Journal of American College Health Physical Activity in the Transition

This article was downloaded by: [24.114.71.154] On: 02 August 2015, At: 19:07 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG

Journal of American College Health Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vach20

Physical Activity in the Transition to University: The Role of Past Behavior and Concurrent Self-regulatory Efficacy a

a

a

Alyson J. Crozier , Madelaine S. H. Gierc , Sean R. Locke & Lawrence R. Brawley

a

a

College of Kinesiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada Accepted author version posted online: 09 Jun 2015.

Click for updates To cite this article: Alyson J. Crozier, Madelaine S. H. Gierc, Sean R. Locke & Lawrence R. Brawley (2015): Physical Activity in the Transition to University: The Role of Past Behavior and Concurrent Self-regulatory Efficacy, Journal of American College Health, DOI: 10.1080/07448481.2015.1042880 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2015.1042880

Disclaimer: This is a version of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to authors and researchers we are providing this version of the accepted manuscript (AM). Copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof will be undertaken on this manuscript before final publication of the Version of Record (VoR). During production and pre-press, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal relate to this version also.

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Major Article

Downloaded by [24.114.71.154] at 19:07 02 August 2015

Physical Activity in the Transition to University: The Role of Past Behavior and Concurrent Self-regulatory Efficacy

Alyson J. Crozier1; Madelaine S. H. Gierc1; Sean R. Locke1; Lawrence R. Brawley1 1

College of Kinesiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

The first three authors, A.J. Crozier, M.S.H. Gierc, and S.R. Locke, contributed equally to the research and manuscript.

Abstract Abstract. Objective: Two studies were conducted to examine the relationship between past physical activity, concurrent self-regulatory efficacy (CSRE), and current physical activity

1

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT during the transition to university. Participants: Study 1 included 110 first-year undergraduate students recruited during October/November of 2012. Study 2 involved 86 first-year undergraduate students recruited during October/November of 2013. Methods: Surveys were completed online, concurrently (Study 1) and prospectively (Study 2). Results: CSRE was found to positively predict current physical activity participation in both studies. However, the relation of CSRE to physical activity was attenuated when past behavior was taken into account.


Conclusions: Physical activity is one goal that university students pursue concurrently with other goals. Not only is current planned activity related to one’s past participation in physical activity, it is also related to self-regulatory beliefs about managing that activity in the new context of university life.

Keywords: past behavior, physical activity, self-regulation, transition, university

2

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Introduction The positive health benefits of physical activity (PA) are well-known. Across populations, engaging in regular PA is associated with significantly improved health, enhanced symptom management, and decreased risk of disease. 1 Current Canadian2 and American3 guidelines recommend adults engage in no less than 150 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous


aerobic activity per week, with additional benefits achieved through more activity and/or strength and flexibility training. Despite this, national surveillance data indicates that only about 15% of Canadian adults4 and about 20% of American adults5 meet these guidelines on a regular basis. In addition to already-low rates of PA, studies have found that PA typically declines following the occurrence of a life transition. 6 A life transition is characterized by a significant change in roles and responsibilities, 7 and is often precipitated by a major life event (e.g., the birth of one’s first child). As a result of these changes, individuals experience a shift in their priorities, motivations, and goal pursuits – including those surrounding PA engagement. Declines in PA have been observed after starting a job, 8 becoming a parent,9,10 and at retirement11. Decreases have also been observed following the transition to university, with first-year undergraduate students experiencing a significant decline in PA relative to high school.12-15 This is particularly disconcerting in that many universities provide students with on-campus recreational facilities (e.g., basketball courts, swimming pools) and programming (e.g., fitness classes, intramural sports) at little to no cost. If removing structural barriers (i.e., lack of access, affordability) is not

3

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT enough to maintain/increase PA, it begs the question of what additional factors should health interventionists target in university settings? Life Transitions and Social Cognitions Past work on PA and the transition to university has been primarily descriptive in nature. A typical study will (1) measure PA before and after the transition period, and then (2) examine the pre-/post- difference; frequently, such studies observe a significant decline in students’ PA.12,


