Effects of home‐based exergaming on child social cognition and subsequent prediction of behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of exergames may be one viable way to increase child physical activity, but investigation of its effects on motivation over time and prediction of adherence have seen little research attention. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of two cycling exergame interventions (single-player, multi-player) among children aged 9-12 years on motivational variables (theory of planned behavior) and to explore whether these variables could predict objective assessment of playtime across 6 weeks. Sixty-nine insufficiently active children were recruited through advertisements within the community/schools and randomized to either the single play condition (n = 30) or multi-player condition (n = 39). Exergaming use was recorded objectively via game logs and motivational variables were assessed after a familiarization session, at 2 weeks, and at 4 weeks. Participants played the exergames M = 133.45 (SD = 81.27) minutes in week 1 to M = 77.23 (SD = 84.09) minutes in week 6. The two exergame conditions did not result in differences among theory of planned behavior variables (P > .05). Mean levels of these constructs declined across the first 4 weeks (P < .05), with the exception of injunctive norm. Positive bivariate associations (P < .05) between game play and perceived control (0-6 weeks), and intention (weeks 3-4 and weeks 5-6) were identified, but only affective attitude (assessed at week 2) predicted (P < .05) game play (3-4 weeks) in a multivariate examination of the theory of planned behavior model. The results demonstrate that social cognitive motives wane across time when exposed to repeated exergame play.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".