There are no literature reviews that have examined the impact of health-domain interventions, informed by self-determination theory (SDT; Ryan & Deci, 2017), on SDT constructs and health indices. Our aim was to meta-analyze such interventions in the health promotion and disease management literatures. Studies were eligible if they used an experimental design, tested an intervention that was based on SDT, measured at least one SDT-based motivational construct, and at least one indicator of health behavior, physical health, or psychological health. Seventy-three studies met these criteria and provided sufficient data for the purposes of the review. A random-effects meta-analytic model showed that SDT-based interventions produced small-to-medium changes in most SDT constructs at the end of the intervention period, and in health behaviors at the end of the intervention period and at the follow-up. Small positive changes in physical and psychological health outcomes were also observed at the end of the interventions. Increases in need support and autonomous motivation (but not controlled motivation or amotivation) were associated with positive changes in health behavior. In conclusion, SDT-informed interventions positively affect indices of health; these effects are modest, heterogeneous, and partly due to increases in self-determined motivation and support from social agents.

Interventions are increasingly described as theory-based; however, the basis for this is often not clear. Advancing behavioral science requires a good understanding of how interventions are informed by, and test, theory. This study aims to develop a reliable method for assessing the extent to which behavioral interventions are theory-based. The reliability, usability, and comprehensiveness of an initial coding scheme were improved in 13 iterative stages on the basis of its application to 29 papers, from a systematic review of interventions to promote physical activity and healthy eating. The final Theory Coding Scheme contained 19 items, each with satisfactory interrater reliabilities, coding whether a theory or model was mentioned, how theories were used in intervention design, how intervention evaluations tested theory, and the implications of the results for future theory development. The Theory Coding Scheme is an important methodological innovation, providing a research tool to reliably describe the theoretical base of interventions, inform evidence syntheses within literature reviews and meta-analyses, and stimulate the use of empirical data for theory development.

To systematically investigate the extent and type of theory use in physical activity and dietary interventions, as well as associations between extent and type of theory use with intervention effectiveness. An in-depth analysis of studies included in two systematic reviews of physical activity and healthy eating interventions (k = 190). Extent and type of theory use was assessed using the Theory Coding Scheme (TCS) and intervention effectiveness was calculated using Hedges's g. Metaregressions assessed the relationships between these measures. Fifty-six percent of interventions reported a theory base. Of these, 90% did not report links between all of their behavior change techniques (BCTs) with specific theoretical constructs and 91% did not report links between all the specified constructs with BCTs. The associations between a composite score or specific items on the TCS and intervention effectiveness were inconsistent. Interventions based on Social Cognitive Theory or the Transtheoretical Model were similarly effective and no more effective than interventions not reporting a theory base. The coding of theory in these studies suggested that theory was not often used extensively in the development of interventions. Moreover, the relationships between type of theory used and the extent of theory use with effectiveness were generally weak. The findings suggest that attempts to apply the two theories commonly used in this review more extensively are unlikely to increase intervention effectiveness.

Control theory and other frameworks for understanding self-regulation suggest that monitoring goal progress is a crucial process that intervenes between setting and attaining a goal, and helps to ensure that goals are translated into action. However, the impact of progress monitoring interventions on rates of behavioral performance and goal attainment has yet to be quantified. A systematic literature search identified 138 studies (N = 19,951) that randomly allocated participants to an intervention designed to promote monitoring of goal progress versus a control condition. All studies reported the effects of the treatment on (a) the frequency of progress monitoring and (b) subsequent goal attainment. A random effects model revealed that, on average, interventions were successful at increasing the frequency of monitoring goal progress (d+ = 1.98, 95% CI [1.71, 2.24]) and promoted goal attainment (d+ = 0.40, 95% CI [0.32, 0.48]). Furthermore, changes in the frequency of progress monitoring mediated the effect of the interventions on goal attainment. Moderation tests revealed that progress monitoring had larger effects on goal attainment when the outcomes were reported or made public, and when the information was physically recorded. Taken together, the findings suggest that monitoring goal progress is an effective self-regulation strategy, and that interventions that increase the frequency of progress monitoring are likely to promote behavior change.