16-18

However, an important caveat has been noted: while a sample’s overall PA may decline,

individual variability does exist. For instance, Bray and Born observed that 11% of students increased their level of PA when they started university.12 Thus, it may not simply be the occurrence of a life transition that is related to lower PA, but how individuals respond to the challenges and changes that the transition presents. Indeed, some authors implicate the psychological aspects of change in this response, describing life transitions as periods of “inner reorientation and self-definition” (pp. xii).19 It seems plausible that, as individuals reassess and shift their priorities, goals that were once highly valued (e.g., being part of a high school sports team) become less so in the wake of new ones (e.g., being independent, getting into a professional program). That noted, goals do not exist in a vacuum: individuals can be in the pursuit of several outcomes at once.20, 21 The successful management of multiple valued goals requires selfregulation, the set of purposive processes (psychological or behavioral) that allows individuals to strive toward valued outcomes and reach their personal goals. 22, 23 In the case of PA during the transition to university, individuals may need to self-regulate across several domains of behavior,

4

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT including scheduling exercise amidst other daily activities, self-monitoring progress toward goals, and engaging in problem solving to overcome both foreseen and unforeseen barriers.24 Self-efficacy is a key construct of the agency component of social cognitive theory; it suggests that personal efficacy to self-regulate is an important mechanism in the attainment of goals.25 Of importance for this study, concurrent self-regulatory efficacy (CSRE) specifically refers to individuals’ confidence in their ability to concurrently manage multiple goals. 20, 21 In


general, past research has observed a positive relationship between CSRE and PA. For instance, CSRE has been shown to be related to PA adherence in challenging circumstances, such as with working mothers who have to balance work and family obligations alongside their PA. 21, 27 In a sample of undergraduate students, frequent exercisers were found to have greater CSRE than less frequent exercisers.20 However, although that study included first-year students, it did not specifically target whether CSRE was related to PA in the first semester of university. For firstyear students undergoing the transition to university, faced with the multiple interacting demands of university life (e.g., academic load, social life, family and work obligations), CSRE would be expected to be positively related to students’ participation in PA. Past Behavior and Current Social Cognitions Another predictor of first-year students’ PA may be their past experiences. Weinstein has made the distinction between ongoing (i.e., repeated) health behaviors, such as wearing a seatbelt, and intermittent (i.e., infrequent) health behaviors, such as annual flu shots.27 PA is an example of an ongoing behavior, in that a person must be active on a regular basis if they wish to achieve the associated physical and mental health benefits. In general, individuals have much more experience with and feedback regarding ongoing behaviors as opposed to intermittent

5

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT behaviors. According to the agency aspect of social-cognitive theory (cf.25), past behavior is theorized to be the strongest determinant of future social cognitions; in turn, social-cognitions can help to motivate future behavior. Thus, Weinstein argues that when predicting regular and intermittent behavior, it would be wise to control for the relationship between past behavior and current or future behavior to avoid overestimating the predictive utility of social-cognitions.27


In support of Weinstein,27 research has demonstrated a positive relationship between past behavior and future behavior.27 However, the observed decreases in physical activity during life transitions presents an interesting exception: does the occurrence of a life transition create a change sufficient to alter the relation between past and current/future behavior? The transition to university presents students (i) with the challenges of changing priorities and new routines, and (ii) a new environment in which there are many barriers to PA engagement. 29, 30 In effect, the challenges of the transition may change past behavior’s (high school PA) prediction of future behavior (university PA). During transition periods, social cognitions such as CSRE may offer greater predictive utility given students being challenged by new and competing priority activities.31 The Present Study The purpose of the current research was to examine the relationship between past behavior, CSRE, and current behavior in the context of a life transition. Two questions were posed: (1) Is CSRE related to PA engagement in first-year university students? and, (2) Does Weinstein’s assertion27 about past behavior attenuating the cognition-behavior relationship hold during the university transition? In regards to the former, it was hypothesized that a positive

6

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT relationship would emerge between CSRE and current PA. For the latter, no a priori hypotheses were made regarding past behavior, as there has been a lack of previous work that has focussed on Weinstein’s recommendations during a life transition. On one hand, when controlling for past behavior, the relationship between CSRE and current PA during the transition to the first-year university may be attenuated as Weinstein suggests. Conversely, it may be that the disruptions to an individual’s life caused by the transition to university (e.g., change in schedule, perceived


importance of goals) may make past behavior less predictive of current behavior, and thus, the relationship between CSRE and current behavior would not be attenuated. To answer these questions, we conducted two studies: the first cross-sectional, and the second prospective. Both featured first-year university students in their first term of university. Study 1 Methods Procedure and Participants. Ethics approval was attained from a university Ethics Review Board. Participants were recruited via advertisements posted on departmental bulletin boards and the university’s website. Prospective participants were considered eligible if they were a first-year university student in their first term of study; and were excluded if they had a chronic physical or cognitive condition that would limit their ability to be physically active. Participants had the opportunity to enter a draw to win one of ten $10 gift cards. The final sample included 110 first-year undergraduate students, 97% full-time students, 28.7% living on campus. Seventy-nine percent of the participants were female with a mean age of 20.2 (SD = 5.11) years.

