Understanding the intention-to-behaviour relationship for adolescents: an application of the multi-process action control model

Imran Haider · Denver M. Y. Brown · Steven Russell Bray · Pallavi Dutta · Ryan E. Rhodes · MATTHEW Y. W. KWAN

13 citations0/0 files storedInternational Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Behavioral Health and Interventions Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes Physical Activity and Health

Abstract

The multi-process action control model (M-PAC) is an integrative model specifically designed to evaluate intention-behaviour gaps. To date, however, the processes through which intentions are translated into action have largely been underexplored among adolescents. The primary purpose of the study was to investigate the distribution of intention-behaviour profiles during late adolescence; and to apply the M-PAC framework to assess predictors of these profiles. Our sample included 1176 grade 11 students (Mage = 15.85 ± 0.38, 45.6% male) that completed an online questionnaire as part of the baseline cohort in the ADAPT study. The questionnaire assessed the reflective, regulatory, and reflexive processes outlined within M-PAC, and a self-reported measure of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Following the use of a novel tertiary split, six intention-behaviour profiles were observed: inactive non-intenders (7.1%; n = 83), active non-intenders (2.8%; n = 33), inactive quasi-intenders (20.6%; n = 242), active quasi-intenders (19.2%; n = 226), unsuccessful intenders (12.5%; n = 147) and successful intenders (37.8%; n = 445). Descriptive statistics revealed successful intenders reported the highest scores on all M-PAC predictors, followed by unsuccessful intenders. A graded response pattern continued for quasi-intenders and non-intenders, with inactive non-intenders scoring the lowest across all M-PAC variables. The current study offers new insight into the intention-behaviour gap by differentiating adolescents with more conviction in their intentions from those that report intention ambivalence to create six intention-behaviour profiles. Findings demonstrate strong support for the core tenets of M-PAC in predicting physical activity intention-behaviour profiles during late adolescence.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.

References

1991The theory of planned behavior 2016The Intention–Behavior Gap 2005Bridging the intention–behaviour gap: Planning, self-efficacy, and action control in the adoption and maintenance of physical exercise 1993Athletic identity: Hercules' muscles or Achilles heel?2012Towards parsimony in habit measurement: Testing the convergent and predictive validity of an automaticity subscale of the Self-Report Habit Index 2013How big is the physical activity intention–behaviour gap? A meta‐analysis using the action control framework 2012Nonconscious processes and health.2011A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Applications of the Self-Report Habit Index to Nutrition and Physical Activity Behaviours

Cited by

2024Effect of healthy dietary intention‐behavior (in)consistency on depression and anxiety in the process of behavior change 2024Can daily affect impact intentions and next day behavior of physical activity? A daily diary study 2024Predictive Utility of the Multi-Process Action Control Framework for Self-Reported and Device-Measured Physical Activity Behavior of Adolescents

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.