The Relationship Between Exercise Motives and Physical Self‐Esteem in Female Exercise Participants: An Application of Self‐Determination Theory1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the relationship between exercise motives and physical self‐esteem (PSE) in physically active females using Self‐Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 1995; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Female exercise participants recruited from university‐based exercise classes reported their motives for exercise during Week 2, and their levels of PSE during Week 12, of a 15‐week exercise class. Bivariate correlations indicated that exercise motives displayed a graded pattern of relationships. They also suggested that only autonomous exercise motives were associated with higher PSE. Discriminant function analysis revealed that more autonomous exercise motives correctly classified 83.3% of the high PSE group and 88.9% of the low PSE group. These findings support Ryan and Deci's assertions and suggest that autonomous exercise motives may play an important role in positive PSE in the exercise domain. These findings advance the application of SDT in the exercise domain and further our understanding of PSE development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".