1. Beware the semantics when modeling
Kai R. Larsen
University of Colorado
NSF International Workshop on Dynamic Modeling of Health Behavior Change and Maintenance, Sept 8-9, 2015, London, UK
Note: the presenter knows almost nothing about Skyler, diet, and exercise and will therefore not muddle the water with related factors.

2. CBSEM Analysis of TAM theory (Language info only…no respondents)

3. Social Cognitive Theory (Stevens, 2006, p. 35)

4. Survey correlations are predictable…
These work:
Leadership:
Idealized influence attributes
Idealized influence behavior
Inspiring motivation
Intellectual stimulation
Individualized consideration
Conditional reward
Management by exception active
Management by exception passive
Laissez-Faire
Outcomes
Related:
Economic-exchange perceptions
Social-exchange perceptions
Intrinsic motivation
Organizational citizenship behavior
Turnover intention
Self-rated work quality
Self-rated work effort
Leader-member social exchange
Initiation of structure
Consideration
Affective organizational commitment
Job satisfaction
Technology adoption:
Ease of use
Usefulness
Intention to use
Patient reported outcomes:
Global health
Emotional distress – anger
Emotional distress – anxiety
Emotional distress – depression
Fatigue – fatigue experience
Fatigue – fatigue impact
Pain – behavior
Pain – interference
Pain – quality
Physical function

5. Important for Modeling Behaviors…
Bad news:
The better the fit statistics, the more likely a theory is semantic
Cronbach’s alpaha > .9
Be suspicious
Semantics may account for the easy part of modeling behavioral theories
Good news:
Behavior-based responses are not semantically based
More behavior-derived measures are available than ever before

6. What is left in Social Cognitive Theory for Skyler?
Physical Environment
Access to sweets and snacks
Social Environment
Social support
Behavioral capability
Knowledge
Skills