Premium
Reflecting on non‐reflective action: An exploratory think‐aloud study of self‐report habit measures
Author(s) -
Gardner Benjamin,
Tang Vinca
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
british journal of health psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.05
H-Index - 88
eISSN - 2044-8287
pISSN - 1359-107X
DOI - 10.1111/bjhp.12060
Subject(s) - automaticity , psychology , habit , think aloud protocol , context (archaeology) , thematic analysis , conceptualization , cognitive psychology , action (physics) , developmental psychology , nomothetic and idiographic , social psychology , snacking , cognition , qualitative research , medicine , paleontology , social science , physics , usability , human–computer interaction , neuroscience , artificial intelligence , sociology , quantum mechanics , computer science , biology , obesity
Objectives Within health psychology, habit – the tendency to enact action automatically as a learned response to contextual cues – is most commonly quantified using the ‘ S elf‐ R eport H abit I ndex’, which assesses behavioural automaticity, or measures combining self‐reported behaviour frequency and context stability. Yet, the use of self‐report to capture habit has proven controversial. This study used ‘think‐aloud’ methods to investigate problems experienced when completing these two measures. Design Cross‐sectional survey with think‐aloud study. Methods Twenty student participants narrated their thoughts while completing habit measures applied to four health‐related behaviours (active commuting, unhealthy snacking, and one context‐free and one context‐specific variant of alcohol consumption). Data were coded using thematic analysis procedures. Results Problems were found in 10% of responses. Notable findings included participants lacking confidence in reporting automaticity, struggling to recall behaviour or cues, differing in interpretations of ‘commuting’, and misinterpreting items. Conclusions While most responses were unproblematic, and further work is needed to investigate habit self‐reports among larger and more diverse samples, findings nonetheless question the sensitivity of the measures, and the conceptualization of habit underpinning common applications of them. We offer suggestions to minimize these problems.Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject?Habit is most commonly measured within health psychology via the Self‐Report Habit Index, or a combination of self‐reported behaviour frequency and contextual stability. The suitability of self‐report for capturing automatic processes has been questioned.What does this study add?This is the first study of how people interpret and respond to self‐report habit measures. Results show the potential for errors in recalling automaticity, cues, and behaviours. We discuss practical and theoretical challenges to assessing habit in health behaviours.