Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Aug 23.
Published in final edited form as: Psychol Health. 2017 Feb 6;32(5):509–529. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2017.1283038

Table 6.

Prediction of sugar-sweetened beverage behavioural intentions from theory of planned behaviour constructs with the same IVR call.

Call TB
n = 155
IVR1
n = 153
IVR2
n = 154
IVR3
n = 155
IVR4
n = 155
IVR5
n = 154
IVR6
n = 154
IVR7
n = 155
IVR8
n = 155
IVR9
n = 154
IVR10
n = 155
IVR11
n = 155
Step 1 Model R2     .10*** .05**   .04**     .09*** .21*** .23*** .12***   .15*** .27*** .26*** .24*** .35***
Step 2 Model R2     .09***     .11***ˆ .06*     .09***   .24***ˆ .22*** .14***     .20***ˆ   .33***ˆ   .31***ˆ   .29***ˆ   .38***ˆ
Perceived behavioural control β Step 2 −.28** −.12       −.12       −.33*** −.47***   −.55***   −.30**     −.26**   −.40***   −.69***   −.45***   −.54***  
Affective attitudes β Step 2 −.08     −.21*     −.16     −.02     −.03         .07       −.04         −.14       −.21        .29**   .01       <.01      
Instrumental attitudes β Step 2 .07   .13     .13   .03   .17*     <−.01           .07       −.06       .07**  .11       −.13         −.05      
Subjective norms β Step 2 <.01     .22** .05   .11   .11       .08       −.19*       −.19*     −.15*     −.11         −.24***   −.21***

Notes: Step 1 included PBC and Step 2 included addition of instrumental attitudes, affective attitudes, and SN. Analysis performed using last observation carried forward imputation methods; variations in sample size are due to exclusion of cases based on outlier analysis.

ˆ

R2Δ < 0.05

*

p < 0.05;

**

p < 0.01;

***

p < 0.001.