Which behaviour change techniques are most effective at increasing older adults' self-efficacy and physical activity behaviour? A systematic review

David P French, Ellinor K Olander, Anna Chisholm, Jennifer Mc Sharry

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    259 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    BACKGROUND: Increasing self-efficacy is an effective mechanism for increasing physical activity, especially for older people.

    PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to identify behaviour change techniques (BCTs) that increase self-efficacy and physical activity behaviour in non-clinical community-dwelling adults 60 years or over.

    METHODS: A systematic search identified 24 eligible studies reporting change in self-efficacy for physical activity following an intervention. Moderator analyses examined whether the inclusion of specific BCTs (as defined by CALO-RE taxonomy) was associated with changes in self-efficacy and physical activity behaviour.

    RESULTS: Overall, interventions increased self-efficacy (d = 0.37) and physical activity (d = 0.14). Self-regulatory techniques such as setting behavioural goals, prompting self-monitoring of behaviour, planning for relapses, providing normative information and providing feedback on performance were associated with lower levels of both self-efficacy and physical activity.

    CONCLUSIONS: Many commonly used self-regulation intervention techniques that are effective for younger adults may not be effective for older adults.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)225-34
    Number of pages10
    JournalAnnals of Behavioral Medicine
    Volume48
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Oct 2014

    Keywords

    • Age Factors
    • Aged
    • Health Promotion
    • Humans
    • Middle Aged
    • Motor Activity
    • Self Efficacy

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Which behaviour change techniques are most effective at increasing older adults' self-efficacy and physical activity behaviour? A systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this