TY - JOUR
T1 - Equal prioritisation does not yield lower levels of participation in physical activities than higher prioritisation
AU - Chatzisarantis, Nikos L.D.
AU - Barkoukis, Vassilis
AU - Yli-Piipari, Sami
AU - Thogersen-Ntoumani, Cecilie
AU - Ntoumanis, Nikos
AU - Hardcastle, Sarah
AU - Hagger, Martin S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015.
PY - 2016/1/1
Y1 - 2016/1/1
N2 - Objectives: This study examined whether individuals who assigned equal priority to physical activity and an alternative activity exhibited lower levels of participation in physical activities than individuals who assigned higher priority to physical activity than an alternative activity. In addition, we examined whether a measure of prioritisation derived from an algebraic difference index provided a rigorous test of prioritisation effects. Design: We employed a two-wave prospective design that aimed to predict physical activity participation. Method: Prioritisation, intentions and perceptions of control were measured at the first wave of data collection. After five weeks, we administered follow-up measures of behavioural conflict and physical activity participation. Results: A hierarchical regression analysis showed that although the algebraic difference index was positively associated with measures of physical activity participation, equal prioritisation did not yield lower levels of physical activity participation than high prioritisation. Conclusions: Findings suggest that equal prioritisation is not a less optimal self-regulatory strategy than high prioritisation in the domain of physical activity. Regression coefficients associated with algebraic difference indexes should be interpreted with caution and consider analyses that examine effects of component measures of prioritisation on physical activity participation.
AB - Objectives: This study examined whether individuals who assigned equal priority to physical activity and an alternative activity exhibited lower levels of participation in physical activities than individuals who assigned higher priority to physical activity than an alternative activity. In addition, we examined whether a measure of prioritisation derived from an algebraic difference index provided a rigorous test of prioritisation effects. Design: We employed a two-wave prospective design that aimed to predict physical activity participation. Method: Prioritisation, intentions and perceptions of control were measured at the first wave of data collection. After five weeks, we administered follow-up measures of behavioural conflict and physical activity participation. Results: A hierarchical regression analysis showed that although the algebraic difference index was positively associated with measures of physical activity participation, equal prioritisation did not yield lower levels of physical activity participation than high prioritisation. Conclusions: Findings suggest that equal prioritisation is not a less optimal self-regulatory strategy than high prioritisation in the domain of physical activity. Regression coefficients associated with algebraic difference indexes should be interpreted with caution and consider analyses that examine effects of component measures of prioritisation on physical activity participation.
KW - Algebraic difference index
KW - Behavioural conflict
KW - Physical activity
KW - Prioritisation
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84938914125
U2 - 10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.07.001
DO - 10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.07.001
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84938914125
SN - 1469-0292
VL - 22
SP - 123
EP - 130
JO - Psychology of Sport and Exercise
JF - Psychology of Sport and Exercise
ER -