7

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Eligible participants were asked to complete a 10-minute online survey. Participants first read the consent form outlining details of the study, and those willing to participate provided informed consent; consent was further implied by completing the online survey. The survey was completed once during October/November of 2012, after entering university in early September. This timing allowed participants to have some experience with attempting to manage competing demands while still being relatively early in the transition period (e.g., first experiences with


mid-term exams and assignments).

Measures Demographic Questionnaire. Information regarding participant’s age, sex, student status, and residence was collected for descriptive purposes. Physical Activity. The total volume of moderate and vigorous physical activity (MVPA) was assessed using a modified Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire (GLTEQ).32 Assessing the total volume of MVPA is consistent with the manner in which adult PA recommendations have been expressed in prior research (cf. 2). Scores from the original GLTEQ measure have been demonstrated as reliable, with test-retest scores of 0.74 and 0.81 in healthy adults,32 and have shown convergent validity with objective physiological measures of fitness and energy expenditure.32, 33 Given our research question (i.e., self-regulating PA alongside other valued goals; cf. 20), our focus was the reporting of planned PA versus incidental and/or total daily PA. Therefore, in order to reflect past PA, participants reported the number of planned 30-minute bouts of MVPA during a typical week in the 6 months before starting university (i.e., March to August). The

8

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT validity of the alteration to the scale (30-minute bouts) has also been established.34 To assess current PA, participants reflected on the number of planned 30-minute bouts of MVPA during the past week (i.e., the past 7 days). Unplanned and/or incidental activity was not included given it is not intentionally self-regulated and is not correspondent with the CSRE predictor measure. The intensity and effort associated with planned MVPA was clearly defined in order to serve as an unambiguous structured reference understood by all participants. 35 The instructions


given to participants about their recall was based upon a three-fold rationale that took into account: (a) the self-regulation of planned bouts of activity (i.e., requiring conscious efforts to plan, schedule, and carry out); (b) that planned exercise bouts of longer duration are more apt to be recalled and self-reported with accuracy compared to short bouts of unplanned activity;36 and (c) stronger associations between self-reported MVPA and objective measures. Beyond these pragmatic reasons, recall of durations of planned bouts has been validated with objective measures like accelerometers.36, 37 Assessment of number of planned bouts is consistent with previous research predicting planned self-regulated behavior (e.g. Jung20). Total minutes of planned PA were calculated by multiplying the total number of reported bouts of MVPA by 30 minutes (e.g., 2 bouts X 30 minutes = 60 minutes). Concurrent Self-Regulatory Efficacy (CSRE). To assess participants’ confidence in their abilities, participants were first prompted: “Think about concurrently managing exercise with your other most important goal (e.g., academic, family, social, work).” They were then asked to rate their confidence to engage in five different self-regulatory behaviors used to manage both goals. An example item reads, “During a typical week, how confident are you in

9

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT your ability to accurately monitor your time so that your progress for both your exercise goal and your other important non-exercise goal is effective?” Participants rated their confidence ranging from 0% (not at all confident) to 100% (extremely confident), with 10% increments. The specificity with which the time course and action of the five items were created was in accordance with recommendations. 25, 38 Each participant’s average score for the five items was calculated. The scale has demonstrated internal


consistency in previous studies of concurrent management of exercise and other goals, 20, 21 and scores on the scale were reliable in the present study (Cronbach’s  = 0.9539). Value of Goals. As a manipulation check, the value of exercise goals was measured. Participants were asked to indicate how much value they placed on their exercise goal on a scale ranging from 1 (I do not value this goal at all) to 9 (I value this goal very much). Participants responded with an average of M = 7.11 out of 9 when asked how much they valued their exercise goals. Data Analysis To test the research questions, two regression analyses were conducted. Univariate and multivariate assumptions were assessed prior to analysis. The first analysis was a linear regression, which examined the relationship between CSRE and current PA (Purpose 1). The second analysis examined the relationship between CSRE and current PA while controlling for past behavior, in order to test Weinstein’s27 hypothesis on the predictive utility of past behavior (Purpose 2). Past PA was entered on the first step of a hierarchical regression, and CSRE was added on the second step, both predicting current PA. Results of this hierarchical regression indicated whether CSRE added to the prediction of current behavior beyond that of past

