Dietary intake and physical activity behaviours in patrons of commercial weight-loss programs: An application of Organismic Integration Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the motivational basis for healthy eating and leisure-time physical (LTPA) activity behaviours within a sample of commercial weight-loss program users. Participants (N = 37; 83.80 percent female; M = 32.45 years, SD = 10.86 years) enrolled in self-selected commercial weight-loss programs (M= 0.74 years, SD = 1.18 years) completed a self-report survey using a cross-sectional design via an encrypted internet site. Participants endorsed more autonomous compared to controlling motives for both healthy eating and LTPA. Limited endorsement of amotivation was evident for either health behaviour. Autonomous motives were positively correlated with greater frequency of daily fruit and vegetable intake (r's ranged from 0.23 to 0.30), engagement in more strenuous types of LTPA (r's ranged from 0.32 to 0.51), and typical frequency of LTPA per week (r's ranged from 0.33 to 0.44). Both amotivation and external regulation were negatively correlated with LTPA (r's ranged from -0.20 to -0.46), yet were unrelated to daily fruit and vegetable intake (r's < 0.09). Introjected regulation was unrelated to daily fruit and vegetable intake (r = 0.06) but positively associated with more frequent engagement in LTPA during a typical week (r = 0.35). Overall, these results of this study reinforce the adaptive benefits of motives centred on personal values, self-congruence, and interest/enjoyment as a basis for promoting behaviours integral to weight control.??Acknowledgments: Funded by the Social Sciences & Humanities Research Council of Canada
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".