Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
Language
- English (81) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (81)
Keywords
- exercise (10)
- doping (8)
- Neuroenhancement (6)
- motivation (6)
- affect (5)
- EEG/ERP (4)
- Motivation (4)
- automatic evaluations (4)
- cognitive enhancement (4)
- physical activity (4)
Institute
Exercise or not?
(2023)
Objective: Individuals’ decisions to engage in exercise are often the result of in-the-moment choices between exercise and a competing behavioral alternative. The purpose of this study was to investigate processes that occur in-the-moment (i.e., situated processes) when individuals are faced with the choice between exercise and a behavioral alternative during a computerized task. These were analyzed against the background of interindividual differences in individuals’ automatic valuation and controlled evaluation of exercise.
Method: In a behavioral alternatives task 101 participants were asked whether they would rather choose an exercise option or a behavioral alternative in 25 trials. Participants’ gaze behavior (first gaze and fixations) was recorded using eye-tracking. An exercise-specific affect misattribution procedure (AMP) was used to assess participants’ automatic valuation of exercise before the task. After the task, self-reported feelings towards exercise (controlled evaluation) and usual weekly exercise volume were assessed. Mixed effects models with random effects for subjects and trials were used for data analysis.
Results: Choosing exercise was positively correlated with individuals’ automatic valuation (r = 0.20, p = 0.05), controlled evaluation (r = 0.58, p < 0.001), and their weekly exercise volume (r = 0.43, p < 0.001). Participants showed no bias in their initial gaze or number of fixations towards the exercise or the non-exercise alternative. However, participants were 1.30 times more likely to fixate on the chosen alternative first and more frequently, but this gaze behavior was not related to individuals’ automatic valuation, controlled evaluation, or weekly exercise volume.
Conclusion: The results suggest that situated processes arising from defined behavioral alternatives may be independent of individuals’ general preferences. Despite one’s best general intention to exercise more, the choice of a non-exercise alternative behavior may seem more appealing in-the-moment and eventually be chosen. New psychological theories of health behavior change should therefore better consider the role of potentially conflicting alternatives when it comes to initiating physical activity or exercise.
Exercise or not?
(2023)
Objective: Individuals’ decisions to engage in exercise are often the result of in-the-moment choices between exercise and a competing behavioral alternative. The purpose of this study was to investigate processes that occur in-the-moment (i.e., situated processes) when individuals are faced with the choice between exercise and a behavioral alternative during a computerized task. These were analyzed against the background of interindividual differences in individuals’ automatic valuation and controlled evaluation of exercise.
Method: In a behavioral alternatives task 101 participants were asked whether they would rather choose an exercise option or a behavioral alternative in 25 trials. Participants’ gaze behavior (first gaze and fixations) was recorded using eye-tracking. An exercise-specific affect misattribution procedure (AMP) was used to assess participants’ automatic valuation of exercise before the task. After the task, self-reported feelings towards exercise (controlled evaluation) and usual weekly exercise volume were assessed. Mixed effects models with random effects for subjects and trials were used for data analysis.
Results: Choosing exercise was positively correlated with individuals’ automatic valuation (r = 0.20, p = 0.05), controlled evaluation (r = 0.58, p < 0.001), and their weekly exercise volume (r = 0.43, p < 0.001). Participants showed no bias in their initial gaze or number of fixations towards the exercise or the non-exercise alternative. However, participants were 1.30 times more likely to fixate on the chosen alternative first and more frequently, but this gaze behavior was not related to individuals’ automatic valuation, controlled evaluation, or weekly exercise volume.
Conclusion: The results suggest that situated processes arising from defined behavioral alternatives may be independent of individuals’ general preferences. Despite one’s best general intention to exercise more, the choice of a non-exercise alternative behavior may seem more appealing in-the-moment and eventually be chosen. New psychological theories of health behavior change should therefore better consider the role of potentially conflicting alternatives when it comes to initiating physical activity or exercise.
The affective response during exercise is an important factor for long-term exercise adherence. Pottratz et al. suggested affective priming as a behavioral intervention for the enhancement of exercise-related affect. The present paper aims to replicate and extend upon these findings. We conducted a close replication with 53 participants completing a brisk walking task in two conditions (prime vs. no prime). Affective valence was assessed during exercise, and exercise enjoyment and remembered/forecasted pleasure were assessed postexercise. We could not replicate the findings of Pottratz et al., finding no evidence for positive changes in psychological responses in the priming condition. However, linear mixed models demonstrated significant interindividual differences in how participants responded to priming. These results demonstrate that affective priming during exercise does not work for everyone under every circumstance and, thus, provide an important contribution to the understanding of boundary conditions and moderating factors for priming in exercise psychology.
There is an ongoing debate about how to test and operationalize self-control. This limited understanding is in large part due to a variety of different tests and measures used to assess self-control, as well as the lack of empirical studies examining the temporal dynamics during the exertion of self-control. In order to track changes that occur over the course of exposure to a self-control task, we investigate and compare behavioral, subjective, and physiological indicators during the exertion of self-control. Participants completed both a task requiring inhibitory control (Go/No-Go task) and a control task (two-choice task). Behavioral performance and pupil size were measured during the tasks. Subjective vitality was measured before and after the tasks. While pupil size and subjective vitality showed similar trajectories in the two tasks, behavioral performance decreased in the inhibitory control-demanding task, but not in the control task. However, behavioral, subjective, and physiological measures were not significantly correlated. These results suggest that there is a disconnect between different measures of self-control with high intra- and interindividual variability. Theoretical and methodological implications for self-control theory and future empirical work are discussed.