10

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT behavior. Variance accounted for, beta weights and effect sizes were compared between these two analyses, to assess whether the relationship between CSRE and behavior was overestimated. Results All assumptions for multiple regression analyses were met. 39 Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations of each variable, as well as the correlations between variables. With regard to our first hypothesis, results from the linear regression illustrated that


CSRE had a significant positive relationship with current PA, F(1, 107) = 24.54, β = .43, ηp2 = .43, p < .001,accounting for 18.7% of the variance. This suggests that first-year students’ confidence in their ability to manage multiple life goals concurrently is predictive of their current PA engagement. When controlling for past PA, the overall hierarchical regression model significantly predicted current PA, F(2, 105) = 53.36, p < .001, accounting for 50.4% of the variance. When examining the first step of this regression model, the results revealed that past PA significantly predicted current PA, F(1, 106) = 80.04, β = .66, ηp2 = .66, p < .001, and accounted for 43% of the variance. The addition of CSRE on the second step was also significant, F change(1, 105) = 15.64, β = .28, p < .001, ηp2 = .27, contributing an additional 7.4% of the variance. On this second step, past PA remained a significant predictor of current PA, β = .59, p < .001, ηp2 = .57. Study 1 Comment Overall, results support our hypotheses. There was a positive relationship between CSRE and PA, with a large effect size (ηp2 = .43) and 18.7% accounted for variance. Thus, greater confidence in the ability to concurrently manage PA with other goals was associated with higher PA levels in first-year students’ PA participation.

11

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The results of our second analysis address Weinstein’s argument about past behavior as a predictor of current behavior during a life transition. When past PA was included, the overall effect of CSRE on current PA was attenuated (from β = .43 to β = .28). CSRE accounted for less variance in current PA (7.4%) as compared to the former analysis when it was excluded (18.7%). However, the effect size was still large (ηp2 = .27).40 Thus, results provide support for Weinstein’s argument 27.


Study 2 Inasmuch as Weinstein’s contentions appear valid based on Study 1, our findings may have been limited by our concurrent measurement of variables in a cross-sectional design: potentially inflating relationships between variables.41 Therefore, a second study was conducted, where we used a prospective design to examine whether CSRE would predict current planned PA. Methods Procedure and Participants. Ethics approval was granted by the university Ethics Review Board. Recruitment occurred via advertisements posted on departmental bulletin boards and the university’s website. As with Study 1, individuals were considered eligible for participation if they were a first-year university student in their first term of study; and ineligible for participation if they had a chronic physical or cognitive condition that limited their ability to be physically active. The final sample included 86 first-year students, 75% full-time students, 25.7% living in residence. Seventy-five percent were female with a mean age of 19.3 (SD=3.74) years.

12

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Following our two-week prospective design, participants read and completed the consent form, and completed measures for demographics, past PA, and CSRE at Time 1. At Time 2, two weeks later, they completed a measure of current PA. Measures Demographic Questionnaire. Information regarding participant’s age, sex, residence, and student status was collected for descriptive purposes.


Physical Activity. As with Study 1, our interest concerned planned bouts of MVPA. In order to reflect past PA, participants reported the number of 30-minute bouts of MVPA during a typical week in the 6 months before starting university (i.e., March to August). To assess current PA, participants reflected on the number of 30-minute bouts of MVPA during the past 7 days. Concurrent Self-Regulatory Efficacy (CSRE). The same CSRE measure that was used in Study 1 was used in Study 2. Participants were initially prompted to “Think about concurrently managing exercise with your other most important goal (e.g., academic, family, social, work).” Participants were then asked to rate their confidence (from 0% to 100%) to engage in five self-regulatory behaviors used to manage both goals over the next two weeks. Each participant’s average score for the five items was calculated, and was found to be reliable in Study 2 (Cronbach’s  = 0.90). Value of Goals. As a manipulation check, the value of exercise goals was measured. Participants responded on a scale ranging from 1 (I do not value this goal at all) to 9 (I value this goal very much) with an average of M = 7.32 when asked how much they valued their exercise goals.

