Premium
A match–mismatch test of a stage model of behaviour change in tobacco smoking
Author(s) -
Dijkstra Arie,
Conijn Barbara,
De Vries Hein
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
addiction
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.424
H-Index - 193
eISSN - 1360-0443
pISSN - 0965-2140
DOI - 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2006.01419.x
Subject(s) - stage (stratigraphy) , psychological intervention , smoking cessation , test (biology) , social cognitive theory , psychology , odds ratio , cognition , behavior change , confidence interval , medicine , clinical psychology , social psychology , psychiatry , paleontology , pathology , biology
Aims An innovation offered by stage models of behaviour change is that of stage‐matched interventions. Match–mismatch studies are the primary test of this idea but also the primary test of the validity of stage models. This study aimed at conducting such a test among tobacco smokers using the Social Cognitive Stage Model. Design A match–mismatch field‐experiment was conducted in which smokers and ex‐smokers in different stages were assigned randomly to one of three information conditions. Participants Smokers in the pre‐contemplation stage, the contemplation stage and the preparation stage, and ex‐smokers in the action stage ( n = 481), who were recruited through mass media, were assigned randomly to one of three information conditions. Intervention In each of the three information conditions, participants received a four‐ to six‐page computer‐tailored letter designed to: (1) increase the positive outcome expectations of quitting, (2) decrease the negative outcome expectations of quitting or (3) increase self‐efficacy. Measurements Forward stage transition was the primary outcome measure, which was assessed 2 months after the participants received the information. Findings At the 2‐month follow‐up, the matched interventions were significantly more effective in stimulating forward stage transition (44.7%) than were mismatched interventions (25.8%; odds ratio = 2.78; confidence interval = 1.85–4.35). Conclusion The present study provides experimental support for the benefits of stage‐matching and for the validity of the Social Cognitive Stage Model.