Physical activity barriers in the workplace: An exploration of factors contributing to non-participation in a UK workplace physical activity intervention
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore factors contributing to non-participation in a workplace physical activity (PA) intervention in a large UK call centre. Design/methodology/approach – In total, 16 inactive individuals (nine male/seven female), aged 27±9 years, who had not taken part in the intervention were interviewed to explore their perceptions of PA, the intervention and factors which contributed to their non-participation. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Findings – Six superordinate themes were identified: self-efficacy for exercise; attitudes towards PA; lack of time and energy; facilities and the physical environment; response to the PA programme and PA culture. Barriers occurred at multiple levels of influence, and support the use of ecological or multilevel models to help guide future programme design/delivery. Research limitations/implications – The 16 participants were not selected to be representative of the workplace gender or structure. Future intentions relating to PA participation were not considered and participants may have withheld negative opinions about the workplace or intervention despite use of an external researcher. Practical implications – In this group of employees education about the importance of PA for young adults and providing opportunities to gain social benefits from PA would increase perceived benefits and reduce perceived costs of PA. Workplace cultural norms with respect to PA must also be addressed to c…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Obstacles perceived by users, e.g., time barriers, perception of overlap between work and home, and perception that WHP is provided in inconvenient places, limited participation in WHP interventions in the past.
“Another factor limiting participation in WHP interventions in the past is related to obstacles perceived by users, e.g., time barriers, the perception of an overlap between work and home, and the perception that WHP is provided in inconvenient places [65, 69, 70].”
From Advantages and disadvantages of mobile applications for workplace health promotion: A scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [69]
Personalisation is a reported desire of users of nontechnical WHP interventions.
“Furthermore, app users and employers appreciate the possibility of adjusting and personalising mobile apps to suit a user’s preferences and needs, as well as workplace requirements [9, 32, 35, 42, 47, 48, 51, 53, 54]–a reported desire of users of nontechnical WHP interventions [69, 72].”
From Advantages and disadvantages of mobile applications for workplace health promotion: A scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [69]
By including the option to personalise their own content, it may be possible to improve interest and motivation among users and limit dropout rates and failure to participate due to lack of interest.
“By including the option to personalise their own content, it may be possible to improve interest and motivation among users and limit dropout rates and failure to participate due to lack of interest [38, 69, 74–76].”
From Advantages and disadvantages of mobile applications for workplace health promotion: A scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [69]
Social support from colleagues and supervisors and group pressure were mentioned as advantages of nontechnical interventions, and also were valued in the apps.
“Social support from colleagues [66, 69, 74, 77, 78] and supervisors and group pressure [72] also were mentioned as advantages of nontechnical interventions, and also were valued in the apps [24].”
From Advantages and disadvantages of mobile applications for workplace health promotion: A scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [69]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 37 · Cited by 69
- Authors
- Edmunds, S., Hurst, L., & Harvey, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Westminster (GB)
- St Mary's University Twickenham London (GB)
- Venue
- International Journal of Workplace Health Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2013-09-23
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 227-240
- ISSN
- 1753-8351 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1504865944
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 1.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Workplace Health Management (publishedVersion)
- WestminsterResearch (University of Westminster) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
- Social Sciences › Life-span and Life-course Studies › Sports and Physical Education Studies
- Keywords
- workplace physical activity, barriers to physical activity, non-participation, call center employees, young adults, self-efficacy, attitudes toward physical activity, organizational culture, ecological model, multilevel models, physical activity interventions
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
