The Health Belief Model of Behavior Change (2024)

Summary / Explanation

The health belief model (HBM) is a foundational framework in health behavior research. It was conceptualized in the 1950s to help understand preventative health behavior by social psychologists working in the United States Public Health Service (USPHS), specifically "the widespread failure of people to accept disease preventatives or screening tests for the early detection of asymptomatic disease." The model focuses on how individuals perceive health threats and decide to act based on the value individuals place on a particular goal and the likelihood that actions taken toward that goal will be successful in achieving the goal.It consists of6 primary cognitive constructs, or "dimensions" that influence behavior: perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, self-efficacy, and cues to action.

The model has been applied in diverse contexts, from chronic disease prevention to health education and promotion to evaluation of the effectiveness of community-based interventions. Critics argue that the HBM overly emphasizes cognitive constructs, neglecting emotional and social factors. It often overlooks cultural and social influences on health behaviors and assumes rational decision-making, ignoring emotional complexities. Some reviews highlight its static nature and limited predictive power, which can be as low as 20% to 40% compared to other models that incorporate social, economic, and environmental factors.

Technology integration, specifically leveraging technology for tailored health messaging, can modernize interventions and adapt to evolving lifestyles. Focusing on key constructs—prioritizing perceived susceptibility, severity, and self-efficacy—can strengthen health promotion efforts. While the HBM remains a foundational framework for understanding health behaviors, ongoing adaptation and refinement are crucial for its continued relevance and effectiveness in promoting health and preventing disease.

The Health Belief Model ofBehavior Change

The USPHS created the HBM, a widely used conceptual framework of health behavior, in the 1950s. The main contributors to the development of the model were Irwin M. Rosenstock, Godfrey M. Hochbaum, S. Stephen Kegels, and Howard Leventhal. The model responded to the challenges of tuberculosis screening using chest x-rays, the need for immunization, and the community's underutilization of services. The model is based on the psychologists' hypothesis that the community perceives health threats when undergoing chest x-rays for diagnosis and anticipates fear reduction from immunization as a perceived benefit.[1]

In practical terms, individuals assess the benefits of changing their behavior to mitigate health threats and decide to act based on their evaluation.This model is commonly applied to explore interpersonal decision-making on various health behaviors such as screening, vaccination, surgery, and the cessation of any unhealthy behaviors.[2][3][4]

Key Cognitive Constructs

As a theoretical framework, theHBM comprises4 primary cognitive constructs: perceived susceptibility to illness, perceived severity of illness, perceived benefits of behavior change, and perceived barriers to action.[5]Over time, and due to evolving research, psychologists have recognized the significance of self-efficacy as a critical aspect of health behavior decision-making and have accordingly incorporated it into the model.[6]In the 1970s, the "cues to action" construct wasadded to the model to include the stimuli ofinitiating the action for the change. This addition enhanced the model's predictive power by addressing the factors that motivate individuals to act on their beliefs about health behaviors.

TheHBM consists of the following:

Perceived susceptibility:assessing the probability of acquiring an illness or encountering an undesirable outcome. For instance, the individual susceptibility to viral infection increases if in a crowded public space during a respiratory pandemic.
Perceived severity: understanding the severity of the illness, condition, or unfavorable outcome and what could happen if no additional action is taken. There is a considerable range in how people perceive the severity of an illness, and they often consider both the medical and social implications when assessing its severity. The COVID-19 pandemic is an excellent example, with a wide range of behaviors based on differing perceptions of the consequences of becoming infected.
Perceived benefits: how the effectiveness ofvarious available actions to reduce the risk of illness are perceived.One exampleis wearing face masks during a respiratory pandemic.
Perceived barriers:obstacles to performing a recommended health action that maystop one from doing what is recommended. Examples include the availability, perceived social implications, or discomfort associated with wearing a respirator during a respiratory infectious disease outbreak.
Self-efficacy: an individual's belief in their capacity to perform a specific behavior or task effectively. It is also related to the likelihood of a person engaging in a desired behavior. Self-efficacy was initially incorporated into the perceived barriers construct of the model by Janz and Becker, but many psychologists later identified it as an essential and independent cognitive construct.[7][8]For example, a patient with a chronic illness who adheres to their healthcare provider's medication regimen demonstrates self-efficacy. They believe in remembering to take their medications, following dosage instructions, and managingadverse effects effectively.
Cues to action:whether from one's surroundings or subjective experiences.Specific cues can influence the actions one chooses to take.[9]While less explored, cues to action are the stimuli that initiate the decision-making process to embrace a recommended health intervention. These cues can be either internal or external, from noticing symptoms of an illness to being exposed to a health campaign.[10]

