Suppr超能文献

规划的哪些特征重要?个体和对偶的体育活动计划及其对计划实施的影响。

Which characteristics of planning matter? Individual and dyadic physical activity plans and their effects on plan enactment.

机构信息

Department of Education and Psychology, Division Health Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.

Department of Education and Psychology, Division Health Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.

出版信息

Soc Sci Med. 2017 Sep;189:53-62. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.07.025. Epub 2017 Jul 31.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Past research supports individual planning as an effective intervention strategy to increase physical activity in individuals. A similar strategy, dyadic planning, adds a planning partner who supports an individual's planning processes. Whether the two planning formats differ in terms of participants' entered plan content and whether and how different content characteristics are linked to plan enactment remains unknown. By investigating the content of generated plans, this study aimed at distinguishing plan characteristics of the two planning formats and examining their role as predictors of later plan enactment.

METHODS

Secondary analyses of a three-arm RCT with German couples (data collection between 2013 and 2015). Couples were assigned to an individual (IPC, n = 114) or dyadic planning condition (DPC, n = 111) and formulated up to 5 physical activity plans for a target person. Couples assigned to a control condition were not included as they did not generate plans. The following characteristics were distinguished and coded for each plan: number of planned opportunities, presence of a planned routine, planned cue- or activity-related specificity, activity-related intensity, and chronological plan rank. One week before (T0) and two weeks following (T2) the intervention (T1), increase vs. no increase of the planned activity was coded as a dichotomous plan enactment variable. Multilevel logistic regressions were fit.

RESULTS

Plan enactment was higher in dyadic than in individual planners. Findings indicated that routines (e.g., after work) were positively related to plan enactment, whereas a high specificity of when-cues (e.g., Friday at 6.30 p.m.) showed a negative relationship. None of the examined plan characteristics could explain differences in enactment between IPC and DPC.

CONCLUSIONS

Linking health behaviours to other behavioural routines seems beneficial for subsequent plan enactment. Dyadic planning was linked with higher enactment rates than individual planning. However, as mechanisms underlying this effect remain unclear, they should be investigated further.

摘要

目的

过去的研究支持个体计划作为一种有效的干预策略,以增加个体的身体活动。类似的策略,即对偶计划,增加了一个支持个体计划过程的计划伙伴。两种计划格式在参与者输入的计划内容方面是否存在差异,以及不同的内容特征如何与计划执行相关联,目前尚不清楚。通过调查生成计划的内容,本研究旨在区分两种计划格式的计划特征,并研究它们作为计划执行的预测因子的作用。

方法

对一项具有德国夫妇的三臂 RCT 的二次分析(数据收集于 2013 年至 2015 年之间)。夫妇被分配到个体计划组(IPC,n=114)或对偶计划组(DPC,n=111),并为目标人物制定了多达 5 项身体活动计划。未纳入未制定计划的对照组夫妇,因为他们没有制定计划。为每个计划区分并编码了以下特征:计划机会的数量、计划常规的存在、计划线索或活动相关的具体性、与活动相关的强度以及时间顺序计划排名。在干预前一周(T0)和干预后两周(T2),将计划活动的增加与不增加编码为二分类的计划执行变量。拟合多水平逻辑回归。

结果

对偶计划者的计划执行率高于个体计划者。研究结果表明,常规(例如,下班后)与计划执行呈正相关,而当线索(例如,周五下午 6 点 30 分)的特异性高时,则呈负相关。没有一种被检查的计划特征可以解释 IPC 和 DPC 之间的执行差异。

结论

将健康行为与其他行为常规联系起来似乎有利于随后的计划执行。对偶计划与更高的执行率相关,而个体计划则相反。然而,由于这种效果的潜在机制尚不清楚,因此应进一步研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验