Reciprocal relationships between self‐efficacy, outcome satisfaction, and attendance at an exercise programme
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to (i) investigate directional influences of self-efficacy, outcome satisfaction, and attendance during an exercise programme and (ii) examine the predictive capabilities of self-efficacy and outcome satisfaction on participant dropout. METHODS: Adults aged 35-65 years were recruited to a 12-month exercise programme. Self-efficacy was collected at baseline, three, six, nine, and 12 months, and outcome satisfaction at the same time-points except baseline. Cross-lagged panel analyses and logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the primary and secondary objectives, respectively. RESULTS: Coping and scheduling self-efficacy had stronger reciprocal relationships with outcome satisfaction than task self-efficacy, although the strength of these relationships varied across time. Initially, task self-efficacy predicted programme attendance. Midway through the programme, outcome satisfaction predicted attendance, and by the end of the programme, coping self-efficacy was the strongest predictor of attendance. Self-efficacy and outcome satisfaction did not predict programme dropout. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the reciprocal relationship between outcome satisfaction and scheduling and coping self-efficacy and highlight the importance of sequentially targeting different beliefs and skills to facilitate successful initiation and maintenance of exercise behaviour. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Self-efficacy and outcome satisfaction are related to exercise behaviour. The relationship between self-efficacy and outcome satisfaction are typically considered unidirectional. The longitudinal relationships among self-efficacy, outcome satisfaction, and physical activity participation are unclear. What does this study add? Outcome satisfaction had reciprocal relationships with both coping and scheduling self-efficacy for exercise. The importance of self-efficacy and outcome satisfaction to exercise attendance changes over time. Task self-efficacy was the strongest predictor of initial programme attendance. Midway through the programme, outcome satisfaction and task self-efficacy were the strongest predictors of attendance, and by the end of the programme, coping self-efficacy was the strongest predictor.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle