↓ Skip to main content

Increasing Physical Activity Through Principles of Habit Formation in New Gym Members: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Behavioral Medicine, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
18 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 Mendeley
Title
Increasing Physical Activity Through Principles of Habit Formation in New Gym Members: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Published in
Annals of Behavioral Medicine, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12160-017-9881-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Navin Kaushal, Ryan E. Rhodes, John C. Spence, John T. Meldrum

Abstract

The promotion of physical activity (PA) is paramount to public health, yet interventions in the social cognitive tradition have yielded negligible improvements. The limited progression may be due to an overreliance on intention as the proximal determinant of behavior and a lack of consideration of implicit/automatic processes. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a habit formation intervention on PA over 8 weeks in a two-arm parallel design, randomized controlled trial. Participants (n = 94) were new gym members with the intention to engage in PA but below international PA guidelines at baseline, who were randomized into a control or habit experimental group. The experimental group attended a workshop (at baseline) and received a follow-up booster phone call at week 4. The primary outcome of the study was minutes of moderate-vigorous intensity PA (MVPA) at week 8. The secondary outcome was a manipulation check to determine if the experimental group effectively incorporated habit-building constructs (cues and practice consistency). The experimental group showed a significant increase in MVPA after 8 weeks in both accelerometry (d = 0.39, p = .04) and self-report (d = 0.53, p = .01) compared with the control group. The experimental group also showed an increase in use of cues (d = 0.56, p < .001) and practice consistency (d = 0.40, p = .01) at week 8. The results contribute to the initial validity of increasing PA through a focus on preparation cues and practice consistency. Future research should replicate these findings and extend the duration of assessment to evaluate whether PA changes are sustained. Registered Trial Number NCT02785107.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 136 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 18%
Student > Bachelor 19 14%
Student > Master 17 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Researcher 10 7%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 32 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 14%
Sports and Recreations 17 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 8%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 38 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 May 2021.
All research outputs
#1,600,179
of 24,522,750 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#194
of 1,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,879
of 431,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#6
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,522,750 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,459 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 431,228 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.