Predictive Utility of the Multi-Process Action Control Framework for Self-Reported and Device-Measured Physical Activity Behavior of Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the correlates of physical activity behavior is imperative for informing the development of interventions to address the low rates of physical activity guideline adherence among adolescents living in the United States. This cross-sectional study examined the predictive utility of the Multi-Process Action Control (M-PAC) framework for explaining self-reported and device-measured physical activity behavior among a Hispanic-majority sample of adolescents. A total of 1849 high school students (mean age = 16.0 ± 1.22 SD years; 52.3% women; 87.8% Hispanic) enrolled in one school district in south-central Texas completed a survey including instruments to assess M-PAC framework constructs (instrumental and affective attitudes, perceived capability and opportunity, behavioral regulation, habit, identity) and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) behavior. A subsample (n = 435) wore accelerometers for seven days. The results from robust linear regression models revealed role identity and habit were significant predictors of self-reported MVPA. Role identity was a significant predictor of accelerometer-derived daily MVPA and raw acceleration in the most active hour but not daily raw acceleration. The findings indicated reflexive processes are robust predictors of adolescent physical activity and should be the focus of interventions designed to promote adoption and maintenance of physical activity during this developmental life stage.
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 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".