Measuring motivation using the transtheoretical (stages of change) model: A follow-up study of people who failed an online hearing screening

Figures & data

Table 1. Summary of descriptive data and data for the three measurements at baseline for the study sample who did not participate in the follow-up (n = 102), and the study sample that did participate in the follow-up (n = 122).

	No follow-up (n = 102)	Follow-up (n = 122)	Significance
Gender n (%)			χ^2(1) = 0.12, p = 0.733
Male	60 (58.8)	69 (56.6)
Female	42 (41.2)	53 (43.4)
Age, in years Mean ± SD	67.25 (8.8)	68.95 (8.8)	t(222) = 1.44, p = 0.152
Speech and noise recognition threshold expressed as a signal-to-noise ratio, in dB Mean ± SD	−0.29 (2.5)	−0.57 (2.2)	t(222) = −0.88, p = 0.378
Education n (%)			χ^2(3) = 1.22, p = 0.748
Elementary school	19 (18.6)	23 (18.9)
Middle school	9 (8.8)	16 (13.1)
High school	28 (27.5)	29 (23.8)
College/university/graduate school	46 (45.1)	54 (44.2)
Living situation n (%)			χ^2(1) = 0.51, p = 0.477
Alone	21 (20.6)	30 (22.8)
With others	81 (79.4)	92 (77.2)
Amount of years with perceived hearing problems
Mean ± SD	10.9 (10.3)	10.3 (10.3)	t(220) = −0.44, p = 0.659
Can you imagine yourself using hearing aids, if you were recommended? n (%)			χ^2(1) = 1.27, p = 0.260
Yes	84 (82.4)	107 (87.7)
No	18 (17.6)	15 (12.3)
URICA Stage with highest score n (%)			χ^2(3) = 6.42, p = 0.093
Precontemplation	14 (13.7)	7 (5.7)
Contemplation	42 (41.2)	43 (35.2)
Preparation	44 (43.1)	68 (55.7)
Action	2 (2.0)	4 (3.3)
Staging algorithm n (%)			χ^2(3) = 0.23, p = 0.973
Precontemplation	3 (2.9)	3 (2.5)
Contemplation	45 (44.1)	55 (45.1)
Preparation	47 (46.1)	54 (44.3)
Action	7 (6.9)	10 (8.2)
The Line mean (SD)	6.11 (3.1)	6.17 (2.7)	χ^2(10) = 12.98, p = 0.225

Table 2. Summary of results on self-assessment measures: URICA (SHS), Staging algorithm, and the Line (rage of response options: 0–10). Baseline and follow-up data for the study sample who completed the follow-up (N = 122).

	Baseline data (122)	Follow-up data (122)	Significance
URICA stage with highest score n (%)			χ^2(5) = 122, p = 0.018*
Precontemplation	7 (5.7)	10 (8.2)
Contemplation	43 (35.2)	48 (39.3)
Preparation	68 (55.7)	50 (41.0)
Action	4 (3.3)	14 (11.5)
Staging algorithm n (%)			χ^2(4) = 122, p = 0.004*
Precontemplation	3 (2.5)	3 (2.5)
Contemplation	55 (45.1)	48 (39.3)
Preparation	54 (44.3)	42 (34.4)
Action	10 (8.2)	29 (23.8)
The Line mean (SD)	6.17 (2.7)	6.16 (2.8)	χ^2(33) = 122, p = 0.42*

*Corrected with McNemar-Bowker test.

Table 3. Associations between descriptive and stages-of-change data at baseline, and whether participants had sought help at 18-months follow-up.

	Sought help (n = 74)	Not sought help (n = 48)	Significance
Gender n (%)			χ^2(1) = 0.18, p = 0.404*
Male	43 (58.8)	26 (54.2)
Female	31 (41.9)	22 (45.8)
Age, in years, mean ± SD	69.28 (9.2)	68.44 (8.2)	t(120) = 0.513, p = 0.609
Speech and noise recognition threshold expressed as a signal-to-noise ratio, in dB Mean ± SD	−0.66 (2.2)	−0.43 (2.2)	t(120) = −0.544, p = 0.587
Education n (%)
Elementary school	10 (13.5)	13 (27.1)	χ^2(3) = 5.26, p = 0.154
Middle school	8 (10.8)	8 (16.7)
High school	20 (27.0)	9 (18.8)
College/university/graduate school	36 (48.6)	18 (37.5)
Living situation n (%)
Alone	15 (20.3)	15 (31.3)	χ^2(1) = 1.89, p = 0.123*
With others	59 (79.7)	33 (68.8)
Amount of years with perceived hearing problems
Mean ± SD	11.6 (11.3)	8.3 (8.4)	t(119) = 1.72, p = 0.088
Can you imagine yourself using hearing aids, if you were recommended? n (%)
Yes	65 (87.8)	42 (87.5)	χ^2(1) = 0.003, p = 0.583*
No	9 (12.2)	6 (12.5)
URICA Stage with highest score n (%)			χ^2(3) = 1.69, p = 0.638
Precontemplation	5 (6.8)	2 (4.2)
Contemplation	28 (37.8)	15 (31.3)
Preparation	38 (51.4)	30 (62.5)
Action	3 (4.1)	1 (2.1)
Staging algorithm n (%)			χ^2 (3) = 7.554, p = 0.043*
Precontemplation	1 (1.4)	2 (4.2)
Contemplation	28 (37.8)	27 (56.3)
Preparation	36 (48.6)	18 (37.5)
Action	9 (12.2)	1 (2.1)
The Line mean (SD)	6.51 (2.6)	5.65 (2.8)	χ^2(10) = 13.1, p = 0.217

*Corrected with Fisher’s exact test.