Psychometric properties of the exercise identity scale in a university sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the structural and criterion validity of scores derived form the Exercise Identity Scale (EIS; Anderson & Cychosz, 1994). Participants (N = 269; 61.0% female) completed the EIS (Anderson & Cychosz, 1994), the Psychological Need Satisfaction in Exercise Scale (PNSE; Wilson, Rogers, Rodgers, & Wild, 2006), and the Godin Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire (Godin & Shepherd, 1985). Confirmatory factor analyses indicated a 2‐factor EIS measurement model comprised of role identity and exercise beliefs factors provided a superior fit to the data compared with a unidimensional model. Correlational and multiple regression analyses suggested that both role identity and exercise beliefs were associated with more frequent exercise behavior and stronger psychological need fulfillment in exercise, although the pattern was more pronounced for role‐identity. Collectively, these results suggest the EIS may hold some promise for advancing our understanding of exercise identity issues and highlights the need for further construct validation research with the EIS.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".