↓ Skip to main content

Within-Subject Associations between Mood Dimensions and Non-exercise Activity: An Ambulatory Assessment Approach Using Repeated Real-Time and Objective Data

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Within-Subject Associations between Mood Dimensions and Non-exercise Activity: An Ambulatory Assessment Approach Using Repeated Real-Time and Objective Data
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00918
Pubmed ID
Authors

Markus Reichert, Heike Tost, Iris Reinhard, Alexander Zipf, Hans-Joachim Salize, Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg, Ulrich W. Ebner-Priemer

Abstract

A physically active lifestyle has been related to positive health outcomes and high life expectancy, but the underlying psychological mechanisms maintaining physical activity are rarely investigated. Tremendous technological progress yielding sophisticated methodological approaches, i.e., ambulatory assessment, have recently enabled the study of these mechanisms in everyday life. In practice, accelerometers allow to continuously and objectively monitor physical activity. The combination with e-diaries makes it feasible to repeatedly assess mood states in real-time and real life and to relate them to physical activity. This state-of-the-art methodology comes with several advantages, like bypassing systematic distortions of retrospective methods, avoiding distortions seen in laboratory settings, and revealing an objective physical activity assessment. Most importantly, ambulatory assessment studies enable to analyze how physical activity and mood wax and wane within persons over time in contrast to existing studies on physical activity and mood which mostly investigated between-person associations. However, there are very few studies on how mood dimensions (i.e., feeling well, energetic and calm) drive non-exercise activity (NEA; such as climbing stairs) within persons. Recent reviews argued that some of these studies have methodological limitations, e.g., scarcely representative samples, short study periods, physical activity assessment via self-reports, and low sampling frequencies. To overcome these limitations, we conducted an ambulatory assessment study in a community-based sample of 106 adults over 1 week. Participants were asked to report mood ratings on e-diaries and to wear an accelerometer in daily life. We conducted multilevel analyses to investigate whether mood predicted NEA, which was defined as the mean acceleration within the 10-min interval directly following an e-diary assessment. Additionally, we analyzed the effects of NEA on different time frames following the e-diary prompts in an exploratory manner. Our results revealed that valence significantly and positively predicted NEA within persons (p = 0.001). Feeling more energetic was associated with significantly increased NEA (p < 0.001), whereas feeling calmer was associated with significantly decreased NEA (p < 0.001) on the within-person level. The analyses on different time frames of NEA largely confirmed our findings. In conclusion, we showed that mood predicted NEA within adults but with distinct magnitudes and directions of effects for each mood dimension.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 20%
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 17%
Engineering 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 15 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,808,979
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,557
of 29,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,990
of 352,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#297
of 391 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,727 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 391 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.