Motor Coordination and Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity in Emerging Adults: Mediating Effect of Physical Self-Concept
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little research has investigated the relationships among motor coordination, perceived physical self-concept (PSC), and physical activity during emerging adulthood. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether PSC mediates the relationship between motor coordination and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in emerging adults. This was a cross-sectional study with 218 undergraduate students aged 17-23 years (167 females, 76.6%). Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire including self-reported measures of motor coordination, PSC and MVPA. The mediating effects of both overall and domain-specific PSC were tested on the relationship between motor coordination and MVPA. Motor coordination was found to have a significant indirect effect on MVPA through overall PSC. Exploratory analyses specifically showed a mediating effect of domain-specific PSC of activity on the relationships between motor coordination and MVPA during chores and leisure-time. Findings from the current study highlight the importance of PSC on the relationship between motor coordination and MVPA and showed that university students with poor motor coordination exhibit lower levels of PSC, specifically, the perception of activity. Future interventions targeting the enhancement of MVPA should focus on improvement in the self-perception of physical activity alongside motor skills training.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".