Lots of Thoughts

Hey Group 5 "Go Team PA!" Wooo haha!

Ok so I was thinking that besides posting per the recommendations for class, that we should use this blog efficiently and discuss our project as well. I know that means extra work, but I think it will be easier than attempting to constantly email thoughts to everyone.

So for starters whoever loved the length of the Bandura reading last week, get ready for this weeks reading length, I'd start early as they are both lengthy :) While it was long and someone abstract, I actually enjoyed the Bandura article, maybe because I'm more familiar with SCT, but I felt after the first few pages it was fairly easy to understand. I like the triadic reciprocal causation (the triangle demonstrating that Behavioral, Environmental, and Personal determinants influence each other). I felt like the article was a good review and that it pointed out important aspects that affect individuals ability to change behavior. For example, understanding the importance of self efficacy. Bandura stated "Human competency requires not only skills, but also self belief in one's capabilities to use those skills well. Modeling influences, must, therefore, be designed to build self-efficacy as well as to convey knowledge and rules of behavior. Perceived self-efficacy affects every phase of personal change. It determines whether people even consider changing their behavior, whether they can enlist the motivation and perseverance needed to succeed should they choose to do so, and how well they maintain the changes they have achieved." I think this is important to note for our intervention. Since we are looking to increase physical activity, I think during the focus groups that we should get the kids to talk about how they feel with regard to PA, high or low SE and if it is with particular activities or if it generalizable. I think we should also look at some of the other constructs like modeling, reinforcements, expectations, and behavioral capability. I think knowing where the kids are at baseline will ultimately influence our decisions with how we will continue with the intervention so we can tailor it to their needs.

As for the Maibach article. I felt it was straight forward and easy to understand. And I thought it clarified the difference between communication and marketing and that it adequately demonstrated how we can use these tools in the field. It also spawned the idea of looking into the "active living" ecological model that Sallis et al. created. I haven't had a chance to look at it yet, but we may be able to use it with our project in class. I'm not sure yet, but it may since we have to do focus groups, and for us we are going to need to look beyond the individual level because we want to deal with middle school kids. Beyond the research thought that incorporating multiple levels makes for a stronger intervention, kids are a particularly interesting group, because they do not have complete control of their situations. We will have to take environment, school opportunities, parental schedules and modeling, as well as social networks into account. Therefore an ecologically based model may be best for our project. Thoughts?

As for class, the demonstrations of the different ways to elicit messages was interesting and informative, but I'm still confused with high vs. low. High is central right? So that means that a high involvement message requires thought and possibly elicits emotion? or does it only present facts and statistics that provide information? Low involvement is peripheral but does it or can it elicit emotion as well? Shelia, if you read this is there anyway, you can answer which ads were which, I felt like the class guessed but we never really figured out what you deemed them as. Also, I felt the livestrong ads that were empowering and that emphasized birthdays were the most effective for me. But my godmom passed from metastasized breast cancer last summer, so Kristen in class may have been right, where the ads speak more to you if you can personally relate to them. Just a thought. But if that is the case then when we advocate for these kids to increase their PA to meet the PA recs we should make sure its relevant to them.

PA recs for Kids:
60 min or more of PA per day

Aerobic (cardio) should be moderate or vigorous intensity (at least 3 days a week should be vigorous)

Muscle Strengthening should be part of 60+ min at least 3 days/week

Bone strengthening part of 60+ min at least 3 days/week

Should be age appropriate, variable, enjoyable

Idea for Message:

F cubed (it won't let me use an exponent) Fun, Fit, Friends