Exclusive Breastfeeding Behavior Model in Rural Central Java, Indonesia: The Application of Theory of Planned Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exclusive breastfeeding’s coverage is low in Indonesia, because attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control fail affecting exclusive breastfeeding intention and behavior. Objectives of research were to formulate exclusive breastfeeding behavior and to explore the relationship of attitude, subjective norm, and behavioral control to exclusive breastfeeding intention and behavior. Mixed method was conducted in rural areas of Karanganyar Regency, Indonesia. Firstly, this was a survey research with attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control being independent variables. Dependent variables were exclusive breastfeeding intention and behavior. Population of research consisted of 873 lactating mothers. Sampling technique employed was multistage random sampling, with 126 lactating mothers being the sample. Data was collected using questionnaire, data analysis using path analysis. Secondly, case study was conducted through in-depth interview, focus group discussion (FGD), document review, and observation. In-depth interview and FGD was conducted with 49 participants: 30 lactating mothers and 19 health workers. Data analysis was conducted content analysis. The result showed that attitude, affective norm, and perceived behavioral control correlated with exclusive breastfeeding intention (ß = 0.09; p = 0.084; ß = 0.09; p = 0.027; ß = 0.51; p <0.001, respectively). Perceived behavioral control and intention correlated with exclusive breastfeeding behavior (ß = 0.08; p = 0.059; ß = 0.09; p = 0.068, respectively). Exclusive breastfeeding behavior model included attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, and exclusive breastfeeding behavior. Attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control collectively correlated with intention; intention and perceived behavioral perception were direct determinants of exclusive breastfeeding behavior.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".