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
\