Home > Riviste > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Fascicoli precedenti > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 June;42(2) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 June;42(2):233-8

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti
Permessi

 

Original articles  SPORT PSYCHOLOGY 

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2002 June;42(2):233-8

Copyright © 2009 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Motives for exercise participation as predictors of exercise dependence among endurance athletes

Hamer M., Karageorghis C. I. *, Vlachopoulos S. P. **

From the Physical Activity and Health Research Unit, De Montfort University, Bedford, United Kingdom *Department of Sport Sciences, Brunel University Middlesex, United Kingdom **Department of Physical Education and Sports Science, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki at Serres, Greece


PDF


Back­ground. To inves­ti­gate ­whether ­motives for exer­cise par­tic­i­pa­tion pre­dicted exer­cise depen­dence (ED) ­among endu­rance ath­letes. The ratio­nale for the ­study cen­tred ­upon a ­test of the ­affect reg­u­la­tion ­model util­ising con­structs ­that ­form ­part of the ­Self-Deter­mi­na­tion ­Theory as pre­dic­tors of ED. It was hypo­the­sised ­that non ­self-deter­mined moti­va­tion, spe­cif­i­cally ­external reg­u­la­tion, ­would be pre­dic­tive of ED.
­Methods. ­Design: cor­re­la­tional ­design, ­with a ­time gap ­between pre­dictor and depen­dent var­i­ables. Set­tings: com­pet­i­tive ­sports envi­ron­ment. Par­tic­i­pants: 188 com­pet­i­tive endu­rance ath­letes ­were ­recruited ­from ama­teur ­sports ­clubs. Inter­ven­tions: ­none. Meas­ures: the Behav­i­oural Reg­u­la­tion in Exer­cise Ques­tion­naire was admin­is­tered ­before a ­training ses­sion to ­measure the pre­dictor var­i­ables (­motives for exer­cise par­tic­i­pa­tion), and the Run­ning Addic­tion ­Scale was admin­is­tered ­before a sim­ilar ­training ses­sion, one ­week ­later, to ­measure the depen­dent var­i­able (ED).
­Results. Mul­tiple regres­sion anal­ysis ­revealed ­that the ­strongest pre­dictor var­i­able of ED was intro­jected reg­u­la­tion (β=0.29, p<0.001), fol­lowed by iden­ti­fied reg­u­la­tion (β=0.19, p<0.05). ­External reg­u­la­tion and ­intrinsic moti­va­tion ­were ­weak and non-sig­nif­i­cant pre­dic­tors. The ­total var­i­ance in ED ­explained by the exer­cise par­tic­i­pa­tion ­motives was 15% (R2= 0.15).
Con­clu­sions. ED was pre­dicted by ­motives ­that did not sup­port the ­tenets of the ­affect reg­u­la­tion ­model. ­Results are dis­cussed in ­light of the poten­tial influ­ence of exer­cise par­tic­i­pa­tion ­motives on ED and ­their impli­ca­tions for inter­ven­tion strat­e­gies and diag­nosis of the ED syn­drome.

inizio pagina