Physical activity and negative affective reactivity in daily life.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The results from experimental studies indicate that physically active individuals remain calmer and report less anxiety after the induction of a standardized stressor. The current study extends this research to real life, and examines whether daily physical activity attenuates negative affect that occurs in response to naturally occurring daily stressors. METHOD: The current study used data from the second wave of the National Study of Daily Experiences, a sub-study of the second wave of the Midlife in the United States Study (MIDUS-II) of 2,022 individuals aged 33-84 questioned nightly for eight consecutive days about their general affect and affective responses to stressful events and their engagement in physical activity. RESULTS: Results indicated that while negative affect is significantly elevated on days with stressful events compared to days free of events in all individuals, these effects are attenuated in those who remain physically active when compared to those who were underactive. This was also true for any day participants were physically active. Importantly, negative affect in response to any specific stressor was reduced the closer in time that the stressor occurred to the bout of exercise in underactive participants, while, in active participants, negative affect in response to any stressor remained low throughout the entire day that participants reported that they were active. CONCLUSION: Given the significant mental and physical health implications of elevated affective reactivity observed in previous studies, the current study sheds further light on the importance of remaining physically active in times of stress. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".