The Role of Self-Efficacy on the Relationship Between the Workplace Environment and Physical Activity: A Longitudinal Mediation Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cross-sectional studies show that self-efficacy (SE) serves as a partial mediator of the effect that perceptions of workplace environment have on self-reported workplace physical activity (PA). To further explore the role SE plays in the relationship between perceptions of the workplace environment and workplace PA, cross-sectional mediation analyses were performed on adult employees at baseline (n = 897), 6 months (n = 616), and 12 months (n = 612); a longitudinal time-sequence was incorporated into the mediation model; and correlates of residual change version of the mediation were tested. The R (2) ranged from .05 to .08 for the three cross-sectional analyses, .03 for the longitudinal analyses, and from .02 to .03 for the residual analyses. The results from the residual change model analyses supported those of the cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, suggesting the relationship between perceived workplace environment and PA was partially mediated by SE. Future research should include similar studies with different population groups and in different settings.
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 | 0.018 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".