim of this scheme is to provide a free piece of fruit and/or vegetable every day for children in Reception to Year 2. When children are no longer eligible for the scheme (from Year 3) their overall fruit and vegetable consumption decreases back to baseline levels. This proposed study aims to design a flexible multi-component intervention for schools to support the maintenance of fruit and vegetable consumption for Year 3 children who are no longer eligible for the scheme. This study is a cluster randomised controlled trial of Year 2 classes from 54 primary schools across England. The schools will be randomly allocated into two groups to receive either an active intervention called Project Tomato, to support maintenance of fruit intake in Year 3 children, or a less active intervention (control group), consisting of a 5 A DAY booklet. Children's diets will be analysed using the Child And Diet Evaluation Tool (CADET), and height and weight measurements collected, at baseline (Year 2) and 18 month follow-up (Year 4). The primary outcome will be the ability of the intervention (Project Tomato) to maintain consumption of fruit and vegetable portions compared to the control group. A positive result will identify how fruit and vegetable consumption can be maintained in young children, and will be useful for policies supporting the SFVS. A negative result would be used to inform the research agenda and contribute to redefining future strategies for increasing children's fruit and vegetable consumption. Medical Research Council Registry code G0501297
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 2019
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 03-2012
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 13-05-2020
Publisher: American Psychological Association (APA)
Date: 2015
DOI: 10.1037/HEA0000143
Abstract: Two measures of affect-affective attitude (AA) and anticipated affective reaction (AAR)-have frequently been used in idually, but rarely simultaneously, in correlational studies predicting health behaviors. This research assessed their in idual and combined impact in predicting intention and action for a range of health behaviors, controlling for theory of planned behavior (TPB) variables. Self-reported intentions and performance of health behaviors were the main outcome measures. Study 1 is a meta-analysis of published studies (k = 16) measuring the relevant variables. In Study 2, adults (N = 426) completed questionnaires assessing TPB variables, past behavior, AA, AAR, and subsequent behavior for a range of health behaviors. Across both studies, AA and AAR were only moderately intercorrelated, although both had significant correlations with both intentions and behavior. AA was a significant predictor of intentions and behavior after controlling for TPB variables (Studies 1 and 2) plus past behavior (Study 2). In Study 1, AAR was a significant predictor of behavior, but not intentions, when controlling for TPB variables. In Study 2, AAR was a significant predictor of intentions when controlling for both TPB variables plus past behavior (Study 2), but was not a significant predictor of behavior when controlling for either of these variables. Several relationships were moderated by health-behavior category. Both AA and AAR are important predictors of health behaviors and can have independent effects on intentions and action. Studies manipulating both variables to test their independent and combined effects on behavior change are required.
Publisher: American Psychological Association (APA)
Date: 09-2016
DOI: 10.1037/HEA0000340
Abstract: Goal intentions are the key proximal determinant of behavior in a number of key models applied to predicting health behavior. However, relatively little previous research has examined how characteristics of goals moderate the intention-health-behavior relations. The present research examined the effects of goal priority and goal conflict as moderators of the intention-health-behavior relationship. The main outcome measures were self-reported performance of physical activity (Studies 1, 2, and 3) and other health behaviors (Study 4), and objectively measured physical activity (Study 3). Studies 1 and 4 used prospective correlational designs to predict later behavior from earlier cognitions. Studies 2 and 3 were experimental studies manipulating goal priority and goal conflict. Studies 1 and 2 used between-subjects designs while Studies 3 and 4 used within-subjects designs. Goal priority significantly moderated the intention-health-behavior relationship for physical activity (Study 1) and a range of protective and risk health behaviors (Study 4). Manipulations of goal priority significantly increased the intention-physical-activity relationship when self-reported (Study 2) and objectively measured (Study 3). In contrast, inconsistent effects were observed for goal conflict as an intention-behavior moderator. When goal priority is high, then intentions are strong predictors of health behaviors. Further studies testing manipulations of goal conflict and in particular goal priority in combination with goal intentions are required to confirm their value as a means to change health behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 19-01-2013
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 2013
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 26-04-2012
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 11-05-2016
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 09-2011
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 19-11-2014
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Mark Conner.