Abstract
Stage models are prominent in research describing health behavior change. Since stage models often propose that different factors have varying influences on membership in the different stage, statistical methods that can estimate the thresholds that separate the stages and the relative value of variables in influencing these thresholds are useful. This article describes use of a “thresholds of change” model for analyzing the thresholds separating stages and specifically for examining the effects of explanatory variables on these thresholds using a generalization of an ordinal logistic (or probit) regression model. Data from a skin cancer prevention study (N=3,185) in which participants were grouped into three stages for sunscreen use (precontemplation, contemplation, and action) are used to illustrate the Thresholds of Change Model. For this example, two thresholds exist: a contemplation (between precontemplation and contemplation) and an action threshold (between contemplation and action). Variables examined include gender, skin type, perceived susceptibility to sunburn, worry about skin cancer, and sun protection self-efficacy. We examine models that assume that the effects of these variables are the same across thresholds, and then allow the effects of these variables to vary across thresholds. Results indicate that perceived susceptibility has an equal effect on both thresholds, but that worry and self-efficacy have differential effects: worry exerts a greater influence on the contemplation threshold, whereas self-efficacy has a significantly stronger effect on the action threshold. Gender also has a stronger effect on the action threshold; males were less likely to be classified in the action stage than females. This analytic approach has broad applications to many types of stage data.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Prochaska JO, DiClemente C: Stages and processes of self-change in smoking: Toward an integrative model of change.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1983,51:390–395.
Prochaska JO, DiClemente C, Norcross J: In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors.American Psychologist. 1992,47:1102–1114.
Flay B: Youth tobacco use: Risks, patterns, and control. In Slade J, Orleans CT (eds),Nicotine Addiction: Principles and Management. New York: Oxford Press, 1993.
Bock RD:Multivariate Statistical Methods in Behavioral Research. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
Long JS:Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1997.
Peterson B, Harrell FE: Partial proportional odds models for ordinal response variables.Applied Statistics. 1990,39:205–217.
Terza J: Ordinal probit: A generalization.Communications in Statistics. 1985,14:1–12.
McKelvey RD, Zavoina W: A statistical model for the analysis of ordinal level dependent variables.Journal of Mathematical Sociology. 1975,4:103–120.
Winship C, Mare RD: Regression models with ordinal variables.American Sociological Review. 1984,49:512–525.
Hedeker D, Mermelstein RJ: A multilevel thresholds of change model for analysis of stages of change data.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1998,33:427–455.
Collins LM, Wugalter SE: Latent class models for stage-sequential dynamic latent variables.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1992,27:131–137.
Martin RA, Velicer WF, Fava JL: Latent transition analysis applied to the stages of change for smoking cessation.Addictive Behaviors. 1996,21:67–80.
Velicer WF, Martin RA, Collins LM: Latent transition analysis for longitudinal data.Addiction. 1996,91 (Suppl.): S197-S209.
Collins LM, Wugalter SE, Rousculp SS:LTA User's Manual. Los Angeles: J. P. Guilford Laboratory of Quantiative Psychology, University of Southern California, 1991.
Agresti A:Categorical Data Analysis. New York: Wiley, 1990.
Little RJA: Modeling the drop-out mechanism in repeated-measures studies.Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1995,90:1112–1121.
Hedeker D, Gibbons RD: Application of random-effects patternmixture models for missing data in longitudinal studies.Psychological Methods. 1997,2:64–78.
Fitzpatrick TB: Soleil et peau.Journal of Medical Esthetics. 1975,2:33–34.
Silvey SD:Statistical Inference. New York: Chapman and Hall, 1975.
Wald A: Tests of statistical hypotheses concerning several parameters when the number of observations in large.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society. 1943,54:426–482.
Greene WH:LIMDEP Version 7.0 User's Manual. Bellport, NY: Econometric Software, Inc., 1995.
Hedeker D, Gibbons RD: MIXOR: A computer program for mixed-effects ordinal regression analysis.Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine. 1996,49:157–176.
McCullagh P: Regression models for ordinal data (with discussion).Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B. 1980,42:109–142.
Weinstein ND, Rothman AJ, Sutton SR: Stages theories of health behavior: Conceptual and methodological issues.Health Psychology. 1998,17:290–299.
Bryk AS, Raudenbush SW:Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 1992.
Goldstein H:Multilevel Statistical Models (2nd Ed.). New York: Halstead Press, 1995.
Hedeker D, Gibbons RD, Flay BR: Random-effects regression models for clustered data with an example from smoking prevention research.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1994,62:757–765.
Hedeker D, Mermelstein RJ: Application of random-effects regression models in relapse research.Addiction. 1996,91(Suppl.):S211-S229.
Hedeker D, Gibbons RD: A random-effects ordinal regression model for multilevel analysis.Biometrics. 1994,50:933–944.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Preparation of this manuscript was supported in part by National Institutes of Mental Health Grant MH56146 and National Cancer Institute Grant CA 62964.
The authors thank guest editor Dawn Wilson, Ph.D., and three anonymous reviewers for many helpful and constructive comments.
About this article
Cite this article
Hedeker, D., Mermelstein, R.J. & Weeks, K.A. The thresholds of change model: An approach to analyzing stages of change data. ann. behav. med. 21, 61–70 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02895035
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02895035