Skip to main content

Table 5 Predictors of intention groups – all compared to successful intenders

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

  Χ2 = 230.82, p < .001;
Nagelkerke R2 = .196
Non-intenders Unsuccessful intenders Disinclined actors Ambivalent nonactors Ambivalent actors Ambivalent
Predictor   Exp (B) Exp (B) Exp (B) Exp (B) Exp (B) Exp (B)
Age   0.965** .967** .990 .981** .990 .983
LTPA Very light or light 1.691 0.740 1.289 1.719 1.606 5.937**
Moderate 0.408 1.027 0.512 0.531 1.010 1.258
Active 0.489 0.888 0.537 0.507 1.051 1.047
Very activea
Mentioned 150 Play List 0.594 1.015 1.876 0.884 1.210 0.652
Mentioned ‘getting active’ 1.076 1.001 1.036 0.726 1.136 0.655
Importance 1.007 1.199 1.594 .973 1.005 1.058
Affective attitudes 1.060 1.034 0.808 1.149 0.983 1.064
Self-efficacy 1.018 0.991 0.995 1.007 1.003 1.012
Intentions 0.608** 0.862 1.165 0.731 0.922 0.819
150 Play List experience 0.586** 0.821 0.754* 0.677** .903 0.645**
Ad attitudes 0.778 0.479* 0.617 0.660 .628* 0.724
  1. acomparison group; * p < .01, **p < .001
\