Most goals in life (e.g., becoming a high performing
athlete, a so-called higher-level-goal) can only be
reached by means of more than one behavior (e.g., to
train appropriately and also to eat adequately). As there
are no other theories explicitly modeling this; the
CCAM is unique in terms of describing multiple behaviors
in orchestration. The CCAM is based on other
social-cognitive theories that assume that behaviors
must be intended, planned, and translated into actions.
Higher-level-goals can also feed into outcome expectancies
and thereby drive the behaviors via intention
formation. Compensatory cognitions come into play in
the event of a tempting situation (e.g., having to work
longer than usual): If behavior A (e.g., training appropriately
after work) is hindered, one can decide to perform
another behavior (behavior B; e.g., do active
commuting). Alternatively, one can adapt the performance
of behavior A by executing it later or in a different
way (e.g., training the next morning or with a
shorter duration). Evidence for these cognitive processes
demonstrates that whereas compensatory cognitions
are generally negative for adherence to the goal
behavior (e.g., the training regime), intrinsic motivation
can lower the risks for a lapse. Higher-level-goals can
volitionally or unconsciously drive different behaviors
and their predictors. Overall, the CCAM consists of the
following five assumptions:
1. Different behaviors interrelate.
2. Higher-level goals drive different behaviors by initiating
and strengthening behavior-specific intentions.
3. Within each behavior domain, individuals translate
their intentions into behavior via planning. Self-efficacy
is a significant moderator of planning, and
additionally affects behavior.
4. Behavior-specific processes for behavior A and
behavior B interrelate via carry-over mechanisms,
and through compensatory cognitions.
5. A healthy lifestyle consists of multiple behaviors,
which buffer the stress response (e.g., due to challenges
of attaining the higher-level goals) and
increase wellbeing.
Single studies support specific assumptions (e.g.,
Cihlar & Lippke, 2017; Storm et al., 2016). There is
evidence supporting the assumption that carry-over
mechanisms exist, and showing that cognitive carryover
and behavioral outcomes depend on whether physical
activity resources are being transferred to nutrition
behaviors (Fleig, Lippke, Pomp, & Schwarzer, 2011).
Research is still needed, however, to extend validation
of the construct and assumptions of the CCAM. This
needs to be done using different research designs, particularly
longitudinal observations, RCTs (which are
the gold standard), experimentally testing effects and
complex analyses of different behaviors and how they
change depending on each other.
