↓ Skip to main content

People have feelings! Exercise psychology in paradigmatic transition

Overview of attention for article published in Current Opinion in Psychology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
52 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
People have feelings! Exercise psychology in paradigmatic transition
Published in
Current Opinion in Psychology, April 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.018
Pubmed ID
Authors

Panteleimon Ekkekakis

Abstract

Exercise psychology has yet to produce intervention methods capable of increasing exercise and physical activity behavior in a sustainable manner. This situation is forcing a critical reevaluation of current conceptual models, especially the assumption that behavioral decisions are driven solely by the rational evaluation of information. Like other behavioral sciences, exercise psychology is transitioning to dual-process models that acknowledge the importance of non-reflective processes. Emerging evidence suggests that the pleasure or displeasure experienced during exercise may influence subsequent physical activity. These data raise the possibility of inactivity resulting from a conflict between positively evaluated information on health benefits and unpleasant affective experiences. Thus, researchers must devise methods to make exercise and physical activity more pleasant and enjoyable across the lifespan.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 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 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 165 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 19%
Student > Bachelor 26 16%
Student > Master 15 9%
Researcher 12 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 26 16%
Unknown 44 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 35 21%
Psychology 35 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 4%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 17 10%
Unknown 58 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 03 February 2022.
All research outputs
#977,952
of 25,497,142 outputs
Outputs from Current Opinion in Psychology
#200
of 1,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,575
of 323,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Opinion in Psychology
#11
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,497,142 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,427 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.0. 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 323,696 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.