习惯和习惯行为。

IF 6.6 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Health Psychology Review Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1080/17437199.2022.2105249
Benjamin Gardner, Phillippa Lally
{"title":"习惯和习惯行为。","authors":"Benjamin Gardner, Phillippa Lally","doi":"10.1080/17437199.2022.2105249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Writing in 1899, William James observed that ‘ninety-nine hundredths or, possibly, nine hundred and ninety-nine thousandths of our activity is purely automatic and habitual’ (James, 1899, pp. 65–66). Nearly 125 years later, the concept of habit continues to stimulate important research regarding the most useful definition of habit, and how to harness habit to understand, predict, and change health-related behaviour (e.g., Gardner, 2015; Verplanken, 2018; Wood & Runger, 2016). Phillips and Mullan (2022) offer a thoughtful synthesis of theory and evidence regarding how habit can be applied to complex health behaviours. Their review addresses an important question that habit researchers are often asked: how credible is it to propose that learned cue-behaviour associations can underpin and sustain complicated real-world health behaviours? Drawing on a definition of complex behaviour as that which involves separable components and a greater number of subactions (or ‘steps’), Phillips and Mullan address this question by suggesting that the same concept – i.e., habit – can underpin both simple and complex behaviours. Significantly however, they argue that ‘complex habits’ should be theorised differently to ‘simple habits’, to better recognise the multiple components of complex habits and the rewards that Phillips and Mullan suggest are needed for complex habits to form. In this commentary, we expand discussion of two areas of Phillips and Mullan’s argument. First, we debate aspects of the definition of habit. Second, we highlight the importance of distinguishing between ‘habit’ and ‘habitual behaviour’ when considering behavioural complexity. We argue that conceptualisations of key terms have important implications for understanding, measuring and changing habit and habitual behaviour.","PeriodicalId":48034,"journal":{"name":"Health Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Habit and habitual behaviour.\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Gardner, Phillippa Lally\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17437199.2022.2105249\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Writing in 1899, William James observed that ‘ninety-nine hundredths or, possibly, nine hundred and ninety-nine thousandths of our activity is purely automatic and habitual’ (James, 1899, pp. 65–66). Nearly 125 years later, the concept of habit continues to stimulate important research regarding the most useful definition of habit, and how to harness habit to understand, predict, and change health-related behaviour (e.g., Gardner, 2015; Verplanken, 2018; Wood & Runger, 2016). Phillips and Mullan (2022) offer a thoughtful synthesis of theory and evidence regarding how habit can be applied to complex health behaviours. Their review addresses an important question that habit researchers are often asked: how credible is it to propose that learned cue-behaviour associations can underpin and sustain complicated real-world health behaviours? Drawing on a definition of complex behaviour as that which involves separable components and a greater number of subactions (or ‘steps’), Phillips and Mullan address this question by suggesting that the same concept – i.e., habit – can underpin both simple and complex behaviours. Significantly however, they argue that ‘complex habits’ should be theorised differently to ‘simple habits’, to better recognise the multiple components of complex habits and the rewards that Phillips and Mullan suggest are needed for complex habits to form. In this commentary, we expand discussion of two areas of Phillips and Mullan’s argument. First, we debate aspects of the definition of habit. Second, we highlight the importance of distinguishing between ‘habit’ and ‘habitual behaviour’ when considering behavioural complexity. We argue that conceptualisations of key terms have important implications for understanding, measuring and changing habit and habitual behaviour.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48034,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Psychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2022.2105249\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2022.2105249","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Habit and habitual behaviour.
Writing in 1899, William James observed that ‘ninety-nine hundredths or, possibly, nine hundred and ninety-nine thousandths of our activity is purely automatic and habitual’ (James, 1899, pp. 65–66). Nearly 125 years later, the concept of habit continues to stimulate important research regarding the most useful definition of habit, and how to harness habit to understand, predict, and change health-related behaviour (e.g., Gardner, 2015; Verplanken, 2018; Wood & Runger, 2016). Phillips and Mullan (2022) offer a thoughtful synthesis of theory and evidence regarding how habit can be applied to complex health behaviours. Their review addresses an important question that habit researchers are often asked: how credible is it to propose that learned cue-behaviour associations can underpin and sustain complicated real-world health behaviours? Drawing on a definition of complex behaviour as that which involves separable components and a greater number of subactions (or ‘steps’), Phillips and Mullan address this question by suggesting that the same concept – i.e., habit – can underpin both simple and complex behaviours. Significantly however, they argue that ‘complex habits’ should be theorised differently to ‘simple habits’, to better recognise the multiple components of complex habits and the rewards that Phillips and Mullan suggest are needed for complex habits to form. In this commentary, we expand discussion of two areas of Phillips and Mullan’s argument. First, we debate aspects of the definition of habit. Second, we highlight the importance of distinguishing between ‘habit’ and ‘habitual behaviour’ when considering behavioural complexity. We argue that conceptualisations of key terms have important implications for understanding, measuring and changing habit and habitual behaviour.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Psychology Review
Health Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The publication of Health Psychology Review (HPR) marks a significant milestone in the field of health psychology, as it is the first review journal dedicated to this important and rapidly growing discipline. Edited by a highly respected team, HPR provides a critical platform for the review, development of theories, and conceptual advancements in health psychology. This prestigious international forum not only contributes to the progress of health psychology but also fosters its connection with the broader field of psychology and other related academic and professional domains. With its vital insights, HPR is a must-read for those involved in the study, teaching, and practice of health psychology, behavioral medicine, and related areas.
期刊最新文献
Components of multiple health behaviour change interventions for patients with chronic conditions: a systematic review and meta-regression of randomized trials. Identifying the psychosocial barriers and facilitators associated with the uptake of genetic services for hereditary cancer syndromes: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Protection motivation theory and health behaviour: conceptual review, discussion of limitations, and recommendations for best practice and future research. Inhibitory control training to reduce appetitive behaviour: a meta-analytic investigation of effectiveness, potential moderators, and underlying mechanisms of change. Psychosocial determinants of alternative protein choices: a meta-review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1