13

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Data Analyses Study 2 utilized the same analysis procedures as Study 1. Univariate and multivariate assumptions were assessed prior to analysis. To test hypotheses, two regression analyses were conducted. The first analysis was a linear regression, which assessed the relationship between CSRE and current PA (Purpose 1). To test Weinstein’s hypothesis27 relative to past behavior, the second analysis examined the relationship between CSRE and current PA while controlling for


past behavior (see Purpose 2). Past PA was entered on the first step of a hierarchical regression, and CSRE was added on the second step, both predicting current PA. Results of this hierarchical regression indicated whether CSRE added to the prediction of current PA beyond that of past PA. Variance accounted for, beta weights and effect sizes were compared between these two analyses. Results Hierarchical regression assumptions were met.39 Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations of each variable, as well as the correlations between variables. CSRE had a significant relationship with current PA, F(1, 82) = 11.27, β = .35, ηp2 = .35, p < .01, explaining 12.1% of the variance in the first linear regression. In the second regression equation, the overall hierarchical regression model (including both past PA and CSRE), significantly predicted current PA, F(2, 81) = 11.90, p < .001, explaining 22.7% of the variance. Results from the first step of the hierarchical regression revealed that past PA significantly predicted current PA, F(1, 82) = 14.70, β = .39, ηp2 = .39, p < .001, and accounted for 15.2% of the variance. The addition of CSRE on the second step was also significant, Fchange(1, 81) =

14

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 7.88, β = .28, ηp2 =.27, p < .01, accounting for an additional 7.5% of the variance. On this second step, past PA remained a significant predictor of current PA, β = .33, η p2 = .33, p < .01. Study 2 Comment Overall, the results from our second study support Weinstein’s argument 27 about past behavior. While CSRE was found to be a positive predictor of current PA (β = .35, accounted for 12.1% variance), its predictive utility was attenuated when past behavior was accounted for (β =


.28, added 7.5% accounted for variance). These findings illustrate the importance and veracity of Weinstein’s claim that the prediction of health behaviors by social cognitions may be overestimated when past behavior is not controlled. However, it is noteworthy that the contribution of CSRE was still significant, indicating that it is useful as a predictor when combined with past behavior when examining individuals engaged in changing behavior as a response to new circumstances (i.e., the transition between high school and university). General Comment There were two primary purposes of our investigations. First, we examined whether selfregulatory efficacy to concurrently manage exercise along with other life goals (i.e., CSRE) accounted for a significant amount of variation in first-year university students’ PA levels. Second, we examined Weinstein’s assertion27 about the importance and inclusion of past behavior in accounting for future behavior. Specifically, we examined whether past behavior would affect the relationship between CSRE and current PA during the transition to university. The finding that CSRE was related to PA in first-year students supported our hypothesis, and is in line with previous research examining working mothers21 and university students going through exams.42 These studies suggest that, when multiple life demands are competing for an

15

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT individual’s time, confidence in one’s ability to manage goals concurrently is an important antecedent of future PA. While other research has noted a particularly large drop in PA following the transition into university,43, 44 our findings suggest that students with greater confidence in their ability to manage PA along with their academic or social goals also had relatively greater PA levels in their first-year of university. While no a priori hypothesis was advanced regarding past behavior, the most interesting


finding was that the relationship between CSRE and PA was attenuated when an individual’s past PA was controlled. Weinstein has stressed the importance of controlling for past behavior to avoid overestimation of the contributions of social cognitions in predicting future behavior.27 Thus, our findings provide additional support for Weinstein’s assertion during the university transition. Although unable to generalize to other life transitions, results indicate that accounting for past behavior is important even when past activity routines are disrupted. However, a notable finding was that the significant relationship between CSRE and current PA remained evident even after controlling for past behavior. Upon examination of the partial effect sizes (i.e., ηp2), the relationship between CSRE and PA would still be considered large (>.1379) according to Cohen’s standards for partial correlations.40 This finding differs from a previous study where social cognitions (i.e., intentions, perceived behavioral control: theory of planned behavior) became non-significant after controlling for past behavior during a student’s transition to university.45 These contrasting results may be due to differing methodologies in data collection (e.g., time points), and/or use of the CSRE measure as a predictor. Nonetheless, the results of Study 2 raises the possibility that individuals may vary in their adjustment to new routines during a life transition (i.e., some adjust well and others do not). The utility of past

