MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410323132 · doi:10.36950/2025.10ciss003

How motivation influence physical activity engagement among active older adults? The contribution of identity and habit

2025· article· en· W4410323132 on OpenAlexaff
Johan Caudroit, Julie Boiché, Marine Vigneron, Paquito Bernard

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Issues in Sport Science (CISS) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitIdentity (music)Physical activityPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationArtAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Using a moderated mediation model, the present study investigated whether the mediation of physical activity (PA) habit into PA level via PA identity depends on the levels of both autonomous and controlled motivation among active older adults.Method: A one-month prospective study was conducted among 220 French physically active older adults. They were administrated measures of sociodemographic variables, self-determination, habit, and identity at baseline aswell as PA level one month later.Results: PA identity partially mediated the positive relationship between PA habit and PA level. In addition, moderated mediation analysis revealed that PA identity and the interaction between habit and motivation were positively and significantly associated with PA level. More precisely, PA habit was related to PA level only for older adults with both high level of controlled motivation and moderated or high level of autonomous motivation.Conclusion: The results highlighted the crucial role of PA identity in the prediction of PA level among physically active older adults. They also revealed the importance to consider various types of motivations in the maintenance of PA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Issues in Sport Science (CISS)Same topicPhysical Activity and HealthFrench-language works237,207