Search for: All records

Health behaviors are inextricably linked to health and well-being, yet issues such as physical inactivity and insufficient sleep remain significant global public health problems. Mobile technology—and the unprecedented scope and quantity of data it generates—has a promising but largely untapped potential to promote health behaviors at the individual and population levels. This perspective article provides multidisciplinary recommendations on the design and use of mobile technology, and the concomitant wealth of data, to promote behaviors that support overall health. Using physical activity as anexemplar health behavior, we review emerging strategies for health behavior change interventions. We describe progress on personalizing interventions to an individual and their social, cultural, and built environments, as well as on evaluating relationships between mobile technology data and health to establish evidence-based guidelines. In reviewing these strategies and highlighting directions for future research, we advance the use of theory-based, personalized, and human-centered approaches in promoting health behaviors. 

Abstract Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions¹, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process². In April 2020, an influential paper³proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.