Does ruminative responding to a health behaviour goal failure reduce health behaviour intentions?

Abstract

Background: The Self-Regulation Resource model (SRRM) highlights the importance of positive affect and future-orientation for self-regulating health behaviours, and the depleting effects of negative affect on these resources. Response styles characterized by negative affect, such as rumination (brooding and reflection, to a lesser degree), are expected to interfere with health behaviours because of decreases in positive affect and future-orientation. This study will test this hypothesis using an upward counterfactual thinking (UCFT) paradigm to experimentally induce ruminative and reflective responses to a failed health behaviour goal (HBG). Methods: 174 people with a HBG will complete an experimental online survey with random assignment to one of three conditions with retrospective recall of a recent HBG failure. The rumination condition will have instructions to generate UCFT about an uncontrollable aspect of the failure, the reflection condition will have instructions to generate UCFT about a controllable aspect of the failure, and the control condition will involve re-reading the failure. Participants will complete measures of future self-continuity, HBG intentions, state rumination, and pre- and post-rumination-induction. Pre- and post-induction rumination will be measured as a manipulation-check. ANCOVAs will test the effects of condition on dependent variables, partialling-out baseline scores; moderated-mediation analysis will test the explanatory pathways. Expected results: Brooding, compared to reflection and no UCFT, is expected to reduce future-orientation and positive affect, increase negative affect, and in turn, reduce HBG intentions. Current stage of work: Application for ethical approval is in preparation. Discussion: Findings could highlight the importance of addressing ruminative responding to HBG failures.