Development of an online tool for linking behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action based on triangulation of findings from literature synthesis and expert consensus

Marie Johnston; Rachel N. Carey; Lauren E. Connell Bohlen; Derek W. Johnston; Alexander J. Rothman; Marijn de Bruin; Michael P. Kelly; Hilary Groarke; Susan Michie

doi:10.1093/tbm/ibaa050

Development of an online tool for linking behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action based on triangulation of findings from literature synthesis and expert consensus

Marie Johnston^* (Corresponding Author), Rachel N. Carey, Lauren E. Connell Bohlen, Derek W. Johnston, Alexander J. Rothman, Marijn de Bruin, Michael P. Kelly, Hilary Groarke, Susan Michie

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

94 Citations (Scopus)

6 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Researchers, practitioners and policymakers develop interventions to change behavior based on their understanding of how behavior change techniques (BCTs) impact the determinants of behavior. A transparent, systematic and accessible method of linking BCTs with the processes through which they change behavior (i.e. their mechanisms of action (MoAs)) would advance understanding of intervention effects, and improve theory and intervention development.

Purpose: To triangulate evidence for hypothesized BCT-MoA links obtained in two previous studies and present the results in an interactive, online tool.

Methods: Two previous studies generated evidence on links between 56 BCTs and 26 MoAs based on their frequency in literature synthesis and on expert consensus. Concordance between the findings of the two studies was examined using multilevel modelling. Uncertainties and differences between the two studies were reconciled by 16 behavior change experts using consensus development methods. The resulting evidence was used to generate an online tool.

Results: The two studies showed concordance for 25 of the 26 MoAs and agreement for 37 links and for 460 ‘non-links’. A further 55 links were resolved by consensus (total of 92 (37+55) hypothesized BCT-MoA links). Full data on 1456 possible links was incorporated into the online interactive Theory and Technique Tool (url link removed for anonymity peer-review).

Conclusions: This triangulation of two distinct sources of evidence provides guidance on how BCTs may affect the mechanisms that change behavior and is available as a resource for behavior change intervention designers, researchers and theorists, supporting intervention design, research synthesis, and collaborative research.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1049-1065
Number of pages	17
Journal	Translational Behavioral Medicine
Volume	11
Issue number	5
Early online date	4 Aug 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaa050
Publication status	Published - May 2021

Bibliographical note

Acknowledgements: We are grateful to the behavior change experts who contributed to these studies. Support for the preparation of this manuscript was also funded by T32 HL076134 and U54GM115677 (Connell Bohlen). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Funding and acknowledgements: This research is funded by UK Medical Research Council grant number MR/L011115/1. Support for the preparation of this manuscript was also funded by T32 HL076134 and U54GM115677 (Connell Bohlen). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. We would particularly like to thank the 16 experts in behavior change who have committed their time and offered their expertise for the reconciliation study. We are also very grateful to all those authors who made explicit links between BCTs and MoAs in their publications of interventions, and to the experts who participated in (removed for anonymity)’s study (11). We would also like to give a special thanks to Holly Walton who assisted in preparing the study data for the Theory and Technique Tool.

Keywords

online tool
behavior change technique
mechanism of action
literature synthesis
expert consensus
triangulation

Access to Document

10.1093/tbm/ibaa050Licence: CC BY-NC

Johston_DevelopmentOfAnOnlineTool_VOR
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.This is an Open Access article distrib-uted under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, pro-vided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
Final published version, 517 KBLicence: CC BY-NC

Cite this

Johnston, M., Carey, R. N., Connell Bohlen, L. E., Johnston, D. W., Rothman, A. J., de Bruin, M., Kelly, M. P., Groarke, H., & Michie, S. (2021). Development of an online tool for linking behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action based on triangulation of findings from literature synthesis and expert consensus. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 11(5), 1049-1065. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaa050

