Development and initial validation of the determinants of physical activity questionnaire
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Physical activity interventions are more likely to be effective if they target causal determinants of behaviour change. Targeting requires accurate identification of specific theoretical determinants of physical activity. Two studies were undertaken to develop and validate the Determinants of Physical Activity Questionnaire. METHODS: In Study 1, 832 male and female university staff and students were recruited from 49 universities across the UK and completed the 66-item measure, which is based on the Theoretical Domains Framework. Confirmatory factor analysis was undertaken on a calibration sample to generate the model, which resulted in a loss of 31 items. A validation sample was used to cross-validate the model. 20 new items were added and Study 2 tested the revised model in a sample of 466 male and female university students together with a physical activity measure. RESULTS: The final model consisted of 11 factors and 34 items, and CFA produced a reasonable fit χ2 (472) = 852.3, p < .001, CFI = .933, SRMR = .105, RMSEA = .042 (CI = .037-.046), as well as generally acceptable levels of discriminant validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. Eight subscales significantly differentiated between high and low exercisers, indicating that those who exercise less report more barriers for physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: A theoretically underpinned measure of determinants of physical activity has been developed with reasonable reliability and validity. Further work is required to test the measure amongst a more representative sample. This study provides an innovative approach to identifying potential barriers to physical activity. This approach illustrates a method for moving from diagnosing implementation difficulties to designing and evaluating interventions.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
There are three published validated questionnaire measures of the TDF to identify influences on health care professionals' patient safety behaviours, physical activity in the general population, and generic health professional behaviours.
“There are three published validated questionnaire measures of the TDF to identify influences on the following behaviours: health care professionals' patient safety behaviours [48], physical activity in the general population [20] and generic health professional behaviours [49].”
From A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems (2017) · cites this paper as [20]
The Results discussion describes development and validation of a TDF-based questionnaire for determinants of physical activity. But the General discussion says both studies used voluntary samples of university staff and students and that the findings may not generalise to the wider population; validation in the general population is therefore not established. The other two measures have separate citations in the citing sentence and are not attributed to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThese results correspond with Taylor et al., who found good discriminant validity of TDF domains in a questionnaire measuring influences on patient safety behaviors and in the Determinants of Physical Activity Questionnaire.
“These results correspond with Taylor et al.[36,63] who found good discriminant validity of TDF domains in a questionnaire measuring influences on patient safety behaviors [36] and in the Determinants of Physical Activity Questionnaire [63].”
From Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research (2014) · cites this paper as [63]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 84 · Cited by 96
- Authors
- Taylor, N., Lawton, R., & Conner, M.
- Affiliations
- Bradford Royal Infirmary (GB)
- University of Leeds (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Taylor, Natalie
- Venue
- International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
- Published
- 2013
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 74
- ISSN
- 1479-5868 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3684519
- OpenAlex
- W2167814132
- Cited by
- 96
- References
- 84
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 1.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- Open Scholarship Institutional Repository (Washington University in St. Louis) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- physical activity, determinants of physical activity, Theoretical Domains Framework, questionnaire development, questionnaire validation, barriers to physical activity, university students, university employees, behaviour change interventions, implementation research
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Faculty, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Biological, Motor Activity, Surveys and Questionnaires, Students, Universities, Reproducibility of Results, Health Behavior, Exercise, Young Adult
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
