↓ Skip to main content

Differences in motivation and adherence to a prescribed assignment after face-to-face and online psychoeducation: an experimental study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Differences in motivation and adherence to a prescribed assignment after face-to-face and online psychoeducation: an experimental study
Published in
BMC Psychology, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40359-017-0172-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sven Alfonsson, Karin Johansson, Jonas Uddling, Timo Hursti

Abstract

Adherence to treatment homework is associated with positive outcomes in behavioral psychotherapy but compliance to assignments is still often moderate. Whether adherence can be predicted by different types of motivation for the task and whether motivation plays different roles in face-to-face compared to online psychotherapy is unknown. If models of motivation, such as Self-determination theory, can be used to predict patients' behavior, it may facilitate further research into homework promotion. The aims of this study were, therefore, to investigate whether motivation variables could predict adherence to a prescribed assignment in face-to-face and online interventions using a psychotherapy analog model. A total of 100 participants were included in this study and randomized to either a face-to-face or online intervention. Participants in both groups received a psychoeducation session and were given an assignment for the subsequent week. The main outcome measurements were self-reported motivation and adherence to the assignment. Participant in the face-to-face condition reported significantly higher levels of motivation and showed higher levels of adherence compared to participants in the online condition. Adherence to the assignment was positively associated with intrinsic motivation and intervention credibility in the whole sample and especially in the online group. This study shows that intrinsic motivation and intervention credibility are strong predictors of adherence to assignments, especially in online interventions. The results indicate that intrinsic motivation may be partly substituted with face-to-face contact with a therapist. It may also be possible to identify patients with low motivation in online interventions who are at risk of dropping out. Methods for making online interventions more intrinsically motivating without increasing external pressure are needed. clinicaltrials.gov NCT02895308 . Retrospectively registered 30 August 2016.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 18%
Researcher 15 17%
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 20 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 41 46%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Computer Science 3 3%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 23 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 August 2017.
All research outputs
#1,950,269
of 16,057,636 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#109
of 388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,627
of 359,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,057,636 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 388 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 359,596 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them