| Literature DB >> 33915817 |
Ming-Yu Claudia Wong1, Pak-Kwong Chung1, Ka-Man Leung2.
Abstract
The association between physical activity in achieving mental health benefits and subjective well-being is consistently identified by empirical research. The causation of a positive self-concept created by physical exercise is empirically supported by Sonstroem and Morgan's (1988) exercise and self-esteem model (EXSEM). However, various drawbacks of maintaining high self-esteem have been identified; thus, the concept of self-compassion was conjectured to be a form of "true self-esteem." Hence, the current study aimed to investigate the relationship between physical activity and self-compassion by examining the exercise and self-esteem model revised with self-compassion (EXSEM-SC). This study recruited secondary school students from Hong Kong using convenience sampling. The structural equation modeling (SEM) approach, including path analysis and multiple indicators, multiple causes (MIMIC) modeling, were used to reveal the results of the study. The results (n = 1097) indicated that the relationship between physical activity and self-compassion could be demonstrated by the EXSEM-SC, with a satisfactory goodness-of-fit index in the SEMs. The SEM also demonstrated the direct paths from physical activity to self-compassion and mental well-being, indicating the significant effect of physical activity on self-compassion.Entities:
Keywords: adolescence; exercise and self-esteem model; mental health; physical activity; self-compassion
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33915817 PMCID: PMC8037063 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18073661
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The original exercise and self-esteem model (EXSEM).
Figure 2The Exercise and self-esteem model revised with self-compassion (EXSEM-SC).
Figure 3Extension of exercise and self-esteem model revised with self-compassion (EXSEM-SC) including mental well-being.
Descriptive statistics.
| Minimum | Maximum | Mean | Std. Deviation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 11.00 | 16.00 | 14.13 | 1.45 | |
| Frequency | Percent | ||||
| Gender | |||||
| Women | 376 | 35.0 | |||
| Men | 698 | 65.0 | |||
| Family Monthly Income | 2000 or below | 83 | 7.7 | ||
| 20,000–30,000 | 108 | 10.1 | |||
| 30,000–40,000 | 103 | 9.6 | |||
| 40,000–50,000 | 73 | 6.8 | |||
| 50,000 or above | 214 | 19.9 |
Mean of the model variables.
| Variables | Mean | Std. Deviation |
|---|---|---|
| Self-Compassion | 3.0886 | 0.49 |
| Body Compassion | 3.1144 | 0.50 |
| Exercise Self-efficacy | 4.7856 | 2.32 |
| Mental Well-being | 3.3198 | 0.87 |
| Physical Activity | 2.3023 | 0.94 |
Correlation matrix of the model variables.
| Variables | SC | BC | ESE | WB | PA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BC | 0.546 ** | − | |||
| ESE | 0.189 ** | 0.186 ** | − | ||
| WB | 0.481 ** | 0.391 ** | 0.260 ** | − | |
| PA | 0.119 ** | 0.089 ** | 0.505 ** | 0.229 ** | − |
| Age | −0.033 | −0.105 ** | −0.087 ** | −0.057 | −0.147 ** |
| Income | 0.079 | 0.072 | 0.075 | 0.079 | 0.107 * |
Note: SC = self-compassion; BC = body compassion; ESE = exercise self-efficacy; WB = mental well-being; PA = physical activity; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.
Summary of goodness-of-fit measurement models.
| Measurement | Chi-Squared Test | Indices | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X2/df |
| CFI | TLI | SRMR | RMSEA | |
| Self-compassion | 4.2 | <0.001 | 0.920 | 0.907 | 0.044 | 0.055 |
| Body Compassion | 3.36 | <0.001 | 0.944 | 0.938 | 0.042 | 0.056 |
| Exercise Self-efficacy | 5.7 | <0.001 | 0.954 | 0.945 | 0.031 | 0.066 |
| Mental Well-being | 4.6 | <0.001 | 0.920 | 0.981 | 0.017 | 0.054 |
| Physical Activity | 2.15 | <0.001 | 0.995 | 0.992 | 0.020 | 0.033 |
Note: CFI = comparative fit index; TLI = Tucker–Lewis index; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation, p = p-value; X2 = chi-square, df = degree of freedom.
Figure 4Exercise and self-esteem model revised with self-compassion. Note: ** p < 0.01.
Standardized direct, indirect, and total effect of physical activity on self-compassion.
| Pathways | Direct Effect | Indirect Effect | Total Effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Physical Activity→Exercise Self-Efficacy→Body Compassion→Self-Compassion | − | 0.049 *** | − |
| Physical Activity→Self-Compassion | 0.078 ** | − | 0.127 ** |
| Body Compassion→Self-Compassion | 0.505 *** | − | − |
** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Standardized direct, indirect, and total effect of physical activity on mental health.
| Pathways | Direct Effect | Indirect Effect | Total Effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Physical Activity→Exercise Self-efficacy→Body Compassion→Self-Compassion→Mental Well-Being | − | 0.018 *** | − |
| Physical Activity→Mental Well-Being | 0.167 *** | − | 0.659 *** |
| Body Compassion→Mental Well-Being | 0.175 *** | − | 0.571 *** |
| Self-Compassion→Mental Well-Being | 0.396 *** | − | − |
*** p < 0.001.
Figure 5Exercise and self-esteem model revised with self-compassion and mental health. Note: ** p < 0.01.
Summary of goodness of fit of the measurement invariance analysis models.
| EXSEM with SC | Chi-Squared Test | Indices | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X2/df |
| CFI | TLI | SRMR | RMSEA(90%CI) | |
| Baseline Model | 3.3 | <0.001 | 0.987 | 0.956 | 0.027 | 0.066 (0.038–0.10) |
| Metric Model | 3.3 | <0.001 | 0.987 | 0.956 | 0.027 | 0.068 (0.038–0.10) |
| Scalar Model | 6.6 | <0.001 | 0.995 | 0.900 | 0.065 | 0.103 (0.08–0.127) |
Note: N of early adolescents = 591, N of older adolescents = 483.Abbreviations: EXSEM with SC = exercise and self-esteem model revised with self-compassion; CFI = comparative fit index; TLI = Tucker–Lewis index; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation, p = p-value; X2 = chi-square, df = degree of freedom.