The HBM, a practical and widely used framework to illustrate the key cognitive constructs of health-related behavior change, isoften cited in the context of tobacco cessation in smoking cessation clinics as follows:

Perceived susceptibility is when tobacco users contemplate the fact that there are diseases or undesirable outcomes resulting from using tobacco.
At the same time, theperceived severityis based on the known fact of the relationship between cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases, death, and tobacco use.
In contrast, theperceived benefitsare the expected advantages following tobacco cessation, such as cardiovascular event risk reduction or chronic lung disease.
The commonly encounteredbarriersare peer influence, considering tobacco as an enjoyable behavior to relieve stress, and being addicted to it.
Self-efficacyis the ability to adhere to the cessation plan, such as taking the medication regularly and adopting healthcare workers' behavioral advice.
The cuesto actionmight be a close friend who recently suffered an acute myocardial infarction after lifelong nicotine use.[11][12]
See Also
Exploring the Connection Between Bacterial Biofilms and Renal Calculi: A Comprehensive Review - Journal of Pure and Applied Microbiology Early Stone Manipulation in Urinary Tract Infection Associated with Obstructing Nephrolithiasis Case Report: Two Cases of Recurring Ovale Malaria in Sarawak, Malaysia, after Successful Treatment of Imported Plasmodium falciparum Infection

Screening for breast cancer using mammography has also been frequently analyzed using this model, as follows:

Perceived susceptibilityis a 56-year-old woman considering her lifetime risk of developing breast cancer due to her age and risk factors.
Perceived severityfocuses on the publiclyunderstood morbidity and mortality caused by breast cancer.
Theperceived benefitof screening using mammography is the ability to detect breast cancer at an earlier and more treatable stage while considering the risks of false positives and negatives.
Perceivedbarriers maybe thereluctance to undergo the screening because of difficulty scheduling, discomfort, and anxiety related to possible abnormal findings.
Self-efficacyis confidence in obtaining the procedure and following up in the case of abnormal findings.This may bereinforced by health education about the process, offering insightsinto what to expect and how to arrange the procedure.
Thecues to actionmayinclude family encouragement, health reminders from a physician or insurance company, media influence, or the successful experience of a friend who underwent a similar scenario.[9]

Implementation

TheHBM has been adapted to fit diverse medical and cultural contexts influencing public health through health promotion and preventive community-based programs.

Oneexample of a practical application of the model is its use in reducing the risk of diabetes. For instance, a high perception of diabetes risk among adult females who were newly diagnosed with prediabetes was compared with those with normal fasting blood glucose levels. However, there was no association between a prediabetes diagnosis and implementation of healthy lifestyle behavior compared with those without prediabetes. This identified an opportunity to apply evidence-based approaches to motivate health behaviors to reduce the risk of disease progression in this population.[13]

In a 2024 systematic review, Alani Abdallah et al found that individuals' beliefs about their susceptibility, perceived benefits, and sense of self-efficacy are strongly linked to their adoption and use of preventative measures for common treatable diseases, such as cervical cancer.[14]Anokye et al came to a similar conclusion while examining patients undergoing screeningcardiovascular interventions. They found that these interventions encouraged individual confidence when engaging in beneficial health-related behaviors.[15]

A systematic review in 2020 by Ritchie et al found inconsistencies in the effectiveness of theHBM in encouraging the adoption of healthier choices. Theydiscovered that although the models explained observed findings in screening behavior, they often failed to report effectiveness.[16]Masoumeh et al determined that a cervical screening education program based on theHBM effectively improved Iranian women's participation in cervical cancer screening.[17]TheHBM has been used to examine and improve compliance with beneficial oral health interventions, medication adherence in adults with chronic disease who take multiple drugs, and intentions to get the COVID-19 vaccine with inconsistent results.[18][19][20]

The effectiveness of theHBM in changing behavior was also questioned by Xiao et al following the assessment of the impact of theory on human papillomavirus vaccination promotion.[21]Tremblay and his colleagues concluded in a 2024 published systematic review that thediagnosis of sexually transmitted diseases would impact the subsequent protective behaviors among younger adults.[22]

TheHBM extends beyond health promotion and has been used to evaluate intervention effectiveness using pre- and post-intervention methods. For instance, Joneset alused this model to assess a stroke prevention program for atrial fibrillation patients. They aimed to boost patients' perception of stroke severity and susceptibility by enhancing their knowledge about the link between atrial fibrillation and stroke. The study found an increase in aspirin use from 23% to 33% and an improved understanding of anticoagulant therapy risks.[23]

