Cited by 70Motivation and Self-Concept in SportsPhysical Activity and HealthBehavioral Health and Interventions

Understanding physical activity in adults with type 2 diabetes after completing an exercise intervention trial: A mediation model of self-efficacy and autonomous motivation

Sweet, Shane N., Fortier, Michelle S., Guérin, Eva, Tulloch, Heather, Sigal, Ronald J., Kenny, Glen P., Reid, Robert D.·2009·Psychology, Health & Medicine

Abstract

This study was set out to test if autonomous motivation mediated the relationship between self-efficacy and 12-month physical activity (PA) in adults with type 2 diabetes involved in a randomized exercise trial. Participants (n = 234) completed questionnaires measuring barrier self-efficacy at 3 months, autonomous motivation at 6 months, and PA at 12 months. A mediational analysis of longitudinal data revealed that autonomous motivation mediated the relationship between barrier-self-efficacy and PA. High barrier self-efficacy can therefore help predict 12-month PA in adults with type 2 diabetes, although this effect is attenuated by autonomous motivation. Hence, participating in PA for autonomous reasons such as by choice and/or for fun further explains PA at 12 months in this population. Results of this study extend our understanding of the motivational constructs involved in PA in the maintenance phase. This study has important theoretical implications in that it helps to organize and consolidate well-known correlates of PA by proposing a temporal relationship between them that could be tailored in interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13548500903111806

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Three additional studies/samples showed significant associations only for identified regulation.

    “Three additional studies/samples showed significant associations only for identified regulation [50,51,38].”
  • Introjected regulation is the strongest predictor of exercise dependence.

    “research examining the motivating forces behind exercise dependence, which is considered to be maladaptive, has found introjected regulation to be the strongest predictor of this type of dependence [51].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sweet, S. N., Fortier, M. S., Guérin, E., Tulloch, H., Sigal, R. J., Kenny, G. P., & Reid, R. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • Ottawa Heart Institute (CA)
Corresponding author
Sweet, Shane N.
Venue
Psychology, Health & Medicine
Published
2009-08
Volume
14
Issue
4
Pages
419-429
ISSN
  • 1354-8506 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-3966
OpenAlex
W2003499168
Cited by
70
References
56
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
6.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychology Health & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, physical activity, autonomous motivation, self-efficacy, barrier self-efficacy, exercise intervention, physical activity maintenance, mediation, exercise adherence
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Theoretical, Motivation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Exercise, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Self Efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review