Moving towards a favorable image: The self‐presentational benefits of exercise and physical activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the exercise stereotype phenomenon and the moderating effects of exerciser impression motivation and construction on this stereotype in a sample of 176 female and 96 male Swedish university students. The participants read a description of one of the following female targets: a typical exerciser, an active living target, an excessive exerciser, a non-exerciser, or a control target, and then rated these targets on 12 personality (e.g., lazy-hard worker, dependent-independent) and 8 physical (e.g., scrawny-muscular, sick-healthy) dimensions. They also completed the Self Presentation in Exercise Questionnaire, measuring motivation to self-present as an exerciser and the propensity to construct the image of an exerciser. MANCOVAs revealed a significant main effect for both personality and physical attributes (p < 0.05). In general, the typical exerciser and active living targets received the most favorable ratings, especially on the physical attributes, whereas the excessive exerciser obtained the least positive ratings. Exerciser impression motivation moderated the exercise status/rating relationship for the physical attributes only. Differences between Swedish and North American students' impressions of exercisers and non-exercisers are discussed.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".