16

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT behavior and confidence to concurrently manage multiple life goals as predictors of PA during transition to university suggests variability in students’ active adjustment to transition challenges. This speculation needs to be tested through studies that address causation. A final strength relates to the research design of our studies. The majority of research on first-year students’ PA has been observational in nature (e.g., providing a description of the level and type of PA17). Our work adds to this literature by examining a psychological predictor


known to be related to factors that influence adherence (i.e., CSRE21, 42). Despite their varying designs, both Study 1 (concurrent) and Study 2 (prospective) suggest that CSRE is a predictor of the PA of university students experiencing a life transition. Limitations With respect to study limitations, both Studies 1 and 2 relied upon a self-report measure of planned PA. The decision to focus on recalled, planned bouts of leisure PA (opposed to total daily PA) was purposeful given (1) concerns regarding inaccurate recall of non-planned activity, and (2) that planned activity, as opposed to incidental activity of daily life, is more likely to be influenced by self-regulatory processes. Second, while the original version of our self-report measure is validated against objective measures, our modifications and focus on planned bouts of MVPA need to be compared to objective measures to determine the strength of the relation between the two measures. A final limitation relates to the representativeness of our sample. Though limited demographic information was collected in this study, we do know that participants were primarily female (> 70% in both Study 1 and 2) and in their late-teens and early-twenties. The university from which participants were drawn is in a mid-sized, western Canadian city, home to

17

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT a predominantly Caucasian population. Results may not speak to the experience of older students or non-female students. While not a methodological limitation, it is important to note that our research focused on a specific transition event: the transition into university. Relative to other life transitions, university presents individuals with multiple opportunities to be active. In the case of our sample, students had access to multiple campus facilities, drop-in classes, and recreational leagues, and


membership fees were either fully or partially included in tuition fees. The nature of the oncampus PA environment may bear similarities to pre-university life, potentially making it easier for participants to fall into past routines. As such, our results are not generalizable to other life transitions, and future research should examine the relationships between CSRE, past PA, and future PA during different transition periods (e.g., following graduation from university, marriage, or the start of a full-time career). A second avenue of future research concerns the nature of past behavior. While our results illustrate the importance of controlling for past behavior, they do not speak to why past behavior is a strong predictor. As cautioned by Maddux46 in his discussion of habit, we risk falling into a circular argument where current behavior is caused by past behavior. The logical flaw is obvious: past behavior has no inherent explanatory power (i.e., the sun did not rise today simply because it rose yesterday). One route of future investigation could be to examine the valued and proximal psychosocial outcomes of past PA (e.g., the reinforcement of efficacy, positive experiences, development of routines). Returning to social-cognitive theory as a guide, Bandura47 reminds us that it is the incentive provided by day to day outcomes that are more likely to motivate regular future behavior. This idea should be examined as a possible hypothesis

18

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT to address the link between past and current PA that could be explored in future studies in which individuals vary in their experience with making different transitions. Conclusion and Implications for Practice Given the stage of this research area, and the concurrent nature of Study 1, specific program recommendations to campus physical activity coordinators would be premature; however, results raise several practical considerations. First, the construct of CSRE reminds us


that it is possible to successfully manage multiple life goals concurrently – however, individuals must possess both the confidence and skills to do so. First-year students’ low-levels of physical activity may not reflect a lack of interest in PA, but rather a lack of self-regulatory abilities. Providing interested students with self-regulatory supports and training could prove to be an effective intervention technique.49 Second, it may be useful to tailor PA future intervention research to reflect students’ pre-university PA. For example, first-year students that exhibited high levels of high school PA may benefit from programs that match them with recreational sport leagues. In contrast, first-year students with low high school PA may benefit from moreintensive messaging and intervention, such as learn-to programs or health education on the mental health benefits of PA. In summary, the results of our two studies contribute to the literature in three ways: (1) advancing the understanding about first-year university students’ PA engagement after the transition to university, (2) support for the agency component of Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory,48 and (3) support for Weinstein’s arguments27 about social-cognitive overestimation when predicting future behavior from past behavior. Further, our utilisation of CSRE as a preditor acknowledges that PA rarely takes place in a vacuum. Rather, it is more likely that

19

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT individuals concurrently pursue multiple goals, and during a transition, this pursuit requires adaptation and self-regulation.

Note For comments and further information, address correspondence to Alyson J. Crozier, College of Kinesiology, 87 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 5B2 (e-mail:


[email protected]).

