The Moderating Influence of Situational Motivation on the Relationship Between Preferred Exercise and Positive Affect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite convincing evidence supporting the association between exercise and positive affect, this complex relationship requires further theoretical and person-centered explanation. The nature of one’s motivation for exercise, as postulated by Self-Determination Theory (SDT), may supply a missing and understudied link. The primary aim of this experimental study was to examine the moderating influence of situational motivation from SDT on the relationship between an acute bout of preferred exercise, namely running (vs. control), and changes in positive affect. Forty-one active women attended two sessions to engage in (a) a 30-min moderate-intensity self-paced treadmill run and (b) a 30-min quiet activity (i.e., newspaper reading). Participants with high introjection versus those with low introjection reported a greater increase in positive affect from pre- to postrunning and a greater decrease in positive affect from pre- to postcontrol. A “relief from guilt” effect was postulated to explain these results. Motivational variables accounted for 7% of variance in postrun positive affect. Consistent with SDT, running because one values this behavior and its benefits (i.e., identified regulation) was significantly associated with postrun positive affect.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".