Skip to main content

Table 4 Tried new activities at follow-up – likelihood of saying yes compared to no

From: The short-term effects of a mass reach physical activity campaign: an evaluation using hierarchy of effects model and intention profiles

  

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

  

Χ2 = 6.89 (df = 4), p = .14; Nagelkerke R2 = .009

Χ2 = 10.63 (df = 4), p = .005; Nagelkerke R2 = .023

Χ2 = 139.82 (df = 6), p < .001; Nagelkerke R2 = .195

Predictor

 

Exp (B)

Exp (B)

 

Age

 

.99`

.991

.984*

LTPA

Very light or light

0.753

0.735

0.709

Moderate

1.060

1.062

1.111

Active

1.199

1.180

1.174

Very activea

Mentioned 150 Play List

  

1.340

1.279

Mentioned ‘getting active’

 

1.622*

1.510

Importance

   

0.966

Affective attitudes

   

1.033

Self-efficacy

   

0.989

Intentions

   

1.113

150 Play List experience

   

1.643**

Ad attitudes

   

1.796**

  1. acomparison group; *p < .01, **p < .001