title: Predictors of dieting and non-dieting approaches among adults living in Australia.
abstract: There is a dearth of research comparing why dieting and non-dieting approaches are adopted. A greater understanding of reasons underlying dieting and non-dieting attempts will help to identify target beliefs for interventions to support and motivate adults to attempt whatever approach they are willing and/or able to pursue. We investigated the predictors of dieting and non-dieting approaches in Australian adults using predictors that were identified in a previous qualitative study.
  
  
  
  We conducted a prospective study, with two waves of data collection occurring 4 weeks apart. At baseline, participants completed a questionnaire assessing constructs drawn from the theory of planned behaviour (attitude, subjective norm, and self-efficacy), past behaviour, non-planning, attributions for dieting failure, weight control beliefs, and dieting and non-dieting intentions. We used path modelling to analyse responses.
  
  
  
  At baseline, 719 adults (52.2% male) aged between 18 and 76 completed the questionnaire. Four weeks later, 64% of participants (n = 461) reported on their dieting and non-dieting behaviour in the past month. Past behaviour, attitude, subjective norm, and self-identity significantly predicted dieting intentions. Dieting intentions and past behaviour significantly predicted dieting behaviour, while non-planning and self-efficacy did not. The model explained 74.8% of the variance in intention and 52.9% of the variance in behaviour. While most findings were similar for the non-dieting model, subjective norms and self-identity did not predict intention, while self-efficacy and self-identity both predicted non-dieting behaviour directly. The non-dieting model explained 58.2% of the variance in intention and 37.5% of the variance in behaviour.
  
  
  
  The findings from this study provide support for the application of TPB and identity theory constructs in the context of both dieting and non-dieting behaviour. Self-efficacy and self-identity appear more relevant to non-dieting behaviour than dieting behaviour, while subjective norms was more influential in predicting dieting. Practitioners wishing to encourage either approach in their clients should attempt to modify the constructs that influence each approach.
authors.affiliation: School of Psychology and Counselling, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Road. Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, QLD, 4059, Australia.
authors.forename: Stuart
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Leske
authors.affiliation: School of Psychology and Counselling, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Road. Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, QLD, 4059, Australia. e.strodl@qut.edu.au.
authors.forename: Esben
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Strodl
authors.affiliation: School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Road. Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, QLD, 4059, Australia.
authors.forename: Xiang-Yu
authors.initials: XY
authors.lastname: Hou
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001315:Australia; D002755:Choice Behavior; D004032:Diet / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D004038:Diet, Reducing / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005247:Feeding Behavior; D005260:Female; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006801:Humans; D033182:Intention; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D050177:Overweight / Q000517:prevention & control*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012649:Self Concept; D020377:Self Efficacy; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D055815:Young Adult
keywords: Dieting; Identity theory; Locus of control; Non-dieting; Non-planning; Self-efficacy; Self-identity; Theory of planned behaviour; Weight control beliefs