20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

References 1.

Das P, Horton R. (Eds.). Physical Activity. The Lancet, 2012; 380(No. 9838): 187-306.

2.

Canadian Society of Exercise Physiology (CSEP). Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines and Canadian Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines. CSEP website. 2011. http://www.csep.ca/english/view.asp?x=804


3.

United States Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS). 2008 physical activity guidelines for Americans. Washington DC: USDHHS. 2008.

4.

Colley RC, Garriguet D, Janssen I, et al. Physical activity of Canadian adults: Accelerometer results from the 2007 and 2009 Canadian Health Measures Survey. Statistics Canada website. 2014. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-003x/2011001/article/11396-eng.htm

5.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC Newsroom. CDC website. 2013. http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2013/p0502-physical-activity.html

6.

Telama R, Yang X, Viikari J, Valimaki I, Wanne O, Raitakari O. Physical activity from childhood to adulthood: A 21-year tracking study. Am J Prev Med. 2005; 28:267-273.

7.

George LK. Sociological perspectives on life transitions. Ann Rev Sociol. 1993; 19:353373.

8.

Brown WJ, Trost SG. Life transitions and changing physical activity patterns in young women. Am J Prev Med. 2003; 25(2):140-143.

21

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 9.

Albright CL, Maddock JE, Nigg CR. Physical activity before pregnancy and following childbirth in a multiethnic sample of healthy women in Hawaii. Women & Health. 2006; 42(3):95-110.

10.

Hull EE, Rofey DL, Robertson RJ, Nagle EF, Otto AD, Aaron DJ. Influence of marriage and parenthood on physical activity: a 2-year prospective analysis. J Phys Activ & Health. 2010; 7(5):577.


11.

Slingerland AS, van Lenthe FJ, Jukema JW, et al. Aging, retirement, and changes in physical activity: prospective cohort findings from the GLOBE study. Am J Epi. 2007; 165(12):1356-1363.

12.

Bray SR, Born HA. Transition to university and vigorous physical activity: implications for health and psychological well-being. J Am Coll Health, 2004; 52(4):181-188.

13.

Han JL, Dinger MK, Hull HR, Randall NB, Heesch KC, Fields DA. Changes in women’s physical activity during the transition to college. Am J Health Ed, 2008; 39(4):194-199.

14.

Sinclair KM, Hamlin MJ, Steel G. Physical activity levels of first-year New Zealand university students: a pilot study. Youth Stud Aust. 2005; 24(1):38.

15.

Kwan MY, Cairney J, Faulkner GE, Pullenayegum EE. Physical activity and other health-risk behaviors during the transition into early adulthood: a longitudinal cohort study. Am J Prev Med. 2012; 42(1):14-20.

16.

Gordon-Larsen P, Nelson MC, Popkin BM. Longitudinal physical activity and sedentary behavior trends: Adolescence to adulthood. Am J Prev Med. 2004; 27:277283.

22

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT


Telama R, Yang X. Decline of physical activity from youth to young adulthood in Finland. Med & Sci in Sports & Exerc. 2000; 32:1617-1622.

18.

Telama R, Yang X, Viikari. Physical activity from childhood to adulthood. Am J Prev Med. 2005; 28:267-273.

19.

Bridges W. Transitions: Making Sense of Life's Changes. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press; 2004.


20.

Jung ME, Brawley LR. Concurrent management of exercise with other valued life goals: Comparison of frequent and less frequent exercisers. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2010; 11(5):372-377.

21.

Jung ME, Brawley LR. Exercise persistence in the face of varying exercise challenges: A test of self-efficacy theory in working mothers. J Health Psychol. 2011; 16(5):728738.

22.

Carver CS, Scheier MF. Action, affect, multitasking, and layers of control. In Forgas, Baumeister, Baumeister, & Tice (Eds.), Psychology of self-regulation: Cognitive, affective, and motivational processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group; 2011.

23.

Fiske ST, Taylor SE. Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company; 1991.

24.

Meichenbaum D, Turk DC. Facilitating treatment adherence: A practitioner's guidebook. New York, NY: Plenum; 1987.

25.

Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman; 1997.

23

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT


Gierc MSH, Locke SR, Jung ME, Brawley LR. Attempting to be active: Self-efficacy and barrier limitation differentiate activity levels of working mothers. Journal of Health Psychol. In press.

27.

