Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Eval Program Plann. 2013 Dec 10;43:93–102. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.11.003

Table 4.

Mean physical activity and healthy eating implementation scores and means (and standard deviations) for Psychosocial variables from congregants.

Intervention Control


Response range Churches N Pre Post Churches N Pre Post
Physical activity
Getting the message out 1–4 37 375 2.02 (0.53) 2.34 (0.52) 31 257 2.23 (0.51) 2.26 (0.48)
Opportunities 1–4 37 375 1.44 (0.25) 1.89 (0.58) 31 257 1.44 (0.21) 1.42 (0.23)
Pastor support 1–4 37 375 1.67 (0.34) 1.97 (0.47) 31 257 1.84 (0.35) 1.77 (0.30)
PA policy 0–1 17 191 NA 0.31 (0.45) 12 123 NA 0.00 (0.00)
Social support 1–4 37 375 2.53 (0.30) 2.70 (0.31) 31 257 2.61 (0.21) 2.66 (0.32)
Self efficacy 1–4 37 375 2.70 (0.24) 2.64 (0.28) 31 257 2.76 (0.24) 2.70 (0.24)
Healthy eating
Getting the message out 1–4 37 371 1.96 (0.51) 2.28 (0.54) 31 256 2.11 (0.49) 2.15 (0.42)
Opportunities 1–4 37 371 2.87 (0.39) 3.09 (0.43) 31 256 2.94 (0.32) 3.04 (0.32)
Pastor support 1–4 37 371 2.19 (0.55) 2.55 (0.60) 31 256 2.30 (0.38) 2.36 (0.39)
PA policy 0–1 17 188 NA 0.80 (0.27) 14 128 NA 0.30 (0.30)
Social support 1–4 37 371 2.46 (0.36) 2.64 (0.37) 31 256 2.55 (0.23) 2.64 (0.32)
Self efficacy 1–4 37 371 3.12 (0.16) 3.14 (0.24) 31 256 3.10 (0.20) 3.16 (0.21)

Note: These means are the mean scores of church means. Lower score means less implementation, lower social support, and lower self efficacy.