Furthermore, theHBM has beenapplied to various health behaviors and conditions, including adopting a healthy lifestyle, alcohol use, obesity, weight management, regular physical exercise, and dietary intake.[24][25][26]It also exhibited effectiveness in safety-related behaviors such as seatbelt use, preparedness for infectious disasters, and dental health.[27][28][29]Moreover, the model demonstrated effects regarding chronic diseases such as HIV, prostate cancer, and type 2 diabetes mellitus.[30][31][32]

Limitations

As with any model attempting to understand and influence a process as complex as human behavior, theHBM has several limitations. One of the most notable limitations is the lack of an individual's belief inhis capacity, which was addressed earlier by many psychologists but amended by Janz and Becker in the 1980s by adding self-efficacy to the model.

The model fundamentally focuses on cognitive constructs such as perceived susceptibility, severity, benefits, and barriers. Thus, it may not capture the emotional and social aspects that affect health behaviors.[7]

Some have criticized the model for not adequately addressing the impact of social and cultural factors on health beliefs and behaviors.[33]The model also assumes that individuals make rational decisions based on weighing the advantages and disadvantages of health actions even though emotions, habits, and other external pressures can complicate decisions.[34]

TheHBM has also been criticized for its static nature, which does not account for changes in beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors over time or in response to interventions. Furthermore, it can, at times, overemphasize individual responsibility for health, neglecting broader environmental and structural factors that influence health behaviors.[8][35]

Although the model was amendedto include self-efficacy in the 1980s, some reviews suggested that theHBM has a low predictive value (20% to 40%) in explaining health behaviors compared to other models or theories.[36][5]

Future Directions

TheHBM continues to be a constructive framework for understanding and promoting health behaviors. Incorporating social determinants of health into the model may give a deeper understanding of changing human behavior, particularly by recognizing the role of social, economic, environmental, and other factors in health beliefs. This can be achieved by tailoring interventions based on cultural beliefs to enhance their relevance and effectiveness.[37]

Using recent technology to deliver customized health messages might effectively enhance health promotion and prevention and make the model more applicable to current lifestyle practices.[38]

Furthermore, focusing on the key constructs of theHBM may benefit health promotion. Advancing interventions to enhance awareness and understanding of health risks and their potential severity might enhance perceived susceptibility and severity.[7]Khodaveisi et al. addressed practical, financial, and logistical barriers to adopting healthy behaviors in the hopes of reducing overall perceived barriers.[39]While Bandura et al postulated that empowering individuals with the confidence and skills to act and maintain healthy behaviors would promote self-efficacy.[40]

Whilecreatedin the 1950s, theHBM remains a relevant andvaluable foundational framework for understanding and promoting behavior change in preventative medicine. By recognizing the significance of individual perceptions, beliefs, and cues to action, the current model enables healthcare professionals to tailor interventions effectively to address specific health concerns and motivate individuals to adopt healthier behaviors. Through the application of strategies aimed at enhancing perceived susceptibility, severity, benefits, and barriers, alongside the reinforcement of cues to action, theHBM empowers individuals to take proactive steps toward safeguarding their health and well-being. As society continues to face ongoing health challenges, the continued utilization and refinement of this model hold promise for promoting positive health outcomes and fostering a culture of prevention and wellness.