Weinstein ND. Misleading tests of health behavior theories. Ann Behav Med. 2007; 33(1):1-10.

28.

Sutton SR. Determinants of health-related behaviors: Theoretical and methodological


issues. In Sutton S, Baum A, Johnston M (eds), The Sage Handbook of Health psychology. London: Sage, 2004. 29.

Gyurcsik NC, Bray SR, Brittain DR. Coping with barriers to vigorous physical activity during transition to university. Fam Comm Health. 2004; 27:130-142.

30.

Gyurcsik NC, Spink KS, Bray SR, Chad K, Kwan M. An ecologically based examination of barriers to physical activity in students from grade seven through firstyear university. J Adolescent Health. 2006. 38:704-711. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.06.007

31.

Pidgeon M, Andres L. Demands, challenges, and rewards: The first year experiences of international and domestic students at four Canadian universities. Vancouver: Department of Educational Studies, University of British Columbia; 2005.

32.

Godin G, Shephard RJ. A simple method to assess exercise behavior in the community. Can J Appl Sport Sci. 1985; 10(3):141-146.

33.

Miller DJ, Freedson PS, Kline GM Comparison of activity levels using the Caltrac accelerometer and five questionnaires. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1994; 26:376-382.

24

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT


Amireault, S., & Godin, G. (2012, May). Physical activity guidelines for health: How valid are the Godin-Shephard Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-short form? Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the International Society for Behavioural Nutrition and Physical Activity, Austin, TX.

35.

Haskell WL, Lee IM, Pate RR, et al. Physical activity and public health: updated


recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2007; 116(9):1081. 36.

Cust AE, Smith BJ, Chau J, et al. Validity and repeatability of the EPIC physical activity questionnaire: a validation study using accelerometers as an objective measure. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Activ. 2008; 5(1):33.

37.

Gionet NJ, Godin G. Self-reported exercise behavior of employees: a validity study. J Occup Enviro Med. 1989; 31(12):969-973.

38.

McAuley E, Mihalko SL. Measuring exercise-related self-efficacy. In: Duda JL, ed. Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement. Fitness Information Technology. Morgantown, WV; 1998:371-390.

39.

Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson; 2007.

40.

Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1969.

41.

Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J App Psychol. 2003; 88(5):879.

25

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT


Jung ME, Brawley LR. Concurrent self-regulatory efficacy as a mediator of the goal: Exercise behavior relationship. J Health Psychol. 2013; 18(5):601-611.

43.

Baranowski T, Cullen KW, Basen-Engquist K, et al. Transitions out of high school: time of increased cancer risk?. Prev Med. 1997; 26(5):694-703.

44.

Malina RM. Adherence to physical activity from childhood to adulthood: A perspective from tracking studies. Quest. 2001; 53(3):346-355.


45.

Kwan MY, Bray SR, Martin Ginis KA. Predicting physical activity of first-year university students: An application of the theory of planned behavior. J Am Coll Health. 2009; 58(1):45-55.

46.

Maddux JE. Habit, health, and happiness. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 1997; 19:331-346.

47.

Bandura A. Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Edu Behav. 2004; 31(2):143-164.

48.

Bandura A. Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. J Appl Sport Psychol. 1990; 2(2):128-163.

49.

Artinian, N.T., Fletcher, G.F., Mozaffarian, D., Kris-Etherton, P., Van Horn, L., Lichtenstein, A.H.,...Burke, L.E. (2010). Interventions to promote physical activity and dietary lifestyle changes for cardiovascular risk reduction in adults. Circulation, 122, 406-441. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e3181e8edf1 Received: 1 November 2014 Revised: 28 February 2015 Accepted: 12 April 2015

26

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Between Variables for Studies 1 and 2 Variable

M

SD

Range

1

2

1. Current Physical Activitya

120.4

95.91

0 to 360

-

2. Past Physical Activitya

168.61

108.11

0 to 420

.66**

-

3. CSREb

49.94

23.11

10 to 84

.42**

.25*

1. Current Physical Activitya

171.43

119.05

0 to 420

-

2. Past Physical Activitya

183.00

107.67

0 to 420

.39**

-

3. CSREb

59.00

22.78

7 to 93

.35*

.20*

3

Study 1

-


Study 2

-

Note. aMinutes per week of planned bouts of 30 mins of physical activity. bCSRE was measured on an 11-point scale, ranging from 0% to 100% confidence, increasing in 10% increments. *p < .01, **p < .001.

27

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT