A brief intervention increases fruit and vegetable intake. A comparison of two intervention sequences

• Published in: Appetite Vol. 82; pp. 103 - 110
• Main Authors: Lhakhang, Pempa, Godinho, Cristina, Knoll, Nina, Schwarzer, Ralf
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Elsevier Ltd 01.11.2014
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Cross-Over Studies; Diet; Feeding Behavior; Female; Fruit; Health Behavior; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Health Promotion; Humans; Male; Motivation; Planning; Self Efficacy; Self-regulation; Socioeconomic Factors; Surveys and Questionnaires; Vegetables; Young Adult; Vegetables; Planning; Fruit; Motivation; Self-efficacy; Self-regulation
• ISSN: 0195-6663; 1095-8304
• DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2014.07.014

•Motivating people only via knowledge acquisition does not lead to behavior change.•The sequence of cumulative health promotion strategies makes a difference.•Motivation followed by self-regulation is more efficient than the opposite sequence.•Dietary self-efficacy predicts changes in fruit and vegetable intake.•Implementing self-regulatory skills enhances nutritional behavior. Background and Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of two subsequent intervention components (motivational and self-regulatory components), placed in different order, to promote fruit and vegetable (FV) intake. Methods: After baseline assessment, university students (N = 205, aged 18–26 years) were allocated to two groups. One group received a motivational intervention (outcome expectancies, risk perception, and task self-efficacy) followed by a self-regulatory intervention (planning and dietary self-efficacy) after 17 days. The second group received the same intervention conditions in the opposite order. Follow-up assessments were done after another 17 days. Results: Both intervention sequences yielded gains in terms of FV intake and self-efficacy. However, this gain was only due to the self-regulatory component whereas the motivational component did not contribute to the changes. Moreover, changes in intention and self-efficacy mediated between intervention sequence and follow-up behavior, suggesting that improving these proximal predictors of FV intake was responsible for the behavioral gains. Conclusions: Findings highlight the superiority of a self-regulatory intervention over a motivational intervention when it comes to dietary changes in this sample of young adults. Moreover, changes in dietary self-efficacy may drive nutritional changes.