Development of an online tool for linking behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action based on triangulation of findings from literature synthesis and expert consensus. / Johnston, Marie (Corresponding Author); Carey, Rachel N.; Connell Bohlen, Lauren E. et al.
In: Translational Behavioral Medicine, Vol. 11, No. 5, 05.2021, p. 1049-1065.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Johnston, M, Carey, RN, Connell Bohlen, LE, Johnston, DW, Rothman, AJ, de Bruin, M, Kelly, MP, Groarke, H & Michie, S 2021, 'Development of an online tool for linking behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action based on triangulation of findings from literature synthesis and expert consensus', Translational Behavioral Medicine, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 1049-1065. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaa050

@article{ac0e9fd113d64e62a2f940101e0520e8,

title = "Development of an online tool for linking behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action based on triangulation of findings from literature synthesis and expert consensus",

abstract = "Background: Researchers, practitioners and policymakers develop interventions to change behavior based on their understanding of how behavior change techniques (BCTs) impact the determinants of behavior. A transparent, systematic and accessible method of linking BCTs with the processes through which they change behavior (i.e. their mechanisms of action (MoAs)) would advance understanding of intervention effects, and improve theory and intervention development.Purpose: To triangulate evidence for hypothesized BCT-MoA links obtained in two previous studies and present the results in an interactive, online tool.Methods: Two previous studies generated evidence on links between 56 BCTs and 26 MoAs based on their frequency in literature synthesis and on expert consensus. Concordance between the findings of the two studies was examined using multilevel modelling. Uncertainties and differences between the two studies were reconciled by 16 behavior change experts using consensus development methods. The resulting evidence was used to generate an online tool.Results: The two studies showed concordance for 25 of the 26 MoAs and agreement for 37 links and for 460 {\textquoteleft}non-links{\textquoteright}. A further 55 links were resolved by consensus (total of 92 (37+55) hypothesized BCT-MoA links). Full data on 1456 possible links was incorporated into the online interactive Theory and Technique Tool (url link removed for anonymity peer-review).Conclusions: This triangulation of two distinct sources of evidence provides guidance on how BCTs may affect the mechanisms that change behavior and is available as a resource for behavior change intervention designers, researchers and theorists, supporting intervention design, research synthesis, and collaborative research.",

keywords = "online tool, behavior change technique, mechanism of action, literature synthesis, expert consensus, triangulation",

author = "Marie Johnston and Carey, {Rachel N.} and {Connell Bohlen}, {Lauren E.} and Johnston, {Derek W.} and Rothman, {Alexander J.} and {de Bruin}, Marijn and Kelly, {Michael P.} and Hilary Groarke and Susan Michie",

note = "Acknowledgements: We are grateful to the behavior change experts who contributed to these studies. Support for the preparation of this manuscript was also funded by T32 HL076134 and U54GM115677 (Connell Bohlen). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Funding and acknowledgements: This research is funded by UK Medical Research Council grant number MR/L011115/1. Support for the preparation of this manuscript was also funded by T32 HL076134 and U54GM115677 (Connell Bohlen). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. We would particularly like to thank the 16 experts in behavior change who have committed their time and offered their expertise for the reconciliation study. We are also very grateful to all those authors who made explicit links between BCTs and MoAs in their publications of interventions, and to the experts who participated in (removed for anonymity){\textquoteright}s study (11). We would also like to give a special thanks to Holly Walton who assisted in preparing the study data for the Theory and Technique Tool.",

year = "2021",

month = may,

doi = "10.1093/tbm/ibaa050",

language = "English",

volume = "11",

pages = "1049--1065",

journal = "Translational Behavioral Medicine",

issn = "1869-6716",

publisher = "Oxford University Press (OUP)",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Development of an online tool for linking behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action based on triangulation of findings from literature synthesis and expert consensus

AU - Johnston, Marie

AU - Carey, Rachel N.

AU - Connell Bohlen, Lauren E.

AU - Johnston, Derek W.

AU - Rothman, Alexander J.

AU - de Bruin, Marijn

AU - Kelly, Michael P.

