• Korean Journal of Health Education and Promotion
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.31-61
• /
• 2000

Introduction. Despite the fact that half of premature deaths are caused by unhealthy lifestyles such as smoking tobacco, sedentary lifestyle, alcohol and drug abuse and poor nutrition, there are no theoretical models which accurately explain these health promotion related behaviors. This study tests a new model of health behavior called the Model of Health Promotion Behavior. This model draws on elements and frameworks suggested by the Health Belief Model, Social Cognitive Theory, the Theory of Planned Action and the Health Promotion Model. This model is intended as a general model of behavior but this first test of the model uses amount of exercise as the outcome behavior. Design. This study utilized a cross sectional mail-out, mail-back survey design to determine the elements within the model that best explained intentions to exercise and those that best explained amount of exercise. A follow-up questionnaire was mailed to all respondents to the first questionnaire about 10 months after the initial survey. A pretest was conducted to refine the questionnaire and a pilot study to test the protocols and assumptions used to calculate the required sample size. Sample. The sample was drawn from 2000 eligible participants at two blue collar (utility company and part of a hospital) and two white collar (bank and pharmaceutical) companies located in Southeastern Michigan. Both white collar site had employee fitness centers and all four sites offered health promotion programs. In the first survey, 982 responses were received (49.1％) after two mailings to non-respondents and one additional mailing to secure answers to missing data, with 845 usable cases for the analyzing current intentions and 918 usable cases for the explaining of amount of current exercise analysis. In the follow-up survey, questionnaires were mailed to the 982 employees who responded to the initial survey. After one follow-up mailing to non-respondents, and one mailing to secure answers to missing data, 697 (71.0％) responses were received, with 627 (63.8％) usable cases to predict intentions and 673 (68.5％) usable cases to predict amount of exercise. Measures. The questionnaire in the initial survey had 15 scales and 134 items; these scales measured each of the variables in the model. Thirteen of the scales were drawn from the literature, all had Cronbach's alpha scores above .74 and all but three had scores above .80. The questionnaire in the second mailing had only 10 items, and measured only outcome variables. Analysis. The analysis included calculation of scale scores, Cronbach's alpha, zero order correlations, and factor analysis, ordinary least square analysis, hierarchical tests of interaction terms and path analysis, and comparisons of results based on a random split of the data and splits based on gender and employer site. The power of the regression analysis was .99 at the .01 significance level for the model as a whole. Results. Self efficacy and Non-Health Benefits emerged as the most powerful predictors of Intentions to exercise, together explaining approximately 19％ of the variance in future Intentions. Intentions, and the interaction of Intentions with Barriers, with Support of Friends, and with Self Efficacy were the most consistent predictors of amount of future exercise, together explaining 38％ of the variance. With the inclusion of Prior Exercise History the model explained 52％ of the variance in amount of exercise 10 months later. There were very few differences in the variables that emerged as important predictors of intentions or exercise in the different employer sites or between males and females. Discussion. This new model is viable in predicting intentions to exercise and amount of exercise, both in absolute terms and when compared to existing models.