Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Postprint (1)
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4) (remove)
Keywords
- health (4) (remove)
Institute
- Department Sport- und Gesundheitswissenschaften (4) (remove)
The goals of this study were to test whether exercise-related stimuli can elicit automatic evaluative responses and whether automatic evaluations reflect exercise setting preference in highly active exercisers. An adapted version of the Affect Misattribution Procedure was employed. Seventy-two highly active exercisers (26 years +/- 9.03; 43% female) were subliminally primed (7 ms) with pictures depicting typical fitness center scenarios or gray rectangles (control primes). After each prime, participants consciously evaluated the "pleasantness" of a Chinese symbol. Controlled evaluations were measured with a questionnaire and were more positive in participants who regularly visited fitness centers than in those who reported avoiding this exercise setting. Only center exercisers gave automatic positive evaluations of the fitness center setting (partial eta squared = .08). It is proposed that a subliminal Affect Misattribution Procedure paradigm can detect automatic evaluations to exercising and that, in highly active exercisers, these evaluations play a role in decisions about the exercise setting rather than the amounts of physical exercise. Findings are interpreted in terms of a dual systems theory of social information processing and behavior.
Changing the perspective sometimes offers completely new insights to an already well-known phenomenon. Exercising behavior, defined as planned, structured and repeated bodily movements with the intention to maintain or increase the physical fitness (Caspersen, Powell, & Christenson, 1985), can be thought of as such a well-known phenomenon that has been in the scientific focus for many decades (Dishman & O’Connor, 2005). Within these decades a perspective that assumes rational and controlled evaluations as the basis for decision making, was predominantly used to understand why some people engage in physical activity and others do not (Ekkekakis & Zenko, 2015).
Dual-process theories (Ekkekakis & Zenko, 2015; Payne & Gawronski, 2010) provide another perspective, that is not exclusively influenced by rational reasoning. These theories differentiate two different processes that guide behavior “depending on whether they operate automatically or in a controlled fashion“ (Gawronski & Creighton, 2012, p. 282). Following this line of thought, exercise behavior is not solely influenced by thoughtful deliberations (e.g. concluding that exercising is healthy) but also by spontaneous affective reactions (e.g. disliking being sweaty while exercising). The theoretical frameworks of dual-process models are not new in psychology (Chaiken & Trope, 1999) and have already been used for the explanation of numerous behaviors (e.g. Hofmann, Friese, & Wiers, 2008; Huijding, de Jong, Wiers, & Verkooijen, 2005). However, they have only rarely been used for the explanation of exercise behavior (e.g. Bluemke, Brand, Schweizer, & Kahlert, 2010; Conroy, Hyde, Doerksen, & Ribeiro, 2010; Hyde, Doerksen, Ribeiro, & Conroy, 2010). The assumption of two dissimilar behavior influencing processes, differs fundamentally from previous theories and thus from the research that has been conducted in the last decades in exercise psychology. Research mainly concentrated on predictors of the controlled processes and addressed the identified predictors in exercise interventions (Ekkekakis & Zenko, 2015; Hagger, Chatzisarantis, & Biddle, 2002).
Predictors arising from the described automatic processes, for example automatic evaluations for exercising (AEE), have been neglected in exercise psychology for many years. Until now, only a few researchers investigated the influence of these AEE for exercising behavior (Bluemke et al., 2010; Brand & Schweizer, 2015; Markland, Hall, Duncan, & Simatovic, 2015). Marginally more researchers focused on the impact of AEE for physical activity behavior (Calitri, Lowe, Eves, & Bennett, 2009; Conroy et al., 2010; Hyde et al., 2010; Hyde, Elavsky, Doerksen, & Conroy, 2012). The extant studies mainly focused on the quality of AEE and the associated quantity of exercise (exercise much or little; Bluemke et al., 2010; Calitri et al., 2009; Conroy et al., 2010; Hyde et al., 2012). In sum, there is still a dramatic lack of empirical knowledge, when applying dual-process theories to exercising behavior, even though these theories have proven to be successful in explaining behavior in many other health-relevant domains like eating, drinking or smoking behavior (e.g. Hofmann et al., 2008).
The main goal of the present dissertation was to collect empirical evidence for the influence of AEE on exercise behavior and to expand the so far exclusively correlational studies by experimentally controlled studies. By doing so, the ongoing debate on a paradigm shift from controlled and deliberative influences of exercise behavior towards approaches that consider automatic and affective influences (Ekkekakis & Zenko, 2015) should be encouraged. All three conducted publications are embedded in dual-process theorizing (Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2006, 2014; Strack & Deutsch, 2004). These theories offer a theoretical framework that could integrate the established controlled variables of exercise behavior explanation and additionally consider automatic factors for exercise behavior like AEE.
Taken together, the empirical findings collected suggest that AEE play an important and diverse role for exercise behavior. They represent exercise setting preferences, are a cause for short-term exercise decisions and are decisive for long-term exercise adherence. Adding to the few already present studies in this field, the influence of (positive) AEE for exercise behavior was confirmed in all three presented publications. Even though the available set of studies needs to be extended in prospectively studies, first steps towards a more complete picture have been taken. Closing with the beginning of the synopsis: I think that time is right for a change of perspectives! This means a careful extension of the present theories with controlled evaluations explaining exercise behavior. Dual-process theories including controlled and automatic evaluations could provide such a basis for future research endeavors in exercise psychology.
Purpose
To test whether the negative relationship between perceived stress and quality of life (Hypothesis 1) can be buffered by perceived social support in patients with dementia as well as in caregivers individually (Hypothesis 2: actor effects) and across partners (Hypothesis 3: partner effects and actor-partner effects).
Method
A total of 108 couples (N = 216 individuals) comprised of one individual with early-stage dementia and one caregiving partner were assessed at baseline and one month apart. Moderation effects were investigated by applying linear mixed models and actor-partner interdependence models.
Results
Although the stress-quality of life association was more pronounced in caregivers (beta = -.63, p<.001) compared to patients (beta= -.31, p<.001), this association was equally moderated by social support in patients (beta = .14, p<.05) and in the caregivers (beta =.13, p<.05). From one partner to his or her counterpart, the partner buffering and actor-partner-buffering effect were not present.
Conclusion
The stress-buffering effect has been replicated in individuals with dementia and caregivers but not across partners. Interventions to improve quality of life through perceived social support should not only focus on caregivers, but should incorporate both partners.
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.