Healthy Living - A2 Psychology

HBM?

-> Severity/Susceptibility/Cues to Action/Costs/Benefits

Becker

• Parents beliefs + attitudes correlated with administering asthma medication
• costs e.g. chemist being far away affected if it was given

-> Costs of the health behaviour had a high impact on administering medication.

Locus of Control?

-> Internal = you have control

-> External = fate

-> Wallston - High internal = quit smoking

Normal et al

• Questionnaire on smoking/diet/exercise/alcohol made index and correlated with LOC
• Positive correlation with Internal LOC and index
• Negative correlation with External LOC and index

-> Health behaviours can be increased if we make people feel in control.

Self Efficacy

-> Believe in ability

-> Bandura - due to past experiences

-> Vicarious experiences = someone else/Verbal persuassion-"you can do it"/Emotional arousal - too much anxiety

Murray and Mcmillan

• SR on breast screening behaviour, health beliefs/motivations and confidence
• More confidence = more breast screening

-> Self efficacy = predictor of health behaviour

USEFUL

P.apps - e.g. Murray - increase self efficacy by showing others success

FREE-WILL

e.g. Murray - down to own beliefs

DETERMINISTIC

e.g. Norman - Blames Locus of Control

REDUCTIONIST

e.g. Becker - only focus' on five factors as theory of health belief - ignores LOC

Media Campaign?

-> Provides information to change behaviour

-> e.g. Chip pan fire ad 1976-1984

Cowpe

• See effect of media campaign - regions in UK
• Gathered statistics and 2 surveys
• Chip pan fires reduced (25%) + awareness of them increased (12% to 28% Yorkshire)

-> Effective method of promoting healthy behaviour

Legislation?

-> Forced into healthy behaviours with a law

-> Operant conditioning

Dannenburg

•  Questionnaire on helmet usage, knowledge of law, ad campaigns and peer pressure
• Howard county with law 11.4 to 37.4 helmet usage - biggest improvement

-> Law is more effective than media campaign.

Fear Arousal

-> Increases percieved threat

-> gives emotional arousal which causes change in behaviour

Janis and Feshback

• Min - diagrams/xrays of tooth decay/ Moderate- less graphic images than strong/ Strong - gruesome pictures of tooth decay and gum diesease 
•  Minimal fear changed behaviour most

-> Fear appeal = effective but if too strong then the effect drops.

EFFECTIVE - e.g. Cowpe, Dannenburg + J and F prove.

HIGH EV - e.g. Cowpe - real life ad campaign/ Dannenburg - real law enforced.

LOW EV - e.g. J+F = lecture

FALSIFIABILITY - e.g. Dannenburg questions media campaigns

ETHICS - Pop - e.g. J+F = gruesome images

SAMPLE - e.g. J+F use year 10 USA students

INVALID - e.g. J+F and Dannenburg use self reports so may lie

Reasons for Non-Adherence?

-> Rational reasons = uncertain if works/ side effects/ believe diagnosis is wrong therefore leads to them deciding not to adhere.

Bulpitt

• Looked at reasons why not take meds that would extend life
• 15% of hypertensive patients stopped taking meds due to side effects
• 8% stopped taking due to sexual problems

-> If the costs outweigh the benefits it reduces the chance of adherence.

Measures of Non-Adherence

-> Different ways of measuring are; ask if taking(SR)/ Monitor medicine bottoles(Beh)/Test chemicals in body(physiological)

Becker

• Beliefs and attitudes of parents correlated w/ kids inhalers administered
• If costs outweight benefits then unlikely to administer meds.
• Blood tests to validate claim of medication

-> Using physical tests to check if symptoms are improving is an effective way to measure non-adherence

Improving non-adherence?

-> Behavioural

->Operant conditioning

-> Funhaler - reduce boredom

Watt et al

• 1 week = inhaler 2nd week = funhaler
• after each week parental questionnaire
• 38% more medicated with funhaler than inhaler

-> child friendly features act as reward and encourages adherence

USEFUL - e.g. P.apps - Watt et al/ Knowledge - Becker

VALID - e.g. Becker - blood tests

RELIABLE - e.g. Becker - easy to replicate - standardised

INVALID - e.g. Watt et al - self report - lie

NOT RELIABLE - e.g. Watt et al - different results with different sample

LIMITED SAMPLE - e.g. Watt et al - 32 children

NOT USEFUL - e.g. Watt et al - limited sample limits p.apps