The interaction of behavioral context and motivational-volitional factors for exercise and sport in adolescence: patterns matter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In order to generate more effective interventions to promote exercise and sport in adolescence, a better understanding of the interaction of influencing factors across different levels is needed. In particular, motivation and volition for exercise and sport, as well as the context in which adolescents are doing exercise and sport, have been identified as important factors. Behavioral context refers to both the organizational setting, e.g., doing exercise and sport in a club, and the social setting, e.g., doing exercise and sport with friends. Extending previous research, the present study applies a person-oriented approach and aims to identify typical behavioral context patterns and motivational-volitional patterns. To validate the patterns, it was examined whether they differ concerning the exercise and sport activity level. Furthermore, the study investigated how behavioral context patterns and motivational-volitional patterns interact. METHOD: = 15.29; 53% female) was applied. A latent profile analysis was used twice to identify typical patterns: once with eight organizational and social setting factors to examine behavioral context patterns, and once with five motivational-volitional factors to examine motivational-volitional patterns. To validate the patterns identified, the exercise and sport activity level were compared across the patterns using Wald-tests. Finally, transition probabilities and odds ratios were calculated in order to investigate the interaction of the behavioral context and motivational-volitional patterns. RESULTS: Four behavioral context patterns - differing in activity level - were identified: Mostly inactive, non-club-organized individualists, self-organized individualists and family sportspersons, and traditional competitive club athletes with friends. Furthermore, five motivational-volitional patterns emerged with differing activity levels: three level patterns with overall low, moderate or high motivation and volition, and two shape patterns called the intention- and plan-less and the plan-less motivated. Regarding interaction, the results indicate that one behavioral context pattern is not solely responsible for moderate to high motivation and volition in adolescents. CONCLUSION: Applying a person-oriented approach allows a more differentiated view of how behavioral context and motivational-volitional factors interact within homogenous subgroups. This, in turn, provides a basis to design tailored multilevel interventions which account for the interaction of influencing factors across different levels.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".