AU - Groarke, Hilary

AU - Michie, Susan

N1 - Acknowledgements: We are grateful to the behavior change experts who contributed to these studies. Support for the preparation of this manuscript was also funded by T32 HL076134 and U54GM115677 (Connell Bohlen). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Funding and acknowledgements: This research is funded by UK Medical Research Council grant number MR/L011115/1. Support for the preparation of this manuscript was also funded by T32 HL076134 and U54GM115677 (Connell Bohlen). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. We would particularly like to thank the 16 experts in behavior change who have committed their time and offered their expertise for the reconciliation study. We are also very grateful to all those authors who made explicit links between BCTs and MoAs in their publications of interventions, and to the experts who participated in (removed for anonymity)’s study (11). We would also like to give a special thanks to Holly Walton who assisted in preparing the study data for the Theory and Technique Tool.

PY - 2021/5

Y1 - 2021/5

N2 - Background: Researchers, practitioners and policymakers develop interventions to change behavior based on their understanding of how behavior change techniques (BCTs) impact the determinants of behavior. A transparent, systematic and accessible method of linking BCTs with the processes through which they change behavior (i.e. their mechanisms of action (MoAs)) would advance understanding of intervention effects, and improve theory and intervention development.Purpose: To triangulate evidence for hypothesized BCT-MoA links obtained in two previous studies and present the results in an interactive, online tool.Methods: Two previous studies generated evidence on links between 56 BCTs and 26 MoAs based on their frequency in literature synthesis and on expert consensus. Concordance between the findings of the two studies was examined using multilevel modelling. Uncertainties and differences between the two studies were reconciled by 16 behavior change experts using consensus development methods. The resulting evidence was used to generate an online tool.Results: The two studies showed concordance for 25 of the 26 MoAs and agreement for 37 links and for 460 ‘non-links’. A further 55 links were resolved by consensus (total of 92 (37+55) hypothesized BCT-MoA links). Full data on 1456 possible links was incorporated into the online interactive Theory and Technique Tool (url link removed for anonymity peer-review).Conclusions: This triangulation of two distinct sources of evidence provides guidance on how BCTs may affect the mechanisms that change behavior and is available as a resource for behavior change intervention designers, researchers and theorists, supporting intervention design, research synthesis, and collaborative research.

AB - Background: Researchers, practitioners and policymakers develop interventions to change behavior based on their understanding of how behavior change techniques (BCTs) impact the determinants of behavior. A transparent, systematic and accessible method of linking BCTs with the processes through which they change behavior (i.e. their mechanisms of action (MoAs)) would advance understanding of intervention effects, and improve theory and intervention development.Purpose: To triangulate evidence for hypothesized BCT-MoA links obtained in two previous studies and present the results in an interactive, online tool.Methods: Two previous studies generated evidence on links between 56 BCTs and 26 MoAs based on their frequency in literature synthesis and on expert consensus. Concordance between the findings of the two studies was examined using multilevel modelling. Uncertainties and differences between the two studies were reconciled by 16 behavior change experts using consensus development methods. The resulting evidence was used to generate an online tool.Results: The two studies showed concordance for 25 of the 26 MoAs and agreement for 37 links and for 460 ‘non-links’. A further 55 links were resolved by consensus (total of 92 (37+55) hypothesized BCT-MoA links). Full data on 1456 possible links was incorporated into the online interactive Theory and Technique Tool (url link removed for anonymity peer-review).Conclusions: This triangulation of two distinct sources of evidence provides guidance on how BCTs may affect the mechanisms that change behavior and is available as a resource for behavior change intervention designers, researchers and theorists, supporting intervention design, research synthesis, and collaborative research.

KW - online tool

KW - behavior change technique

KW - mechanism of action

KW - literature synthesis

KW - expert consensus

KW - triangulation

U2 - 10.1093/tbm/ibaa050

DO - 10.1093/tbm/ibaa050

M3 - Article

C2 - 32749460

SN - 1869-6716

VL - 11

SP - 1049

EP - 1065

JO - Translational Behavioral Medicine

JF - Translational Behavioral Medicine

IS - 5

ER -

Development of an online tool for linking behavior change techniques and mechanisms of action based on triangulation of findings from literature synthesis and expert consensus

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this