Affect and Self-Efficacy Responses During Moderate-Intensity Exercise Among Low-Active Women: The Effect of Cognitive Appraisal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the relationship between cognitive and affective responses during acute exercise, 24 low-active females completed two 30-min bouts of cycle ergometer exercise at 90% of the ventilatory threshold. In one condition participants had full knowledge of the exercise duration (KD); in the other, exercise duration was unknown (UD). Affect and self-efficacy were measured before and every 3 min during exercise, and affect was also measured postexercise. Affect declined throughout the first half of both conditions, and continued its decline until the end of the UD condition, when a rebound effect was observed. Self-efficacy during exercise displayed a similar pattern. Hierarchical regression analyses demonstrated that during-exercise self-efficacy was a stronger predictor of during-exercise affect than preexercise self-efficacy, and that this relationship was strongest at the end of exercise when duration was unknown. These results indicate that repetitive cognitive appraisal of self and the task could impact the exercise experiences of low-active women during the adoption phase of an exercise program.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".