| Literature DB >> 26377553 |
Martina Kanning1, Ulrich Ebner-Priemer2,3, Wolfgang Schlicht4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that older adults show positive affects after participating in exercise bouts. However, it is less clear, if and how physical activities in daily living enhance affective states, too. This is dissatisfying, as most of older adults' physical activities are part of their daily living. To answer these questions we used activity-triggered e-diaries to investigate the within-subject effects of physical activity on three dimensions of affective states (valence, energetic arousal, calmness) during everyday life.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26377553 PMCID: PMC4573919 DOI: 10.1186/s12966-015-0272-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ISSN: 1479-5868 Impact factor: 6.457
Characteristics of study participants
| % or mean (SD) | |
|---|---|
| Gender (% men) | 51 % |
| Age | 60.1 (7.1) |
| Marital status (% married or defacto) | 65 % |
| Educational attainment | |
| ● University degree | 46.4 % |
| Work status | |
| ● Currently working | 27.5 % |
| ● Retired | 53.7 % |
| ● Homemaker | 18.7 % |
| Averaged activity during measurement time (milli-g/min) | 73.3 (35.3) |
| BMI | 24.7 (2.9) |
Fixed and random effects and variance components for valence (model 1). energetic arousal (model 2), and calmness (model 3) on actual physical activity of every day life (aPA)
| Outcome | Fixed | Random | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictor | Coefficient | SE | t-Value | df |
| SD | χ2 | df |
| 95%-Predictive intervala | Slopes > 0b | |
| Model 1: Valence | ||||||||||||
| Intercept | 3.99 | 0.06 | 66.06 | 65 | <0.001 | 1.64E-03 | 116.74 | 64 | <0.001 | |||
| sex | −0.15 | 0.13 | −0.11 | 65 | 0.91 | |||||||
| BMI | 0.03 | 0.02 | 2.39 | 65 | 0.02 | |||||||
| SWLS | 0.37 | 0.11 | 3.34 | 65 | <0.001 | |||||||
| aPA | 6.20E-05 | 3.37E-04 | 0.18 | 65 | 0.86 | 1.64E-03 | 116.74 | 64 | <0.001 | −3.15E-03; | 3.28E-03 | 51% |
| aPA*sex | −6.27E-04 | 6.50E-04 | −0.97 | 65 | 0.34 | |||||||
| aPA*BMI | −3.04E-04 | 1.22E-04 | −2.48 | 65 | 0.02 | |||||||
| aPA*SWLS | −4.73E-04 | 5.03E-04 | −0.93 | 65 | 0.35 | |||||||
| time-square | −4.38E-04 | 1.35E-03 | −0.33 | 65 | 0.75 | 6.58E-03 | 100.77 | 64 | 0.01 | |||
| Model 2: Energetic arousal | ||||||||||||
| Intercept | 3.39 | 0.08 | 40.99 | 65 | <0.001 | 0.61 | 262.09 | 64 | <0.001 | |||
| sex | −2.70E-01 | 1.70E-01 | −1.59 | 65 | 0.12 | |||||||
| BMI | 2.00E-02 | 3.00E-02 | 0.61 | 65 | 0.54 | |||||||
| SWLS | 3.70E-01 | 1.40E-01 | 2.53 | 65 | 0.01 | |||||||
| aPA | 1.72E-03 | 4.55E-04 | 3.79 | 65 | <0.001 | 2.42E-03 | 121.05 | 64 | <0.001 | −3.00E-03; | 6.46E-03 | 76% |
| aPA*sex | 1.83E-03 | 8.63E-04 | 2.12 | 65 | 0.04 | |||||||
| aPA*BMI | 1.20E-04 | 2.20E-04 | 0.54 | 65 | 0.59 | |||||||
| aPA*SWLS | −5.09E-04 | 6.56E-04 | −0.77 | 65 | 0.44 | |||||||
| time-square | −9.24E-03 | 1.62E-03 | −5.71 | 65 | <0.001 | 7.34E-03 | 87.71 | 67 | 0.045 | −2.40E-02; | 5.14E-05 | 10% |
| Model 3: Calmness | ||||||||||||
| Intercept | 3.78 | 0.08 | 50.29 | 65 | <0.001 | 0.54 | 238.01 | 65 | <0.001 | |||
| sex | 4.00E-02 | 1.80E-01 | 0.24 | 65 | 0.81 | |||||||
| BMI | 6.00E-02 | 2.00E-02 | 1.72 | 65 | 0.01 | |||||||
| SWLS | 3.60E-01 | 1.20E-01 | 2.99 | 65 | 0.01 | |||||||
| aPA | −1.74E-03 | 4.97E-04 | −3.51 | 65 | 0.01 | 3.06E-03 | 210.94 | 65 | <0.001 | −7.64E-03; | 4.25E-05 | 28% |
| aPA*sex | −1.44E-03 | 1.13E-03 | −1.27 | 65 | 0.21 | |||||||
| aPA*BMI | −2.92E-04 | 1.88E-04 | −1.56 | 65 | 0.12 | |||||||
| aPA*SWLS | 4.37E-04 | 8.33E-04 | 0.52 | 65 | 0.6 | |||||||
| time-square | 4.20E-03 | 1.36E-03 | 3.09 | 1322 | 0.01 | |||||||
aBased on the assumption of normally distributed regression coefficients, the 95 % predictive interval indicates the range of values between which 95 % of the regression coefficients are estimated to lie (Hox, 2010). The intervals were calculated based on a model without Level 2 predictors
bBased on the assumption of normally distributed regression coefficients, this value indicates the percentages of regression coefficients that are positive (Hox, 2010). The percentages were calculated based on a model without Level 2 predictors