The Health Belief Model as an Explanatory Framework in Communication Research: Exploring Parallel, Serial, and Moderated Mediation

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The Health Belief Model (HBM) posits that messages will achieve optimal behavior change if they successfully target perceived barriers, benefits, self-efficacy, and threat. While the model seems to be an ideal explanatory framework for communication research, theoretical limitations have limited its use in the field. Notably, variable ordering is currently undefined in the HBM. Thus, it is unclear whether constructs mediate relationships comparably (parallel mediation), in sequence (serial mediation), or in tandem with a moderator (moderated mediation). To investigate variable ordering, adults (N = 1,377) completed a survey in the aftermath of an 8-month flu vaccine campaign grounded in the HBM. Exposure to the campaign was positively related to vaccination behavior. Statistical evaluation supported a model where the indirect effect of exposure on behavior through perceived barriers and threat was moderated by self-efficacy (moderated mediation). Perceived barriers and benefits also formed a serial mediation chain. The results indicate that variable ordering in the Health Belief Model may be complex, may help to explain conflicting results of the past, and may be a good focus for future research.

Related collections

Most cited references 23

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A meta-analysis of studies of the Health Belief Model with adults.

Joel Harrison, Patricia Mullen, Lawrence W. Green (1992)

The Health Belief Model (HBM) relates a socio-psychologic theory of decision making to individual health-related behaviors. We conducted a meta-analysis of the relationships between four HBM dimensions (Susceptibility, Severity, Benefits and Costs) and health behavior on 16 studies that measured all four of the dimensions, measured a behavioral dependent variable and included some measures of reliability, minimal criteria for establishing the validity of the dimensions. Mean effect sizes were computed for all the studies, subgroupings representing studies of screening, risk reduction and adherence to medical regimen, and prospective and retrospective study designs. Of 24 mean effect sizes, 22 were found to be positive and statistically significant. The actual variance accounted for ranged from 0.001 to 0.09. Homogeneity was rejected for 15 of the 22, however, suggesting that the same underlying construct was not measured. Retrospective studies were found to have significantly large effect sizes for benefits and costs and smaller effect sizes for severity when compared to prospective studies. The weak effect sizes and lack of homogeneity indicate that it is premature to draw conclusions about the predictive validity of the HBM as operationalized in these studies. Our finding of only 16 studies meeting minimal criteria for valid representation of the HBM dimensions indicates that future studies should focus more on such issues.

0 comments Cited 153 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Instrument development for health belief model constructs.

V Champion (1984)

Research was conducted to develop valid and reliable scales to test the Health Belief Model (HBM). The dependent variable chosen for scale development was frequency of breast self-examination. Independent variables were constructs related to the HBM: susceptibility, seriousness, benefits, barriers, and health motivation. Analyses for construct validity and theory testing included factor analysis and multiple regression. Chronbach Alpha and Pearson r were used to compute reliabilities. Scales that were judged valid and reliable were susceptibility, seriousness, benefits, barriers, and health motivation.