Affective and self-presentational responses to an exercise identity challenge: Investigating identity and the role of the other
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to Identity Theory (IT), individuals seek to maintain consistency between their identity and identity-relevant feedback received from others. Individuals' reactions to identity-relevant feedback remain understudied in IT, especially in the exercise domain. This study examined reactions of individuals exposed to an exercise identity confirming or disconfirming public situation. Based on IT, individuals receiving identity disconfirming feedback in the presence of others were hypothesized to demonstrate greater negative affect and attempts to self-present as exercisers as compared to individuals receiving confirming feedback. A MANOVA analysis assessed differences on affective and self-presentational reactions to feedback between confirming and disconfirming conditions. The overall model was significant ( p = .01). Univariate follow-up analyses revealed that individuals in the disconfirming condition reported greater negative affect ( p p p p < .01) than confirmed participants. In the exercise domain, findings support the IT tenet that individuals seek to achieve consistency between their identity and identity-relevant perceptions that others have of them.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".