The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale: Two Validation Studies
Abstract
Two studies examined the reliability and validity of the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES). In Study 1, each subject rode an exercise bicycle under control and external focus conditions. The PACES had high internal consistency in both conditions. As predicted, subjects reported enjoying the exercise more, as measured by the PACES, in the external focus condition. Moreover, there was a significant negative correlation in the control condition between subjects' PACES scores and their scores on a measure of boredom proneness. In Study 2, each subject rode an exercise bicycle and jogged on a minitrampoline in separate sessions; each then chose one of these activities for their third session. Again, the PACES had high internal consistency. And, as predicted, there was a significant relationship between subjects' PACES ratings (completed after each activity) and their choices of activity. Test-retest reliability was high for jogging and moderate for bicycling. These studies provide preliminary evidence of the reliability and validity of the PACES.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“After a 5 min cool-down, subjects were seated for 5 min and subsequently completed the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES) [25].”
From High-Intensity Interval Training Elicits Higher Enjoyment than Moderate Intensity Continuous Exercise (2017) · cites this paper as [25]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Baranowski, T., Buday, R., Thompson, D. I., & Baranowski, J. (2008) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2007.09.027 · Cited by 998
Bartlett, J. D., Close, G. L., MacLaren, D. P. M., Gregson, W., Drust, B., & Morton, J. P. (2011) · Journal of Sports Sciences · doi:10.1080/02640414.2010.545427 · Cited by 593
“To objectively quantify ratings of perceived enjoyment, we employed a previously validated questionnaire (Kenzierski & DeCarlo, 1991), the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale, which has been shown to be a valid measure to quantify perceived enjoyment and is deemed suitable for use as a mediator…”
MethodMeasuring enjoyment of physical activity in adolescent girls
Motl, R. W., Dishman, R. K., Saunders, R. P., Dowda, M. C., Felton, G., & Pate, R. R. (2001) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0749-3797(01)00326-9 · Cited by 581
Rovniak, L. S., Anderson, E. S., Winett, R. A., & Stephens, R. S. (2002) · Annals of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1207/s15324796abm2402_12 · Cited by 569
Urban Form and a Child’s Trip to School: The Current Literature and a Framework for Future Research
McMillan, T. E. (2005) · Journal of Planning Literature · doi:10.1177/0885412204274173 · Cited by 539
Metadata
- Authors
- Kendzierski, D., & DeCarlo, K. J.
- Affiliations
- Villanova University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology
- Publisher
- Human Kinetics
- Published
- 1991-03
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 50-64
- ISSN
- 0895-2779 (ISSN-L)
- 1543-2904
- OpenAlex
- W2170398533
- Cited by
- 1,329
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 82 · 2025: 101 · 2024: 113 · 2023: 100 · 2022: 116 · 2021: 111 · 2020: 89 · 2019: 77 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 72 · 2016: 58 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 28
- FWCI
- 1.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Physical Activity and Health
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
- Keywords
- Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale, exercise enjoyment, scale validation, reliability statistics, external focus, boredom proneness, cycling, test-retest reliability, internal consistency
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