References

1.: Barley E, Lawson V. Using health psychology to help patients: theories of behaviour change. Br J Nurs. 2016 Sep 08;25(16):924-7. [PubMed: 27615529]
2.: Johnson CE, Mues KE, Mayne SL, Kiblawi AN. Cervical cancer screening among immigrants and ethnic minorities: a systematic review using the Health Belief Model. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2008 Jul;12(3):232-41. [PubMed: 18596467]
3.: Brewer NT, Fazekas KI. Predictors of HPV vaccine acceptability: a theory-informed, systematic review. Prev Med. 2007 Aug-Sep;45(2-3):107-14. [PubMed: 17628649]
4.: Yarbrough SS, Braden CJ. Utility of health belief model as a guide for explaining or predicting breast cancer screening behaviours. J Adv Nurs. 2001 Mar;33(5):677-88. [PubMed: 11298205]
5.: Orji R, Vassileva J, Mandryk R. Towards an effective health interventions design: an extension of the health belief model. Online J Public Health Inform. 2012;4(3) [PMC free article: PMC3615835] [PubMed: 23569653]
6.: Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977 Mar;84(2):191-215. [PubMed: 847061]
7.: Janz NK, Becker MH. The Health Belief Model: a decade later. Health Educ Q. 1984 Spring;11(1):1-47. [PubMed: 6392204]
8.: Rosenstock IM, Strecher VJ, Becker MH. Social learning theory and the Health Belief Model. Health Educ Q. 1988 Summer;15(2):175-83. [PubMed: 3378902]
9.: Menon U, Champion V, Monahan PO, Daggy J, Hui S, Skinner CS. Health belief model variables as predictors of progression in stage of mammography adoption. Am J Health Promot. 2007 Mar-Apr;21(4):255-61. [PMC free article: PMC3046551] [PubMed: 17375491]
10.: Bish A, Michie S. Demographic and attitudinal determinants of protective behaviours during a pandemic: a review. Br J Health Psychol. 2010 Nov;15(Pt 4):797-824. [PMC free article: PMC7185452] [PubMed: 20109274]
11.: Taniguchi C, Narisada A, Ando H, Hashimoto A, Nakayama A, Ito M, Tanaka H, Suzuki K. Smoking cessation behavior in patients with a diagnosis of a non-communicable disease: The impact of perceived disease severity of and susceptibility to the disease. Tob Induc Dis. 2023;21:125. [PMC free article: PMC10557053] [PubMed: 37808588]
12.: Bernstein EY, Chang Y, Levy DE, Baggett TP, Lee SS, Tindle HA, Rigotti NA. Tobacco-Related Disease, Health Beliefs, and Post-hospital Tobacco Abstinence. Am J Prev Med. 2023 Nov;65(5):792-799. [PMC free article: PMC10592560] [PubMed: 37217039]
13.: Strodel RJ, Chang CH, Khurana SG, Camp AW, Magenheimer EA, Hawley NL. Increased Awareness, Unchanged Behavior: Prediabetes Diagnosis in a Low-Income, Minority Population. Diabetes Educ. 2019 Apr;45(2):203-213. [PubMed: 30704368]
14.: Al-Ani A, Hammouri M, Sultan H, Al-Huneidy L, Mansour A, Al-Hussaini M. Factors affecting cervical screening using the health belief model during the last decade: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychooncology. 2024 Jan;33(1):e6275. [PubMed: 38282232]
15.: Anokye R, Jackson B, Dimmock J, Dickson JM, Kennedy MA, Schultz CJ, Blekkenhorst LC, Hodgson JM, Stanley M, Lewis JR. Impact of vascular screening interventions on perceived threat, efficacy beliefs and behavioural intentions: a systematic narrative review. Health Promot Int. 2023 Jun 01;38(3) [PMC free article: PMC10243777] [PubMed: 37279474]
16.: Ritchie D, Van den Broucke S, Van Hal G. The health belief model and theory of planned behavior applied to mammography screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Nurs. 2021 May;38(3):482-492. [PubMed: 33258163]
17.: Simbar M, Ghazanfarpour M, Abdolahian S. Effects of training based on the health belief model on Iranian women's performance about cervical screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Educ Health Promot. 2020;9:179. [PMC free article: PMC7482640] [PubMed: 32953907]
18.: Sanaei Nasab H, Yazdanian M, Mokhayeri Y, Latifi M, Niksadat N, Harooni J, Armoon B. The role of psychological theories in oral health interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Dent Hyg. 2019 May;17(2):142-152. [PubMed: 30702796]
19.: Patton DE, Hughes CM, Cadogan CA, Ryan CA. Theory-Based Interventions to Improve Medication Adherence in Older Adults Prescribed Polypharmacy: A Systematic Review. Drugs Aging. 2017 Feb;34(2):97-113. [PMC free article: PMC5290062] [PubMed: 28025725]
20.: Yenew C, Dessie AM, Gebeyehu AA, Genet A. Intention to receive COVID-19 vaccine and its health belief model (HBM)-based predictors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2023 Dec 31;19(1):2207442. [PMC free article: PMC10294737] [PubMed: 37170620]
