| Literature DB >> 32427114 |
Hyeongju Ryu1, Meihua Piao2, Hyeongsuk Lee3, Jeongeun Kim1,4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lack of time for exercise is common among office workers given their busy lives. Because of occupational restrictions and difficulty in taking time off, it is necessary to suggest effective ways for workers to exercise regularly. Sustaining lifestyle habits that increase nonexercise activity in daily life can solve the issue of lack of exercise time. Healthy Lifestyle Coaching Chatbot is a messenger app based on the habit formation model that can be used as a tool to provide a health behavior intervention that emphasizes the importance of sustainability and involvement.Entities:
Keywords: exercise; habits; health behavior; healthy lifestyle; reward
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32427114 PMCID: PMC7267999 DOI: 10.2196/15085
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth ISSN: 2291-5222 Impact factor: 4.773
Figure 1Flow of study participant enrollment.
Figure 2Screenshots of (a) push alarm reminders and (b) uploaded picture evidence and accomplishment with positive reinforcement as an intrinsic reward.
Homogeneity test of general characteristics at baseline.
| Characteristics | Intervention group (n=57) | Control group (n=49) | |||
|
|
|
| 0.001 | .92 | |
|
| Male | 25 (44) | 21 (43) |
|
|
|
| Female | 32 (56) | 28 (57) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 5.06 | .28 | |
|
| 20-29 | 9 (16) | 2 (4) |
|
|
|
| 30-39 | 26 (46) | 29 (59) |
|
|
|
| 40-49 | 16 (28) | 12 (25) |
|
|
|
| 50-59 | 6 (11) | 5 (12) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.72 | .70 | |
|
| Low | 22 (42) | 20 (50) |
|
|
|
| Medium | 28 (54) | 18 (45) |
|
|
|
| High | 2 (4) | 2 (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.05 | .82 | |
|
| Yes | 36 (63) | 32 (65) |
|
|
|
| No | 21 (37) | 17 (35) |
|
|
| Weight (kg), mean (SD) | 64.15 (14.07) | 64.47 (14.13) | –0.12 | .91 | |
| Sitting hours weekly, mean (SD) | 7.55 (2.21) | 8.11 (2.58) | –1.17 | .25 | |
Self-Report Habit Index characteristics based on group.
| Intervention week | Intervention group, mean (SD) | Control group, mean (SD) |
| 1 | 41.44 (15.69) | 45.08 (14.39) |
| 2 | 47.92 (16.40) | 48.50 (13.66) |
| 3 | 51.49 (16.47) | 50.27 (13.66) |
| 4 | 54..97 (16.92) | 51.50 (13.60) |
| 5 | 60.74 (14.62) | 50.23 (11.96) |
| 6 | 61.79 (14.53) | 53.62 (13.33) |
| 7 | 64.15 (14.37) | 52.96 (16.26) |
| 8 | 67.21 (14.80) | 56.62 (15.37) |
| 9 | 68.10 (11.64) | 57.35 (10.39) |
| 10 | 70.56 (10.06) | 59.35 (10.39) |
| 11 | 71.85 (9.71) | 63.15 (10.68) |
| 12 | 72.82 (9.77) | 66.12 (7.15) |
Multivariate test results.
| Effect | Value | Hypothesis dfa | Error df | Significance | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pillai’s trace | 0.815 | 21.16 | 11 | 75 | <.001 |
|
| Wilks’ lambda | 0.185 | 21.16 | 11 | 75 | <.001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pillai’s trace | 0.359 | 2.70 | 11 | 75 | .008 |
|
| Wilks’ lambda | 0.641 | 2.70 | 11 | 75 | .008 |
adf: degree of freedom.
Figure 3Plots of Self-Report Habit Index (SRHI) automaticity scores.
Self-Report Habit Index variation based on the difference of rewards.
| Intervention duration | Variation | Intervention group, mean (SD) | Control group, mean (SD) | t( |
| Weeks 1 to 4 | ΔSRHIa (4–1) | 13.54 (14.99) | 6.42 (9.42) | 2.12 (.04) |
| Weeks 5 to 12 | ΔSRHI (12–5) | 12.08 (10.87) | 15.88 (13.29) | 0.21 (.21) |
aΔSRHI: change in Self-Report Habit Index.