| Course | HLTH 8242 Changing Health Behavior: Theory and Practice |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 4 |
| Paper type | Theory selection memo |
| Length | About 710 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | PhD in Public Health |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HLTH 8242 Week 4
Theory Selection Memo: The Integrated Behavioral Model Over the Health Belief Model for Stool Test Kit Return, Three Reasons That Belong to the Chosen Theory Alone, Each Checked Against What the Rival Contains
Student Name
Walden University
HLTH 8242: Changing Health Behavior: Theory and Practice
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Theory Selection Memo: The Integrated Behavioral Model Over the Health Belief Model for Stool Test Kit Return, Three Reasons That Belong to the Chosen Theory Alone, Each Checked Against What the Rival Contains
Decision
The kit return program for the Fallbrook clinic network will be designed with the integrated behavioral model, as described by Montano and Kasprzyk (2015). The health belief model, the most common alternative in screening research, is rejected. A reason counts in this memo only if it names a feature the integrated model has and the health belief model does not; reasons that both theories satisfy are set aside, however true they are.
The Rival
The rival model rests on six beliefs and prompts: whether a person thinks the disease could strike them, how bad it would be, whether screening pays off, which obstacles loom, what triggers action and, in later versions, confidence in one's own ability (Skinner et al., 2015). It has a long record in cancer screening, and many of its constructs fit the kit problem: patients may doubt that they are susceptible, or see barriers such as embarrassment. That record is why it is the right rival. A choice of theory is only informative if the rejected option was plausible.
Reason 1: Norms
The integrated behavioral model includes perceived norms, both injunctive, what important others think the person should do, and descriptive, what others like the person actually do (Montano & Kasprzyk, 2015). Outreach staff report that some non-returners say nobody they know does this kind of test, and that some spouses discourage it. Those are normative beliefs.
Check against the rival: the health belief model has no normative construct. Cues to action can include a friend's advice, but a cue is a trigger, not a belief about what others do or expect. The reason is exclusive.
Reason 2: What Stands Between Intention and Behavior
In the integrated model, intention is the most important determinant of behavior, but four other factors also affect whether an intention becomes action: knowledge and skill to perform the behavior, salience of the behavior, environmental constraints and habit (Montano & Kasprzyk, 2015). For kit return, this matters more than any other feature. Many non-returners intend to do the test. They put the kit aside and forget it, or the collection steps confuse them, or they cannot find a mailbox on their route. Those are salience, skill and constraint problems, not problems of belief.
Check against the rival: the health belief model's self-efficacy construct is a belief about one's ability, not the skill itself, and cues to action prompt readiness rather than explain why a formed intention fails. The model has no construct for environmental constraints or habit. The match is partial at most, and the integrated model's direct treatment of the intention-behavior gap is exclusive to it.
Reason 3: Two Kinds of Attitude
The integrated model separates experiential attitude, the person's emotional response to doing the behavior, from instrumental attitude, beliefs about its outcomes (Montano & Kasprzyk, 2015). Many patients believe the test is worthwhile and still find the prospect of collecting stool unpleasant. Treating these as one attitude would hide the problem.
Check against the rival: the health belief model's perceived barriers construct can include unpleasantness, and its perceived benefits construct covers beliefs about outcomes, so this reason is not fully exclusive. What the integrated model adds is the explicit pairing of feeling and belief as two parts of attitude, which points to different messages for each. This reason is weaker than the first two and is kept as supporting rather than decisive.
Reasons Set Aside
Two reasons often given for the integrated model fail the exclusivity test. "It has strong evidence in screening" is true of both theories. "It includes self-efficacy" is true of later versions of both. Neither reason supports the choice.
What the Choice Commits the Program To
Choosing the integrated model commits the program to measure norms, intentions and the four gap factors, not only beliefs about cancer, and to design activities aimed at each. Fishbein and Ajzen (2010) argue that effective interventions start by identifying which determinants actually distinguish people who perform a behavior from those who do not. The barrier analysis that follows will test whether salience, skill and norms do so in this population.
References
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Psychology Press.
Montano, D. E., & Kasprzyk, D. (2015). Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, and the integrated behavioral model. In K. Glanz, B. K. Rimer, & K. Viswanath (Eds.), Health behavior: Theory, research, and practice (5th ed., pp. 95-124). Jossey-Bass.
Skinner, C. S., Tiro, J., & Champion, V. L. (2015). The health belief model. In K. Glanz, B. K. Rimer, & K. Viswanath (Eds.), Health behavior: Theory, research, and practice (5th ed., pp. 75-94). Jossey-Bass.
