Fluctuation – a common but neglected pattern of physical activity behaviour: An exploratory review of studies in recent 20 years

Abstract

Notwithstanding the limitations, this review has provided valuable insight into the phenomenon of PA fluctuation.

Psychosocial profiles of physical activity fluctuation in office employees: A latent profile analysis

“…For example, for the fluctuators with a UC profile and low PA level, interventions addressing an active mindset (e.g., self-efficacy, planning, action control, affective attitude, and social support) enhancement may be appropriate to help increase their PA level [17,28]. For the fluctuators who already have a MC mindset for PA and a high PA level, interventions targeting reduction of perceived barriers may be more effective for stabilizing their current PA level [16].…”

“…Several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, the fluctuation identification was highly subjective and retrospective; objective fluctuation identifications should be explored in future [16]. Second, PA assessment was based on self-report, and as such, may include more subjectivity than is desirable.…”

“…A recent exploratory review laid the foundation for PA fluctuation investigation by mapping definitions, measurements and empirical evidence [16]. In particular, this review summarized that PA fluctuation is: 1) primarily defined within the stage model constructs, which elaborate the progression from insufficient PA participation to habitual PA behavior [9,17]; 2) measured accordingly by self-reported stage algorithms [18,19]; and 3) demonstrated by stage distinctiveness among other PA stages [17,20].…”

“…To explore the profile membership of PA fluctuators, it is essential to identify the psychosocial indicators constituting a profile when LPA is conducted. It has been found that in general, PA fluctuators are characterized by three social-cognitive characteristics, including: 1) intention and readiness for PA participation; 2) low automaticity (PA participation is not habitual); 3) limited self-regulation [16]. All three of these characteristics fall into the post-intention/volitional phase described in the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) [27].…”

“…Among the six aforementioned psychosocial factors, previous empirical studies have shown that five factors (self-efficacy, planning, perceived barriers, social support and affective attitude) can effectively distinguish the fluctuation stage from the preparation and maintenance stages [16]. In terms of action control, although there are no studies testing the differences in action control between fluctuation and other adjacent stages, it has been examined as a crucial construct in adherence to long-term plans of health behavior, and as a bridge that closes the intention-behavior gap [28].…”