Brand and Cheval Theories to Explain Exercise Motivation
THE UNFAVORABLE COMMONALITY OF
COGNITIVE THEORIES OF PHYSICAL
ACTIVITY AND EXERCISE
A framework for classifying theories of exercise and physical
activity behavior suggests organizing them into five classes
(Biddle et al., 2007). Belief-attitude theories focus on the
cognitive antecedents of behavioral intentions, defined as
the effort someone is prepared to invest toward performing
a target behavior. Well-known examples are the theory of
reasoned action (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975) and the theory of
planned behavior (Ajzen, 1985). Competence-based theories
are exemplified primarily by Bandura’s construct of self-
efficacy, which is defined as an individual’s judgment of his
or her “capabilities to organize and execute courses of action
required to attain designated types of performances” (Bandura,
1986, p. 391). Control-based theories refer to the notion that
humans have the intrinsic desire or goal to experience oneself
as the initiator and regulator of one’s actions. The currently
highly influential self-determination theory attributes this
desire to a basic psychological need for autonomy (Deci
and Ryan, 1985). Stage models, e.g., the transtheoretical
model (Prochaska and DiClemente, 1983), conceptualize
behavioral change as a process that brings one closer to the
envisaged goal. Hybrid models, such as the health action process
approach (Schwarzer, 1992), combine the stage concept with
motivational variables, to predict intention, with the addition
of post-decisional variables (e.g., implementation intention;
Gollwitzer, 1999).
All these models have one core attribute in common,
stemming from origins of cognitive theorizing in psychology:
They all emphasize the importance of imagined end states
(behaviors or goals) and the energization of action resulting from
them to such an extent that the experience of situated factors
(e.g., momentary affect linked to the situation; Ekkekakis, 2017)
is overlooked.
This notion that a better understanding of ongoing behavior
requires both situated factors and the cognitive projections
that direct behavior was proposed by Lewin (1951). He
conceptualized every specific state of behavior as either the
result of equal but opposite forces, which hold the person in
his or her current state, or under the influence of relatively
stronger driving forces, which direct the person away from the
current state.
This theoretical idea had limited impact on research
on motivation however. Probably because the cognitive
revolution in psychology, which began soon after
Lewin’s early death (in 1947) fascinated so many
psychologists. With the advent of the contention that
people are able to engage in forethought, the separate
conceptualization of momentary restraining forces
was lost.
Two recent theories in exercise psychology tie in with
considerations about situated restraining forces, albeit in
different ways. We will briefly describe the relevant aspects of
these theories and outline ideas on how future research could
yield alternative intervention approaches for public health.
AFFECTIVE-REFLECTIVE THEORY OF
PHYSICAL INACTIVITY AND EXERCISE
Affective-Reflective Theory (ART) of physical inactivity and
exercise (Brand and Ekkekakis, 2018) is a dual-process theory,
which assumes that stimuli (e.g., a friend’s reminder that you
intended to go for a run, or remembering that you had planned
to go for a run) trigger automatic associations and a resulting
automatic affective valuation of exercise (type-1 process). An
automatic affective valuation is the unattended assignment of
positive (association with pleasure) or negative (association
with displeasure) value to a stimulus, either as the result of
repeated exercise-related emotional experiences mediated by
cognitive appraisals (e.g., pride, embarrassment) or as a result
of repeated experiences of core affective reactions to stimuli
(e.g., sense of physical reinvigoration, bodily discomfort). The
automatic affective valuation serves as the basis for a controlled,
reflective evaluation (type-2 process), which can follow if self-
control resources are available. The reflective evaluation draws on
propositions about exercise and physical inactivity, derived from
previous experience and mental simulation (e.g., anticipation
of the affective consequence of actions). Higher-level cognitive
operations, such as deliberative reasoning about one’s needs
and values (Deci and Ryan, 1985) may also contribute to this
process. The automatic affective valuation is connected to an
action impulse (approach or avoidance), whereas the controlled
response can result in action plans.
The ART aims to explain and predict behavior in situations in
which people either remain in a state of physical inactivity or
initiate action. It assumes that experience, feelings, and thoughts
connected with exercise influence whether someone would be
willing to undergo physical strain similar to that previously
experienced during exercise. Related to the topic of this opinion
article, the ART posits that, in the face of an exercise-related
stimulus, one’s negative affective valuation of exercise will act
as a restraining force that may counteract any positive cognitive
motivational drives toward action (or, on the other hand, if the
affective valuation is positive, it will present a driving force and
thus make it more likely that the person will change his or her
current state of physical inactivity).
THEORY OF ENERGETIC
COST MINIMIZATION
The theory of energetic cost minimization (TECM; Cheval
et al., 2018a,b) assumes that biomechanically efficient behaviors
have a rewarding value. It refers to evidence on the multiple
neuro-behavioral adaptations that have contributed to the
minimization of metabolic costs in the course of human
action and during movement (Srinivasan and Ruina, 2006). For
example, individuals automatically adapt their step frequency in
real time to optimize energy costs (Selinger et al., 2015) and learn
to minimize the physical effort required to obtain specific rewards
(Skvortsova et al., 2014). This automatic behavioral tendency
of effort optimization is theorized to be a neurobiologically
anchored process.
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 May 2019 | Volume 10 | Article 1147

+13062052269

info@desklib.com

Theories to Explain Exercise Motivation and Physical Inactivity

Contribute Materials