Limits...
Testing Theory of Planned Behavior and Neo-Socioanalytic Theory models of trait activity, industriousness, exercise social cognitions, exercise intentions, and physical activity in a representative U.S. sample.

Vo PT, Bogg T - Front Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: While both models showed good internal fit, comparative model information criteria showed the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model provided a better fit.The resultant model - termed the Disposition-Belief-Motivation model- is proposed as a useful framework for organizing and integrating personality trait facets and social cognitions from various theoretical perspectives to investigate the expression of health-related behaviors, such as physical activity.Moreover, the results are discussed in terms of extending the application of the Disposition-Belief-Motivation model to longitudinal and intervention designs for physical activity engagement.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Wayne State University, Detroit MI, USA.

ABSTRACT
Prior research identified assorted relations between trait and social cognition models of personality and engagement in physical activity. Using a representative U.S. sample (N = 957), the goal of the present study was to test two alternative structural models of the relationships among the extraversion-related facet of activity, the conscientiousness-related facet of industriousness, social cognitions from the Theory of Planned Behavior (perceived behavioral control, affective attitudes, subjective norms, intentions), Social Cognitive Theory (self-efficacy, outcome expectancies), and the Transtheoretical Model (behavioral processes of change), and engagement in physical activity. Path analyses with bootstrapping procedures were used to model direct and indirect effects of trait and social cognition constructs on physical activity through two distinct frameworks - the Theory of Planned Behavior and Neo-Socioanalytic Theory. While both models showed good internal fit, comparative model information criteria showed the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model provided a better fit. In the model, social cognitions fully mediated the relationships from the activity facet and industriousness to intentions for and engagement in physical activity, such that the relationships were primarily maintained by positive affective evaluations, positive expected outcomes, and confidence in overcoming barriers related to physical activity engagement. The resultant model - termed the Disposition-Belief-Motivation model- is proposed as a useful framework for organizing and integrating personality trait facets and social cognitions from various theoretical perspectives to investigate the expression of health-related behaviors, such as physical activity. Moreover, the results are discussed in terms of extending the application of the Disposition-Belief-Motivation model to longitudinal and intervention designs for physical activity engagement.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Direct standardized path weights of the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. Dotted lines represent non-significant paths, for which the path weights were omitted. All other lines and path weights shown are statistically significant at p < 0.01. Correlated error terms were also omitted for clarity of presentation, and they are as follows: activity ↔ industriousness = 0.34; affective attitudes ↔ norms = 0.21; norms ↔ outcome expectancies = 0.33; affective attitudes ↔ outcome expectancies = 0.41.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4526790&req=5

Figure 3: Direct standardized path weights of the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. Dotted lines represent non-significant paths, for which the path weights were omitted. All other lines and path weights shown are statistically significant at p < 0.01. Correlated error terms were also omitted for clarity of presentation, and they are as follows: activity ↔ industriousness = 0.34; affective attitudes ↔ norms = 0.21; norms ↔ outcome expectancies = 0.33; affective attitudes ↔ outcome expectancies = 0.41.

Mentions: Table 2 shows the fit statistics and indices for the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model and the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. As can be seen, both models had a CFI score of at least 0.99, indicating that at least 99% of the covariation in the data was reproduced by each model. The models also showed acceptable errors of approximation, with RMSEA at 0.016 for the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model and at 0.051 for the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. As indicated by the lower BIC and lower AIC values, the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model provided a better comparative fit than the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. Subsequent interpretation of the data references the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model. Figure 2 shows the standardized path weights for the direct effects in this model. For comparison purposes, Figure 3 shows the standardized path weights for the direct effects in the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model.


Testing Theory of Planned Behavior and Neo-Socioanalytic Theory models of trait activity, industriousness, exercise social cognitions, exercise intentions, and physical activity in a representative U.S. sample.

Vo PT, Bogg T - Front Psychol (2015)

Direct standardized path weights of the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. Dotted lines represent non-significant paths, for which the path weights were omitted. All other lines and path weights shown are statistically significant at p < 0.01. Correlated error terms were also omitted for clarity of presentation, and they are as follows: activity ↔ industriousness = 0.34; affective attitudes ↔ norms = 0.21; norms ↔ outcome expectancies = 0.33; affective attitudes ↔ outcome expectancies = 0.41.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4526790&req=5

Figure 3: Direct standardized path weights of the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. Dotted lines represent non-significant paths, for which the path weights were omitted. All other lines and path weights shown are statistically significant at p < 0.01. Correlated error terms were also omitted for clarity of presentation, and they are as follows: activity ↔ industriousness = 0.34; affective attitudes ↔ norms = 0.21; norms ↔ outcome expectancies = 0.33; affective attitudes ↔ outcome expectancies = 0.41.
Mentions: Table 2 shows the fit statistics and indices for the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model and the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. As can be seen, both models had a CFI score of at least 0.99, indicating that at least 99% of the covariation in the data was reproduced by each model. The models also showed acceptable errors of approximation, with RMSEA at 0.016 for the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model and at 0.051 for the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. As indicated by the lower BIC and lower AIC values, the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model provided a better comparative fit than the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model. Subsequent interpretation of the data references the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model. Figure 2 shows the standardized path weights for the direct effects in this model. For comparison purposes, Figure 3 shows the standardized path weights for the direct effects in the Neo-Socioanalytic-Theory-informed model.

Bottom Line: While both models showed good internal fit, comparative model information criteria showed the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model provided a better fit.The resultant model - termed the Disposition-Belief-Motivation model- is proposed as a useful framework for organizing and integrating personality trait facets and social cognitions from various theoretical perspectives to investigate the expression of health-related behaviors, such as physical activity.Moreover, the results are discussed in terms of extending the application of the Disposition-Belief-Motivation model to longitudinal and intervention designs for physical activity engagement.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Wayne State University, Detroit MI, USA.

ABSTRACT
Prior research identified assorted relations between trait and social cognition models of personality and engagement in physical activity. Using a representative U.S. sample (N = 957), the goal of the present study was to test two alternative structural models of the relationships among the extraversion-related facet of activity, the conscientiousness-related facet of industriousness, social cognitions from the Theory of Planned Behavior (perceived behavioral control, affective attitudes, subjective norms, intentions), Social Cognitive Theory (self-efficacy, outcome expectancies), and the Transtheoretical Model (behavioral processes of change), and engagement in physical activity. Path analyses with bootstrapping procedures were used to model direct and indirect effects of trait and social cognition constructs on physical activity through two distinct frameworks - the Theory of Planned Behavior and Neo-Socioanalytic Theory. While both models showed good internal fit, comparative model information criteria showed the Theory-of-Planned-Behavior-informed model provided a better fit. In the model, social cognitions fully mediated the relationships from the activity facet and industriousness to intentions for and engagement in physical activity, such that the relationships were primarily maintained by positive affective evaluations, positive expected outcomes, and confidence in overcoming barriers related to physical activity engagement. The resultant model - termed the Disposition-Belief-Motivation model- is proposed as a useful framework for organizing and integrating personality trait facets and social cognitions from various theoretical perspectives to investigate the expression of health-related behaviors, such as physical activity. Moreover, the results are discussed in terms of extending the application of the Disposition-Belief-Motivation model to longitudinal and intervention designs for physical activity engagement.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus