Autonomous motivation, goal-facilitating behaviours, and dietary goal progress in individuals transitioning to a veg*n diet: A longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have consistently shown that autonomous motivation – pursuing goals because one wants to , rather than has to – is associated with greater behaviour maintenance in the context of healthy eating, exercise, and diet maintenance. The present study used a 7-wave longitudinal design to examine how autonomous motivation is related to dietary goal progress in individuals ( N = 222) transitioning to a veg*n (i.e., vegetarian or vegan) diet. We hypothesized that when people reported more autonomous motivation (compared to their own average) they would be more successful in reaching their dietary goals. We also explored the role of goal-facilitating behaviours in this process. We found no directional effects of relative autonomous motivation on goal progress or goal-facilitating behaviours, although the concurrent relations were significant. There were also no within-person effects of behaviours on progress. These findings shed light onto the relationship between autonomous motivation, behaviours, and goal progress both at the same time and over time, and highlight the importance of examining within-person fluctuations over time.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".