Search results

The purpose of the current paper is to investigate the determinants of hygienic food handling behaviour using the health action process approach (HAPA) and to examine if the volitional components of the model or the addition of past behaviour could explain additional variance in behaviour.

A prospective four‐week study investigating the predictive ability of HAPA variables and past behaviour was used. At time 1, 109 participants completed self‐report questionnaires regarding their action self‐efficacy, risk awareness, outcome expectancies and intentions to hygienically prepare food and past behaviour. At time 2, participants returned a follow‐up questionnaire, which measured behaviour, planning, maintenance and recovery self efficacy. Structural equation modelling was used to compare three versions of the HAPA model.

The first model showed that intention was a significant predictor of behaviour explaining 40 per cent of the variance and was the best fit. The second model, which included the volitional components of the HAPA model, did significantly increase the proportion of behaviour explained. The third model, which included past behaviour, increased the variance explained but was not a superior fit to the previous two models.

The results of this study confirm that aspects of the HAPA may be useful in determining hygienic food handling behaviour. However, volitional variables do not appear to be important in this behaviour. The implications of this for future research and interventions are elucidated.

The current study is one of the first to use the HAPA model to predict hygienic food handling behaviour.

Breakfast consumption is associated with a range of beneficial health outcomes including improved overall diet quality, lower BMI, decreased risk of chronic disease, and improved cognitive function. Although there are many models of health and social behaviour, there is a paucity of research utilising these in breakfast consumption and very few studies that directly compare these models. This study aims to compare the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) and the health action process approach (HAPA) in predicting breakfast consumption.

University students (N=102; M=19.5 years) completed a questionnaire measuring demographics, TPB and HAPA motivational variables, and intentions. Behaviour and HAPA volitional variables were measured four weeks later.

Using structural equation modelling, it was found that the TPB model was a superior fit to the data across a range of model indices compared to the HAPA. Both models significantly predicted both intentions and behaviour at follow up; however, the TPB predicted a higher proportion of the variance in breakfast consumption (47.6 per cent) than the HAPA (44.8 per cent). Further, the volitional variables did not mediate the intention-behaviour gap, and the data were not an adequate statistical fit to the model compared to the TPB.

The results support the use of the TPB and show that some aspects of the HAPA are useful in predicting breakfast consumption, suggesting that risk perception and self-efficacy be targeted in interventions to increase behaviour. The volitional variables did not appear to mediate breakfast consumption indicating that intention is still the strongest predictor, at least in this behaviour.

The current study is the first to compare the TPB and HAPA in predicting breakfast consumption.

Rather than organize as traditional firms, many of today’s companies organize as platforms that sit at the nexus of multiple exchange and production relationships. This chapter considers a most basic question of organization in platform contexts: the choice of boundaries. Herein, I investigate how classical economic theories of firm boundaries apply to platform-based organization and empirically study how executives made boundary choices in response to changing market and technical challenges in the early mobile computing industry (the predecessor to today’s smartphones). Rather than a strict or unavoidable tradeoff between “openness-versus-control,” most successful platform owners chose their boundaries in a way to simultaneously open-up to outside developers while maintaining coordination across the entire system.