Health Behavior

The scientifıc study of health behavior is a fıeld characterized by nonconsensus; it is not yet known what variables best predict successful outomes. Contemporary models (such as the theory of lanned behavior, the transtheoretical model, the health eliefmodel, self-determination theory, and social cogniive theory) have been developed and refıned through igorous efforts to demonstrate linear causality among ypothetically related psychosocial variables. However, s practitioners testify, such models are problematic in hat they are not fully explanatory and usually are maniest in only modest, transient improvement in health ehavior. At best, thesemodels explain a small amount of he variance in behavioral outcomes, usually around 0%–20%. The knowledge gained from these models bout how the environment and learning experiences ffect behavior are undoubtedly relevant considerations, s are social norms, cues to action, beliefs, attitudes, viarious learning experiences, perceptions of susceptibilty, opportunity, and readiness for change. However, these psychosocial variables, though they are f interest, provide a very incomplete account of human ailure to choose healthy behavior, despite near-optimal nowledge and resources. Faced with the most compeling of evidence, delivered by the most acceptable and otivating of means, human truculence often persists, ielding various unfortunate results, including relapse, orbidity, and prematuremortality. Humans reliably act rrationally, in injurious ways both rapid and slow. Huan nature is to be emotional, apparently self-destructive, efıant, contrary, indulgent, fıckle, and seemingly incapale of sustaining the cool-headed, linear logic that longevty requires. When people do change their behavior to improve heir health, it is often an unexpected and epiphanous xperience, seldom arising from a predictable, linear ex-