Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Little is known about the motivational effects of exercise videos and exercise video instructors. In face-to-face exercise contexts (e.g., group fitness classes), confidence in the exercise leader's ability to perform key tasks (i.e., proxy efficacy) has been shown to influence exercise intentions and adherence. Within the framework of Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), this experiment examined sources of proxy efficacy for an exercise video instructor, and the influence of proxy efficacy on exercise motivation. METHODS: 80 female beginner exercisers (Mage = 26.4 ± 7.4) performed a 30 min aerobic exercise bout led by a videotaped fitness instructor. They completed post-exercise measures of proxy efficacy (i.e., confidence in the instructor's instructional and motivational abilities), perceived similarity to the instructor, perceived mastery of the exercise, enjoyment of the bout and intentions to use the exercise video in the future. RESULTS: Consistent with SCT, participants who perceived themselves to be more similar to the instructor in terms of age and physical attractiveness and who reported greater exercise mastery and enjoyment during the bout, also reported greater proxy efficacy (rs range from .19 to .44, p < .05). Greater proxy efficacy was associated with stronger intentions to use the exercise video in the future (r = .37, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: These findings speak to the importance of identifying characteristics of an exercise video instructor that inspire greater proxy efficacy and that boost exercise motivation among female beginner exercisers.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.005 |
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".