Task and Scheduling Self-efficacy as Predictors of Exercise Behavior

Rodgers, Wendy M.; Hall, Craig; Blanchard, Chris M.; McAuley, Edward; Munroe, Krista J.

doi:10.1080/0887044022000004902

Cited by 114 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

107

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Supporting this notion, studies applying the HAPA model have shown that action self-efficacy and coping self-efficacy differ in their effects on dietary behaviors (a diet low in fat and high in vitamins) and on corresponding intentions (Renner & Schwarzer, 2005;. Action self-efficacy emerged as a significant predictor of intentions, whereas coping self-efficacy contributed to the prediction of eating a low-fat and high-vitamin diet (cf., also Rodgers, Hall, Blanchard, McAuley, & Munroe, 2002;Rodgers & Sullivan, 2001). …”

Section: Phase-specific Self-efficacy Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does age make a difference? Predicting physical activity of South Koreans.

Renner

Spivak

Kwon

et al. 2007

Psychology and Aging

119

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social cognition models of health behavior are commonly understood as being universal, which implies that they are applicable to groups varying in age or cultural background, for example. Cultural uniqueness and characteristics of life-span development, however, necessitate the study of differential effects. Accordingly, the health action process approach (HAPA) was examined in younger and middle-aged/ older adults from South Korea (N ϭ 697) who participated in a longitudinal health screening study with a 6-month time lag. The HAPA model had a good fit within the middle-aged/older adult sample. Physical activity was predicted by planning, coping self-efficacy, and intention, which were, in turn, predicted by action self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, and risk perceptions. Conversely, the results indicated a poor model fit in the younger adult sample. The results suggest a different motivation for the involvement in physical activity as a function of age.

show abstract

Section: Phase-specific Self-efficacy Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does age make a difference? Predicting physical activity of South Koreans.

Renner

Spivak

Kwon

et al. 2007

Psychology and Aging

119

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The eight-item Task Efficacy subscale (e.g., "Maintain a comfortable and rhythmic sense of motion for an entire cardiovascular exercise session") is based on that of Rodgers, Hall, Blanchard, McAuley, and Munroe (2002), but differs in focusing on task components specific to endurance training. The internal consistency of this Cardiovascular Task Efficacy scale was very good for both Hispanics (a ¼ .88) and Anglos (a ¼ .85).…”

Section: Exercise Efficacy Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychocultural differences in physical activity-based antidepressant effects

Ryan

2010

Mental Health and Physical Activity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This is the same 18 item scale used in Study 1 to assess the three psychological needs for exercise, namely perceived competence, autonomy and relatedness. (Rodgers et al, 2001(Rodgers et al, , 2002a(Rodgers et al, , 2002b(Rodgers et al, , 2008. This was the same 9 item scale representing three behavioral domains of selfefficacy as used in Study 1, namely task, scheduling, and coping efficacy.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subscale scores were calculated by taking the average of the 6 scored items per subscale (Morris, 1979). Rodgers et al, 2001;2002a;2002b; is a 9 item self-report instrument representing three behavioral domains of selfefficacy believed to be important for adoption and maintenance of exercise. Participants responded to each item on a 100% confidence scale broken into eleven 10% intervals ranging from 0% ("I have no confidence") to 100% ("I have complete confidence").…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinguishing Perceived Competence and Self-Efficacy: An Example From Exercise

Markland

Selzler

Murray

et al. 2014

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

Self Cite

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examined the conceptual and statistical distinction between perceived competence and self-efficacy. Although they are frequently used inter-changeably, it is possible that distinguishing them might assist researchers in better understanding their roles in developing enduring adaptive behavior patterns. Perceived competence is conceived in the theoretical framework of self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2002) and self-efficacy in the theoretical framework of social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986). Purpose: The purpose of this study was to statistically distinguish perceived competence from self-efficacy for exercise. Method: Two studies evaluated the independence of perceived competence and self-efficacy in the context of exercise. Using two extant instruments with validity and reliability evidence in exercise contexts, the distinctiveness of the two constructs was assessed in two separate samples (n=357 middle aged sedentary adults; n=247 undergraduate students). Results: Confirmatory factor analysis supported the conceptual and empirical distinction of the two constructs. Conclusions: This study supports the conceptual and statistical distinction of perceived competence from perceived selfefficacy. Applications of these results provide rationale for more precise future theorizing regarding their respective roles in supporting initiation and maintenance of health behaviors.Key words: exercise, factorial validity, motivation, need satisfaction.Perceived competence and self-efficacy for exercise -3 -Distinguishing Perceived Competence and Self-efficacy: An Example from Exercise Regular exercise is foundational to the maintenance of good health as well as rehabilitation and regulation of many disease conditions including coronary vascular disease, and type 2 diabetes (Bouchard, Blair & Haskell, 2007;Katzmarzyk, Church & Blair, 2004;Katzmarzyk & Janssen, 2004;Katzmarzyk, Janssen & Ardern, 2003). Public health practitioners are concerned with better understanding motivation to engage in regular exercise (e.g., Bauman, Nelson, Pratt, Matsudo, & Schoeppe, 2006;Bleich, & Sturm, 2009;Cavill & Bauman, 2004;Prohaska, Belansky, Belza, Buchner, Marshall, McTigue, Satariano, & Wilcox, 2006;Rychetnik, Bauman, Laws, King, Rissel, Nutbeam, Colagiuri, & Caterson, 2012). Social cognitive approaches to motivation for exercise all include some consideration of perceived capability to perform the focal behavior. The extent to which these conceptions of capability are distinguishable however is the topic of some debate. Theoretically and practically, it seems necessary to disentangle different conceptualizations because too many redundant variables clutter the literature, yet clearly distinguishable variables can contribute to a more fully explicated understanding of human behavior (Biddle, 2006;Forscher, 1963; Zhu, 2000). The idea that people need to perceive they are capable of performing a focal health behavior before they can be expected to adopt it seems logical. Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 200...

show abstract

Task and Scheduling Self-efficacy as Predictors of Exercise Behavior

Cited by 114 publications

References 21 publications

Does age make a difference? Predicting physical activity of South Koreans.

Does age make a difference? Predicting physical activity of South Koreans.

Psychocultural differences in physical activity-based antidepressant effects

Distinguishing Perceived Competence and Self-Efficacy: An Example From Exercise

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About