↓ Skip to main content

Exercise makes people feel better but people are inactive: paradox or artifact?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, August 2007
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)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
114 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 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
Exercise makes people feel better but people are inactive: paradox or artifact?
Published in
Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, August 2007
DOI 10.1123/jsep.29.4.498
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan H. Backhouse, Panteleimon Ekkekakis, Stuart J.H. Biddle, Andrew Foskett, Clyde Williams

Abstract

The exercise psychology literature includes an intriguing, albeit not frequently discussed, paradox by juxtaposing two conclusions: (a) that exercise makes most people feel better and (b) that most people are physically inactive or inadequately active. In this article, we propose that this might be an artifact rather than a paradox. Specifically, we question the generality of the conclusion that exercise makes people feel better by proposing that (a) occasional findings of negative affective changes tend to be discounted, (b) potentially relevant negative affective states are not always measured, (c) examining changes from pre- to postexercise could miss negative changes during exercise, and (d) analyzing changes only at the level of group aggregates might conceal divergent patterns at the level of individuals or subgroups. Data from a study of 12 men participating in a 90-min walk-run protocol designed to simulate the demands of sports games (e.g., soccer) are used to illustrate these points.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Brazil 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 147 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 20%
Student > Master 25 16%
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Researcher 16 10%
Professor 12 8%
Other 35 23%
Unknown 17 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 42 27%
Psychology 40 26%
Social Sciences 11 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 26 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 10 February 2016.
All research outputs
#2,760,622
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology
#94
of 499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,159
of 76,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 76,010 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 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.