Comparing Different Typologies of Physical Activities With a Focus on Motivation

Abstract

There are numerous classifications of physical activities (PAs). However, they lack precise grouping criteria and tend to vary according to each author. Among other factors, the individual’s level of motivation is considered an important aspect of PA maintenance. In this study, we aimed to (1) compare several PAs according to intrinsic (Interest, Enjoyment, and Competence) and extrinsic (Appearance, Fitness/Health, and Social) motives and (2) analyze PAs with and without previous grouping to explore which PAs are more similar based on the different motivational subscales. We recruited 1,421 physically active Brazilian participants (mean age = 26.83, SD = 10.49). The participants stated which PA they practiced most frequently, and they answered the revised motivation for PA measure. The data were analyzed with multivariate general linear models and Kruskal–Wallis. We found that some PAs consistently differed from others regarding motivational subscales. For example, participants practicing Walking showed less Interest/Enjoyment and Competence motives than participants engaged in several other PAs. Pilates was highlighted by a particularly low level of Social motivation in comparison to other PAs. Furthermore, using the previously suggested categorization of PAs, we also showed consistent distinctions considering each motivational subscale. Specifically, one group of PA (categorized as more Complex, Team, Vigorous, Hybrid, and Combative) scored higher on intrinsic motivation, while the other group of activities (categorized as more Organized, Individual, Moderate, Strength, and Rhythmic) scored higher on Appearance and Fitness/Health motives. Our results thus provide initial evidence for possible new methods of grouping PA types that can improve maintenance behavior using motivation as a grouping factor.

Profiling Physical Activity Motivation Based on Reasons for Exercise: A Cluster Analysis Approach

“…This study highlights two important results in line with Achievement Goal Theory (Hsu et al, 2022) and Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017). The first is that a person can have multiple reasons that are both intrinsic/autonomous (e.g., to feel good) and extrinsic/controlled (e.g., to look good) that may lead to more PA engagement.…”

“…The first is that a person can have multiple reasons that are both intrinsic/autonomous (e.g., to feel good) and extrinsic/controlled (e.g., to look good) that may lead to more PA engagement. The second is dependent on what the goal means to the person and how much they value the goal, which determines how likely the individual is to personally invest in a physically active lifestyle (Hsu et al, 2022; Maehr & McInerney, 2004; Roberts & Treasure, 2012). For variables expected to promote positive PA, such as individuals exhibiting more intrinsic/autonomous-focused reasons (i.e., Multi-Reason Positive and Autonomous-Focused profiles), results were significant and consistent.…”

“…Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is Deci and Ryan's (1985) theory of human motivation which provides a more holistic picture of motivation for PA that extends the achievement-centered constructs of Achievement Goal Theory in our understanding of motivation (Hsu et al, 2022). SDT postulates that there are different types of motivation regulation, each one reflecting the extent to which a behavior has been internalized along a continuum based on the degree of self-determination (Ryan & Deci, 2017).…”

“…While exercisers can define success differently, consistent attainment of valued goals (i.e., success) should allow individuals to feel successful and thereby enhance motivation (Roberts & Treasure, 2012; Segar et al, 2008). During this process, a number of goals may be operative in guiding how people invest their time and energy (Hsu et al, 2022; Teixeira et al, 2012; Wang, Morin, Chian, & Chian, 2016). For instance, embracing multiple goals may provide more opportunities to make meaningful progress towards success and avoid failure, with more valued goals providing more opportunities to experience success than fewer valued goals.…”

Evolution of Artistic and Athletic Propensities: Testing of Intersexual Selection and Intrasexual Competition

“…Even beyond the arts, there has been minimal work that compares the two components of sexual selection. Sports, like the arts, can be seen as play/leisure and profession, dependent on specific motivation, talent, skill, and as sexually selected cultural displays and honest fitness indicators ( Zahavi and Zahavi, 1999 ; Miller, 2000 ; De Block and Dewitte, 2007 ; Lombardo, 2012 ; Hsu and Valentova, 2020 ; Moraes et al, 2021 ; Hsu et al, 2022 ). There also have been theoretical propositions suggesting that both intersexual and intrasexual selection might have influenced the evolution of athletic propensities (e.g., Lombardo, 2012 ; Apostolou, 2015 ), however, no direct empirical tests have been conducted beyond sex differences (e.g., Apostolou, 2015 ).…”