Reading the HLTH 8242 Week 4 instructions
Students write a memo selecting a behavioral theory for their program and rejecting a plausible alternative. Faculty expect reasons that depend on features the chosen theory has and the rival lacks, checked against the rival's actual constructs. Reasons that apply to both theories, such as a strong evidence base, should be recognized as non-decisive. The rival should be described fairly and chosen because readers would expect it. The memo should say what the choice commits the program to measure and target.
Inside the HLTH 8242 Week 4 example
The decision section names the chosen theory and states the exclusivity rule. The rival section summarizes the health belief model's constructs from Skinner and colleagues and explains why it is the right rival. Reason 1 describes injunctive and descriptive norms and checks that the rival has no normative construct. Reason 2 sets out the integrated model's four factors between intention and behavior, applies them to forgetting and collection confusion, and checks them against self-efficacy and cues to action. Reason 3 separates experiential from instrumental attitude, checks it against perceived barriers and benefits and keeps it as supporting. A section sets aside two non-exclusive reasons. The closing section cites Fishbein and Ajzen on identifying the determinants that distinguish doers from non-doers.
Where the marks sit in the HLTH 8242 Week 4 rubric
Theory selection memos are marked on the rigor of the comparison. A memo that lists reasons to like the chosen theory, without testing them against the rival, earns limited credit. The rubric rewards an explicit rule for what counts as a reason, an accurate description of both theories and a check of each reason against the rival's constructs. Faculty respect a memo that downgrades its own weaker reason. Setting aside non-exclusive reasons shows discipline. The commitment section should follow from the choice. Accurate citations of the theory chapters complete the grade. A memo that names the rival's strengths honestly before rejecting it reads as more credible than one that dismisses it. Faculty also look for a link from the chosen theory to the barrier analysis that follows.
HLTH 8242 Week 4 help from the desk
Theory memos often justify a choice with reasons that fit any theory: it is well studied, it is widely used, it includes self-efficacy. Others choose a rival nobody would consider. A third problem is describing the rival inaccurately so it is easy to reject. To write a stronger memo, pick the rival your readers would expect. List its constructs. For each reason you give, ask whether the rival also has that feature. Keep only the reasons it lacks, and mark any that overlap partly. End with what your choice obliges you to measure. Say what the rival does well before you explain why it loses, and connect your choice to the barriers you expect to examine next week. That link shows the memo will shape the program. A theory memo comparing two models for your own behavior is something we can prepare.
Get a HLTH 8242 Week 4 example written to your instructions
Say which theory you are leaning toward and which rival your readers would reach for, and attach the Week 4 prompt and rubric. The HLTH 8242 memo makes the choice in its opening line and argues it with reasons the rival cannot claim, flagging any that are only partly exclusive. It arrives inside 24 to 48 hours, with no charge the first time.
More HLTH 8242 papers and PhD in Public Health samples
- HLTH 8242 Week 1: Target Behavior Orientation Post
- HLTH 8242 Week 2: Target Behavior Brief
- HLTH 8242 Week 3: Risk Message Discussion Post
- HLTH 8242 Week 5: Kit Return Barrier Analysis
- HLTH 8242 Week 6: Mechanism Logic Model
- HLTH 8242 Week 7: Construct Activity Map
- HLTH 8242 Week 8: TIDieR Intervention Draft
- HLTH 8242 Week 9: Mediation Evaluation Plan
- HLTH 8242 Week 10: Incentive Design Peer Critique
- HLTH 8242 Week 11: Program Design Defense
- HLTH 8202E Week 4: Heat Survey Item Bank
HLTH 8242 Week 4 questions, answered
What makes a reason exclusive to one theory?
It depends on a construct the rival does not contain. Saying a model is well supported fails the test, since every candidate can say that. Saying it separates descriptive from injunctive norms passes, if the rival has no descriptive norm construct. The sample checks each reason against the rival's constructs and labels one reason as only partly exclusive.
Is the integrated behavioral model too large for a single intervention?
It can be, which is why the memo lists measurement burden as a cost. The model does not require an intervention to target every construct; it helps identify which ones are weak in a given population. The barrier analysis that follows narrows the list, so the intervention works on the few constructs that are actually low.
What makes the health belief model the right rival?
Readers of screening research would expect it, since it has shaped a long line of cancer screening studies. Beating an obscure rival proves little. If readers in your section would expect a different alternative, such as the transtheoretical model, the memo's structure holds and only the exclusivity checks change.
Where can I find a free HLTH 8242 Week 4 sample paper?
This page carries the complete Week 4 theory selection memo, choosing the integrated behavioral model over the health belief model with three exclusivity-tested reasons and three references.
Which reasons does the memo set aside?
That the model has strong evidence in screening and that it includes self-efficacy, because both are true of the health belief model as well and so cannot decide between them.