↓ Skip to main content

Motivational Interviewing: moving from why to how with autonomy support

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
19 X users
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
244 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
604 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
Motivational Interviewing: moving from why to how with autonomy support
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, March 2012
DOI 10.1186/1479-5868-9-19
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ken Resnicow, Fiona McMaster

Abstract

Motivational Interviewing (MI), a counseling style initially used to treat addictions, increasingly has been used in health care and public health settings. This manuscript provides an overview of MI, including its theoretical origins and core clinical strategies. We also address similarities and differences with Self-Determination Theory. MI has been defined as person-centered method of guiding to elicit and strengthen personal motivation for change. Core clinical strategies include, e.g., reflective listening and eliciting change talk. MI encourages individuals to work through their ambivalence about behavior change and to explore discrepancy between their current behavior and broader life goals and values. A key challenge for MI practitioners is deciding when and how to transition from building motivation to the goal setting and planning phases of counseling. To address this, we present a new three-phase model that provides a framework for moving from WHY to HOW; from building motivation to more action oriented counseling, within a patient centered framework.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 604 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 <1%
Australia 3 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Unknown 593 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 112 19%
Student > Master 105 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 11%
Researcher 41 7%
Other 34 6%
Other 100 17%
Unknown 148 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 115 19%
Psychology 95 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 81 13%
Social Sciences 44 7%
Sports and Recreations 31 5%
Other 65 11%
Unknown 173 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. 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 19 April 2023.
All research outputs
#880,629
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#281
of 2,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,080
of 172,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#2
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,147 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 172,638 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.