@article{KahlertBrand2011,
  author    = {Kahlert, Daniela and Brand, Ralf},
  title     = {Questionnaires for assessing physical activity different response scale categories influence responses concerning health- and sport-related cognitions},
  series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Gesundheitspsychologie},
  volume    = {19},
  journal   = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Gesundheitspsychologie},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Hogrefe},
  address   = {G{\"o}ttingen},
  issn      = {0943-8149},
  doi       = {10.1026/0943-8149/a000044},
  pages     = {96 -- 100},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {The present study examines whether the use of different frequency scales in questionnaires about physical activity influences respondents' own estimation of their activity, as well as subsequent measurements of health- und sport-related cognitions and evaluations. Using a randomized research design we recruited a sample of 118 participants. One group received a high frequency scale for assessing their exercise frequency with the response categories "never", "less often", "once a month", "once a week", or "most days." The other group answered with a medium frequency scale with the alternatives "never", "less often", " once every few months", "once a month", and " once a week or more often." As dependent variables all participants judged the subjective importance of physical activity and their health-related quality of life (WHO-QOL-bref). Results indicate the expected response errors, owing to the fact that using a high-frequency scale produces higher levels of self-reported physical activity (Cramer's V = .30). Corresponding to this the subjective importance of physical activity increased (d = .37) and the health-related quality of life was judged to be better (d = .36). Such artefacts might be eliminated by using standardized formulations such as "I exercise... times per week/month for... minutes."},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{KahlertBrand2011,
  author    = {Kahlert, Daniela and Brand, Ralf},
  title     = {Comparing self-report and accelerometry data a contribution to the validation of the MoMo-Physical activity questionnaire for children and adolescents},
  series = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Sportmedizin : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft f{\"u}r Sportmedizin und Pr{\"a}vention (Deutscher Sport{\"a}rztebund) e.V. (DGSP) und Weiterbildungsorgan der {\"O}sterreichischen Gesellschaft f{\"u}r Sportmedizin und Pr{\"a}vention},
  volume    = {62},
  journal   = {Deutsche Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Sportmedizin : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft f{\"u}r Sportmedizin und Pr{\"a}vention (Deutscher Sport{\"a}rztebund) e.V. (DGSP) und Weiterbildungsorgan der {\"O}sterreichischen Gesellschaft f{\"u}r Sportmedizin und Pr{\"a}vention},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {WWF-Verl.-Ges.},
  address   = {Greven},
  issn      = {0344-5925},
  pages     = {36 -- +},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {According to the results of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS) published in 2009, only 5\% to 8\% of the 15-17-year-old adolescents reach the current recommendations on health-enhancing physical activity This result (besides others in the survey) rests on data measured with the 25-item physical activity questionnaire for children and adolescents (MoMo-AFB). The present study compares two different methods of assessing physical activity with the purpose of testing the validity of the MoMo-AFB self-report. First, we measured the physical activity status of 73 15 to 18-year-old pupils (32 boys and 41 girls) over seven days via objective accelerometry (ActiGraph GT1M), then the pupils completed the MoMo-AFB for the same (previous) period. Results show that using the MoMo-AFB leads to higher levels of self-reported physical activity than measuring it with accelerometers. Furthermore, only the MoMo-AFB subscale MVPA (moderate-to-vigorous physical activity), that uses two single items to decide whether the health-enhancing physical activity recommendation is reached or failed, corresponds statistically significantly with the accelerometry data. For all other subscales (e.g. school- or leisure time activity), we found no agreement. Further research, first of all on the measurement quality of the MoMo-AFB but also on the physical (in)activity status of children and adolescents, is needed.},
  language  = {de}
}