Understanding treatment-seeking smokers' motivation to change: content analysis of the decisional balance worksheet.
Understanding treatment-seeking smokers' motivation to change: content analysis of the decisional balance worksheet.
复制标题
了解寻求治疗的吸烟者改变的动机：决策平衡工作表的内容分析。
DOI：
10.1016/j.addbeh.2012.08.008
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Batra,Anil
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Collins,SusanE;Eck,Sandra;Torchalla,Iris;Schröter,Martina;Batra,Anil
决策平衡量表（DBW）是一种衡量改变动机的开放式指标，可用于记录寻求治疗的吸烟者吸烟与戒烟的利弊。最近的研究结果表明，开放式DBW可以量化，以有效地反映人们戒烟的动机水平（柯林斯，埃克，托纳，施罗特和巴特拉，2010年）。本研究的目的是通过考察这些参与者决策平衡的定性内容来加深我们对他们改变动机的理解。参与者是寻求治疗的吸烟者（N=268），他们参加了一项更大的定制戒烟干预的随机对照试验（Batra等人，2010年）。使用DBW，参与者记录了他们吸烟与戒烟的利弊，内容分析方法被用来提取共同的主题。结果表明，吸烟和禁欲的身体和心理的影响/功能是最常提到的优点和缺点。虽然随着时间的推移，决策的平衡类别实质上是相似的，他们的相对频率从治疗前转移到治疗后。就整个样本而言，从治疗前到治疗后，赞成吸烟的人数普遍减少，而赞成戒烟的人数增加。研究结果表明，临床医生可以预期某些感知的利弊，以表征他们的客户的决策过程中吸烟和禁欲。与此同时，决策平衡的使用允许评估个人独特的动机集。
The Decisional Balance Worksheet (DBW), an open-ended measure of motivation to change, may be used to record the pros and cons of smoking versus abstinence among treatment-seeking smokers. Recent findings indicated that the open-ended DBW could be quantified to validly reflect people's level of motivation to stop smoking (Collins, Eck, Torchalla, Schröter, & Batra, 2010). The goal of the current study was to enhance our understanding of these participants' motivation to change by examining the qualitative content of their decisional balance. Participants were treatment-seeking smokers (N=268) who had participated in a larger randomized controlled trial of tailored smoking cessation interventions (Batra et al., 2010). Using the DBW, participants recorded their pros and cons of smoking versus abstinence, and content analysis methods were used to extract common themes. Findings indicated that the physical and psychological effects/functions of smoking and abstinence were most commonly mentioned as both pros and cons. Although the decisional balance categories were substantively similar over time, their relative frequency shifted from pre- to posttreatment. For the sample as a whole, the number of pros of smoking generally decreased, whereas the pros of abstinence increased from pre- to posttreatment. Findings suggest that clinicians can expect certain perceived pros and cons to characterize their clients' decision-making process about smoking and abstinence. At the same time, the use of the decisional balance allows for assessment of individuals' unique motivational set.