1. Bringing the Relationship into Health Behavior Change: A Dyadic Approach to the Theory of Planned Behavior Maryhope Howland, Allison Farrell, Jeffry A. Simpson, Alexander J. Rothman, Rachel J.Burns, Jennifer Fillo, & Jhon Wlaschin

2. Relationships & Health Romantic relationships and markers of physical health (Stadler, Snyder, Horn, Shrout, & Bolger, 2012;Robles, Slatcher, Trombello, & McGinn, 2014) Blood pressure Heart rate variability Immune response Hospital stays and recovery times What about health behaviors?

3. Traditional Models of Health Behavior Change Intrapersonal factors Personality Attitudes Self-control e.g. Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1985), Health Belief Model (Rosenstock, 1974)

4. Traditional Models of Health Behavior Change Intrapersonal Personality Attitudes Self-control e.g. Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1985), Health Belief Model (Rosenstock, 1974)

5. Attitudes A Subjective Norms A Perceived Behavioral Control A Intentions A Attitudes P Subjective Norms P Perceived Behavioral Control P Intentions P BEHAVIOR

6. Attitudes A Subjective Norms A Perceived Behavioral Control A Intentions A Attitudes P Subjective Norms P Perceived Behavioral Control P Intentions P Partner Perspective PA Relationship Characteristics A

7. Hypotheses 1.Dyadic TPB: Partners TPB variables will predict actor intentions, above and beyond actor predictors 2.Partner perspective on actor: Partner’s perspective on the actor will predict actor intentions above and beyond the dyadic TPB 3.Relationship moderator: High relationship quality will amplify partner effects

8. Participants & Method Measures completed online privately at home or in the lab 200 Heterosexual committed couples (400 individuals) Relationship Length Mean= 4.62 yrs. (sd = 5.47) AgeMean = 26.26 yrs. (sd = 8.48) Ethnicity82% White; 8.7% Asian/Asian American; 4.3% Other; 2.5% Black; 2.5% Hispanic Marital Status21% married/engaged

9. Measures 2 versions of questionnaires (gender-specific) based on TPB constructs Based on Ajzen, 2015 Attitudes, Social norms, Perceived behavioral control (PBC) Actor behavioral intentions Relationship Quality Perceived Relationships Quality Components scale (PRQC; Fletcher, Simpson, & Thomas, 2000; α =.97)

10. Measures- Actor/Partner TPB “For each of the following questions, we are interested in your thoughts about your behavior and beliefs” Attitudes: “In my opinion, my being regularly physically active is:” (4 items, e.g. very bad-very good; α =.80) Social Norms: e.g. “During a typical month how physically active are people similar to you?” (3 items, α =.47) PBC: “I believe I have complete control over how physically active I am”

11. Measures- Perceived Partner TPB “For the next set of questions, try to think about what you think and feel about your partner. Specifically, we are interested in your thoughts about your partner’s behaviors and beliefs” Attitudes: “In my opinion, my partner’s being regularly physically active is:” (4 items, e.g. very bad-very good; α =.87) Social Norms: e.g. “During a typical month how physically active are people similar to your partner?” (3 items, α =.51 PBC: “I believe my partner has complete control over how physically active she is.”

12. H1: The dyadic TPB RESULTS

13. Traditional TPB Partner TPB

14. Actor x Actor Actor x Partner

15. H2: What about a partner’s perspectives on the actor?

16. Traditional TPB Partner perceptions of actor

17. H3: What about relationship quality?

18. Traditional TPB Partner Perceptions of Actor Relationship Quality

19. Actor RQ x Partner Perceptions of Actor

20. Traditional TPB Partner perceptions of actor Relationship Quality

22. Conclusions & Future Directions A dyadic perspective can: Increase predictive power of these models Provide theoretical foundation for partners influence Future directions: Extend to health behavior Other actor x partner interactions, relationship characteristics, health behaviors Changes in these models over the course of a relationship, different relationship stages Other traditional individual-based models of change

23. THANK YOU Co-authors: Allie Farrel, Jeff Simpson, Alex Rothman, Rachel Burns, Jen Fillo, & Jhon Wlaschin Our many research assistants Participants Traci Mann and the UMN Relationships & Health research group