There is an ongoing debate about how to test and operationalize self-control. This limited understanding is in large part due to a variety of different tests and measures used to assess self-control, as well as the lack of empirical studies examining the temporal dynamics during the exertion of self-control. In order to track changes that occur over the course of exposure to a self-control task, we investigate and compare behavioral, subjective, and physiological indicators during the exertion of self-control. Participants completed both a task requiring inhibitory control (Go/No-Go task) and a control task (two-choice task). Behavioral performance and pupil size were measured during the tasks. Subjective vitality was measured before and after the tasks. While pupil size and subjective vitality showed similar trajectories in the two tasks, behavioral performance decreased in the inhibitory control-demanding task, but not in the control task. However, behavioral, subjective, and physiological measures were not significantly correlated. These results suggest that there is a disconnect between different measures of self-control with high intra- and interindividual variability. Theoretical and methodological implications for self-control theory and future empirical work are discussed.
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of scientific endeavors. The goal of this systematic review is to evaluate the quality of the research on physical activity (PA) behavior change and its potential to contribute to policy-making processes in the early days of COVID-19 related restrictions.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review of methodological quality of current research according to PRISMA guidelines using Pubmed and Web of Science, of articles on PA behavior change that were published within 365 days after COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). Items from the JBI checklist and the AXIS tool were used for additional risk of bias assessment. Evidence mapping is used for better visualization of the main results. Conclusions about the significance of published articles are based on hypotheses on PA behavior change in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Results: Among the 1,903 identified articles, there were 36% opinion pieces, 53% empirical studies, and 9% reviews. Of the 332 studies included in the systematic review, 213 used self-report measures to recollect prepandemic behavior in often small convenience samples. Most focused changes in PA volume, whereas changes in PA types were rarely measured. The majority had methodological reporting flaws. Few had very large samples with objective measures using repeated measure design (pre and during the pandemic). In addition to the expected decline in PA duration, these studies show that many of those who were active prepandemic, continued to be active during the pandemic.
Conclusions: Research responded quickly at the onset of the pandemic. However, most of the studies lacked robust methodology, and PA behavior change data lacked the accuracy needed to guide policy makers. To improve the field, we propose the implementation of longitudinal cohort studies by larger organizations such as WHO to ease access to data on PA behavior, and suggest those institutions set clear standards for this research. Researchers need to ensure a better fit between the measurement method and the construct being measured, and use both objective and subjective measures where appropriate to complement each other and provide a comprehensive picture of PA behavior.
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of scientific endeavors. The goal of this systematic review is to evaluate the quality of the research on physical activity (PA) behavior change and its potential to contribute to policy-making processes in the early days of COVID-19 related restrictions.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review of methodological quality of current research according to PRISMA guidelines using Pubmed and Web of Science, of articles on PA behavior change that were published within 365 days after COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). Items from the JBI checklist and the AXIS tool were used for additional risk of bias assessment. Evidence mapping is used for better visualization of the main results. Conclusions about the significance of published articles are based on hypotheses on PA behavior change in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Results: Among the 1,903 identified articles, there were 36% opinion pieces, 53% empirical studies, and 9% reviews. Of the 332 studies included in the systematic review, 213 used self-report measures to recollect prepandemic behavior in often small convenience samples. Most focused changes in PA volume, whereas changes in PA types were rarely measured. The majority had methodological reporting flaws. Few had very large samples with objective measures using repeated measure design (pre and during the pandemic). In addition to the expected decline in PA duration, these studies show that many of those who were active prepandemic, continued to be active during the pandemic.
Conclusions: Research responded quickly at the onset of the pandemic. However, most of the studies lacked robust methodology, and PA behavior change data lacked the accuracy needed to guide policy makers. To improve the field, we propose the implementation of longitudinal cohort studies by larger organizations such as WHO to ease access to data on PA behavior, and suggest those institutions set clear standards for this research. Researchers need to ensure a better fit between the measurement method and the construct being measured, and use both objective and subjective measures where appropriate to complement each other and provide a comprehensive picture of PA behavior.
When pandemic hits
(2020)
The governmental lockdowns related to the COVID-19 pandemic have forced people to change their behavior in many ways including changes in exercise. We used the brief window of global lockdown in the months of March/April/May 2020 as an opportunity to investigate the effects of externally imposed restrictions on exercise-related routines and related changes in subjective well-being. Statistical analyses are based on data from 13,696 respondents in 18 countries using a cross-sectional online survey. A mixed effects modeling approach was used to analyze data. We tested whether exercise frequency before and during the pandemic would influence mood during the pandemic. Additionally, we used the COVID-19 pandemic data to build a prediction model, while controlling for national differences, to estimate changes in exercise frequency during similar future lockdown conditions depending on prelockdown exercise frequency. According to the prediction model, those who rarely exercise before a lockdown tend to increase their exercise frequency during it, and those who are frequent exercisers before a lockdown tend to maintain it. With regards to subjective well-being, the data show that those who exercised almost every day during this pandemic had the best mood, regardless of whether or not they exercised prepandemic. Those who were inactive prepandemic and slightly increased their exercise frequency during the pandemic, reported no change in mood compared to those who remained inactive during the pandemic. Those who reduced their exercise frequency during the pandemic reported worse mood compared to those who maintained or increased their prepandemic exercise frequency. This study suggests that under similar lockdown conditions, about two thirds of those who never or rarely exercise before a lockdown might adopt an exercise behavior or increase their exercise frequency. However, such changes do not always immediately result in improvement in subjective well-being. These results may inform national policies, as well as health behavior and exercise psychology research on the importance of exercise promotion, and prediction of changes in exercise behavior during future pandemics.