Facing Multiple Barriers to Exercise: Does Stronger Efficacy Help Individuals with Arthritis?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research about exercise adherence amongst adults with arthritis has been largely correlational, and theoretically based causal studies are needed. We used an experimental design to test the social cognitive theory premise that high self-efficacy helps to overcome challenging barriers to action. METHODS: Exercising individuals (N = 86; female = 78%; M age = 53; BMI = 27) with differential self-regulatory efficacy for managing salient, non-disease barriers were randomly assigned to many or few barrier conditions. Individuals responded about the strength of their anticipated persistence to continue exercise, and their self-regulatory efficacy to use exercise-enabling coping strategies. RESULTS: In the many barriers condition, higher barriers-efficacy individuals expressed (a) greater persistence (Cohen's d = 0.75 [-0.029, 1.79]) and (b) more confidence in their coping solutions (Cohen's d = 0.65 [-0.30, 1.60]) than lower barriers-efficacy counterparts. CONCLUSION: Experimental support was obtained for the theoretical premise that when facing the greatest barrier challenge, individuals highest in self-regulatory efficacy still view exercise as possible. Findings suggest that identifying lower efficacy exercisers with arthritis to tailor their exercise to increase self-regulatory efficacy might also improve their adherence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".