Use of observational or record audit methods in future studies can address the limitation of common method variance in assessment of behavioural outcomes.
The phonological factor explained the largest proportion of behavioural variance as one would expect from the fact that, clinically, stroke aphasia tends to be dominated by phonological impairments.
Although this study confirmed that acceptance of pain can still account for more variance than various measures of behavioural coping, in a range of important measures of distress and patient functioning, the results of this study were slightly different from those of other studies [ 20, 21].
Results from post hoc analysis of two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) analysing interaction effects of behavioural state (dominant, subordinate, reproductive interaction) and sex on duration of urine release.
As the main contender, the TPB explains ∼34% of variance in health behavioural change related to addictive behaviour, automobile-related behaviours, clinical and screening behaviour, eating behaviour, exercising behaivour, HIV/AIDS-related behaviour and oral hygiene behaivour [40].
Likewise, Schwartz et al. (2006) demonstrated that a computational model in which lesions were either applied to phonological or semantic components could account for a large proportion of variance in the behavioural performance of 94 aphasic participants.
Past behaviour was only able to explain 0.5% of the variance in behavioural intentions (R2 change = 0.001, F change = 0.111, P = 0.954), and did not emerge as a significant, independent predictor of intention, contributing negligibly to any additional variance.
The TPB explained 33% of the variance in behavioural intention, SCT 32% and OLT 60%.
Together these variables explained 63% of the variance in behavioural intention.
The R value for behavioural intention (0.308) indicates that the 'direct effects only' model explains 30.8% of the variance in behavioural intention to use BelRAI.