21.: Xiao X, Lee DKL, Wong RM, Borah P. The Impact of Theory in HPV Vaccination Promotion Research: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Health Promot. 2021 Sep;35(7):1002-1014. [PubMed: 33949203]
22.: Tremblay F, Courtemanche Y, Bélanger RE, Turcotte-Tremblay AM. A systematic review of the association between history of sexually transmitted infections and subsequent condom use in adolescents. BMC Public Health. 2024 Apr 10;24(1):1000. [PMC free article: PMC11007949] [PubMed: 38600483]
23.: Lloyd-Jones DM, Wang TJ, Leip EP, Larson MG, Levy D, Vasan RS, D'Agostino RB, Massaro JM, Beiser A, Wolf PA, Benjamin EJ. Lifetime risk for development of atrial fibrillation: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2004 Aug 31;110(9):1042-6. [PubMed: 15313941]
24.: De Leon AN, Peterson R, Dvorak RD, Leary AV, Kramer MP, Burr EK, Toth EM, Pinto D. The Health Belief Model in the Context of Alcohol Protective Behavioral Strategies. Psychiatry. 2023 Spring;86(1):1-16. [PubMed: 36240071]
25.: Abdeyazdan Z, Moshgdar H, Golshiri P. Evaluating the Effect of Lifestyle Education Based on Health Belief Model for Mothers of Obese and Overweight School-age Children on Obesity-Related Behaviors. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2017 May-Jun;22(3):248-252. [PMC free article: PMC5494957] [PubMed: 28706552]
26.: Al-Haroni H, Nik Farid ND, Azanan MS. Effectiveness of education intervention, with regards to physical activity level and a healthy diet, among Middle Eastern adolescents in Malaysia: A study protocol for a randomized control trial, based on a health belief model. PLoS One. 2024;19(1):e0289937. [PMC free article: PMC10793934] [PubMed: 38232100]
27.: Okyere P, Agyei-Baffour P, Harris MJ, Mock C, Donkor P, Yankson IK, Owusu-Dabo E. Predictors of Seat-Belt Use among Bus Passengers in Ghana: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour and Health Belief Model. J Community Health. 2021 Oct;46(5):992-999. [PubMed: 33797681]
28.: Khaira N, Faisal TI, Magfirah M, Veri N, Usrina N, Andy Rias Y. Effectiveness of a Health Belief Model-Based Education Program on Self-Efficacy and Preparedness for Infectious Disasters in Rural Populations. Creat Nurs. 2024 May;30(2):165-172. [PubMed: 38591961]
29.: Antonovsky A. The model dental patient. An empirical study of preventive health behavior. Soc Sci Med (1967). 1970 Nov;4(4):367-80. [PubMed: 4992908]
30.: Dorr N, Krueckeberg S, Strathman A, Wood MD. Psychosocial correlates of voluntary HIV antibody testing in college students. AIDS Educ Prev. 1999 Feb;11(1):14-27. [PubMed: 10070586]
31.: Khalil MIM, Ashour A, Shaala RS, Allam RM, Abdelaziz TM, Mousa EFS. Effect of health belief model-based educational intervention on prostate cancer prevention; knowledge, practices, and intentions. BMC Cancer. 2024 Mar 04;24(1):289. [PMC free article: PMC10913411] [PubMed: 38438952]
32.: Tan MY. The relationship of health beliefs and complication prevention behaviors of Chinese individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2004 Oct;66(1):71-7. [PubMed: 15364164]
33.: Russell KM, Champion VL, Skinner CS. Psychosocial factors related to repeat mammography screening over 5 years in African American women. Cancer Nurs. 2006 May-Jun;29(3):236-43. [PubMed: 16783125]
34.: Harrison JA, Mullen PD, Green LW. A meta-analysis of studies of the Health Belief Model with adults. Health Educ Res. 1992 Mar;7(1):107-16. [PubMed: 10148735]
35.: Ogden J. Some problems with social cognition models: a pragmatic and conceptual analysis. Health Psychol. 2003 Jul;22(4):424-8. [PubMed: 12940399]
36.: Jones CL, Jensen JD, Scherr CL, Brown NR, Christy K, Weaver J. The Health Belief Model as an explanatory framework in communication research: exploring parallel, serial, and moderated mediation. Health Commun. 2015;30(6):566-76. [PMC free article: PMC4530978] [PubMed: 25010519]
37.: Resnicow K, Baranowski T, Ahluwalia JS, Braithwaite RL. Cultural sensitivity in public health: defined and demystified. Ethn Dis. 1999 Winter;9(1):10-21. [PubMed: 10355471]
38.: Maher CA, Lewis LK, Ferrar K, Marshall S, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Vandelanotte C. Are health behavior change interventions that use online social networks effective? A systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2014 Feb 14;16(2):e40. [PMC free article: PMC3936265] [PubMed: 24550083]
39.: Khodaveisi M, Azizpour B, Jadidi A, Mohammadi Y. Education based on the health belief model to improve the level of physical activity. Phys Act Nutr. 2021 Dec;25(4):17-23. [PMC free article: PMC8843841] [PubMed: 35152620]
40.: Bandura A. Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Educ Behav. 2004 Apr;31(2):143-64. [PubMed: 15090118]