↓ Skip to main content

The Exercise–Affect–Adherence Pathway: An Evolutionary Perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2016
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
60 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
218 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The Exercise–Affect–Adherence Pathway: An Evolutionary Perspective
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01285
Pubmed ID
Authors

Harold H Lee, Jessica A Emerson, David M Williams

Abstract

The low rates of regular exercise and overall physical activity (PA) in the general population represent a significant public health challenge. Previous research suggests that, for many people, exercise leads to a negative affective response and, in turn, reduced likelihood of future exercise. The purpose of this paper is to examine this exercise-affect-adherence relationship from an evolutionary perspective. Specifically, we argue that low rates of physical exercise in the general population are a function of the evolved human tendency to avoid unnecessary physical exertion. This innate tendency evolved because it allowed our evolutionary ancestors to conserve energy for physical activities that had immediate adaptive utility such as pursuing prey, escaping predators, and engaging in social and reproductive behaviors. The commonly observed negative affective response to exercise is an evolved proximate psychological mechanism through which humans avoid unnecessary energy expenditure. The fact that the human tendencies toward negative affective response to and avoidance of unnecessary physical activities are innate does not mean that they are unchangeable. Indeed, it is only because of human-engineered changes in our environmental conditions (i.e., it is no longer necessary for us to work for our food) that our predisposition to avoid unnecessary physical exertion has become a liability. Thus, it is well within our capabilities to reengineer our environments to once again make PA necessary or, at least, to serve an immediate functional purpose. We propose a two-pronged approach to PA promotion based on this evolutionary functional perspective: first, to promote exercise and other physical activities that are perceived to have an immediate purpose, and second, to instill greater perceived purpose for a wider range of physical activities. We posit that these strategies are more likely to result in more positive (or less negative) affective responses to exercise, better adherence to exercise programs, and higher rates of overall PA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 60 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 218 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Luxembourg 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 215 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 18%
Student > Bachelor 34 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 8%
Professor 12 6%
Other 34 16%
Unknown 53 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 41 19%
Psychology 37 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 6%
Neuroscience 13 6%
Other 29 13%
Unknown 69 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 31 January 2022.
All research outputs
#1,067,232
of 24,995,564 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,229
of 33,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,727
of 348,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#54
of 406 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,995,564 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,746 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 348,526 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 406 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.