The association between implicit attitudes toward physical activity and physical activity behaviour: a systematic review and correlational meta-analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a result of recent calls to attend to the implicit processes that regulate health behaviours, the study of implicit attitudes and physical activity behaviour has grown rapidly in the past decade. The aim of this study was to summarise existing evidence on the extent to which implicit attitudes toward physical activity are associated with physical activity behaviour. A systematic literature review was performed to retrieve studies reporting both a measure of implicit attitudes and physical activity. For the meta-analysis, effect size (Pearson’s r) were extracted from eligible studies or retrieved from authors. A total of 26 independent studies, and 55 effect sizes, were eligible. There was a small, significant, and positive correlation between implicit attitudes and physical activity, a finding replicated across multiple meta-analytical strategies with sensitivity analyses applied. This association was not significantly moderated by study design or objective, participants’ age or other characteristics, or measures of implicit attitudes or physical activity. This meta-analysis provides evidence that implicit attitudes toward physical activity are positively associated with physical activity in adults to a small degree.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it