Exercise behaviour, enjoyment and boredom: A test of the 2 × 2 model of perfectionism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research investigating the role or perfectionism in exercise has been limited by both the method of investigation (largely examining independent effects of perfectionism dimensions), and the outcome variables that have been studied (mostly maladaptive outcomes). The purpose of the current study was to investigate the role of perfectionism on exercise behaviour, boredom, and enjoyment using the recently established 2 × 2 model of perfectionism. This model proposes that different forms of perfectionism, such as self-oriented (SOP) and socially prescribed perfectionism (SPP), will interact to influence different outcomes. One hundred and ninety-four college students completed a multi-section inventory comprised of demographics, the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (MPS; Hewitt, P. L., Flett, G. L., Turnbull-Donovan, W., & Mikail, S. F. [1991]. The Multidimensional perfectionism scale: Reliability, validity, and psychometric properties in psychiatric samples. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3(3), 464–468. doi:10.1037/1040.3.3.464), the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES; Kendzierski, D., & DeCarlo, K. J. [1991]. Physical activity enjoyment scale: Two validation studies. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 13, 50–64. doi:10.1123/jsep.13.1.50), and the Godin Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire (GLETQ; Godin, G., & Shephard, R. J. [1985]. A simple method to assess exercise behaviour in the community. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 10, 141–146. doi:10.1037/t31334-000). Somewhat contrary to the predictions of the 2 × 2 model, we obtained significant interactions between SOP and SPP for boredom in exercise only. More specifically, the highest levels of boredom were associated with high levels of SOP and low levels of SPP (“pure personal standards perfectionism” in the parlance of the 2 × 2 model). In addition, SOP was a significant negative predictor of weekly, mild, moderate, and strenuous exercise minutes and a significant positive predictor of enjoyment. SPP positively predicted mild and moderate exercise. These findings do not offer full support for the use of the 2 × 2 model but we suggest that the model may be better suited for more achievement related environments.
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) | 0.000 | 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".