MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994408522 · doi:10.1108/17538350910993421

Using normative messages to increase healthy behaviours

2009· article· en· W1994408522 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jason Slaunwhite, Steven M. Smith, Mark T. Fleming, Leandre R. Fabrigar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Workplace Health Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversitySaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityNormativeStair climbingPsychologyFraming (construction)Norm (philosophy)ClimbingSocial psychologyApplied psychologyPublic healthNaturalistic observationMedicineEngineeringPolitical sciencePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this research is to evaluate the impact of theory‐based poster messages on stair‐climbing behaviour in a work environment. The highest‐rated poster developed by the Public Health Agency of Canada's stairway to health program was used as a comparison condition. Design/methodology/approach Naturalistic observation of stair traffic was conducted in order to measure the effectiveness of poster prompts on stair‐climbing behaviour. Over a period of three years, three separate studies were conducted aimed at increasing stair‐use via experimentally manipulated and theory‐based poster messages. Findings Results suggest that messages derived from a norm‐based framework are more persuasive than generic information‐based posters when attempting to increase stair‐climbing behaviour. Practical implications Small increases in health‐related behaviours at work have important consequences for both individuals and organizations. Using poster messages derived from social psychological theory could prove advantageous for practitioners attempting to increase healthy behaviours at work. Originality/value This research provides the first evidence for the use of norm‐based health‐related messages targeted at increasing healthy behaviours. The study makes a theoretical contribution to the creation and application of norm‐based appeals using both simple and complex message framing. Prior to this study, there was no available research on the effectiveness of such appeals on health‐related behaviour.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.395 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Workplace Health ManagementSame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207