Investigating Microtemporal Processes Underlying Health Behavior Adoption and Maintenance: Protocol for an Intensive Longitudinal Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Young adulthood (ages 18-29 years) is marked by substantial weight gain, leading to increased lifetime risks of chronic diseases. Engaging in sufficient levels of physical activity and sleep, and limiting sedentary time are important contributors to the prevention of weight gain. Dual-process models of decision-making and behavior that delineate reflective (ie, deliberative, slow) and reactive (ie, automatic, fast) processes shed light on different mechanisms underlying the adoption versus maintenance of these energy-balance behaviors. However, reflective and reactive processes may unfold at different time scales and vary across people. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the study design, recruitment, and data collection procedures for the Temporal Influences on Movement and Exercise (TIME) study, a 12-month intensive longitudinal data collection study to examine real-time microtemporal influences underlying the adoption and maintenance of physical activity, sedentary behavior, and sleep. METHODS: Intermittent ecological momentary assessment (eg, intentions, self-control) and continuous, sensor-based passive monitoring (eg, location, phone/app use, activity levels) occur using smartwatches and smartphones. Data analyses will combine idiographic (person-specific, data-driven) and nomothetic (generalizable, theory-driven) approaches to build models that may predict within-subject variation in the likelihood of behavior "episodes" (eg, ≥10 minutes of physical activity, ≥120 minutes of sedentary time, ≥7 hours sleep) and "lapses" (ie, not attaining recommended levels for ≥7 days) as a function of reflective and reactive factors. RESULTS: The study recruited young adults across the United States (N=246). Rolling recruitment began in March 2020 and ended August 2021. Data collection will continue until August 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Results from the TIME study will be used to build more predictive health behavior theories, and inform personalized behavior interventions to reduce obesity and improve public health. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/36666.
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 | 0.032 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.006 |
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".