Submit a preprint

138

Automatic approach-avoidance tendency toward physical activity, sedentary, and neutral stimuli as a function of age, explicit affective attitude, and intention to be activeuse asterix (*) to get italics
Ata Farajzadeh, Miriam Goubran, Alexa Beehler, Noura Cherkawi, Paula Morrison, Margaux de Chanaleilles, Silvio Maltagliati, Boris Cheval, Matthew W. Miller, Lisa Sheehy, Martin Bilodeau, Dan Orsholits, Matthieu P. BoisgontierPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
2023
<p>Using computerized reaction-time tasks assessing automatic attitudes, studies have shown that healthy young adults have faster reaction times when approaching physical activity stimuli than when avoiding them. The opposite has been observed for sedentary stimuli. However, it is unclear whether these results hold across the lifespan and when error rates and a possible generic approach-avoidance tendency are accounted for. Here, reaction times and errors in online approach-avoidance tasks of 130 participants aged 21 to 77 years were analyzed using mixed-effects models. Automatic approach-avoidance tendencies were tested using physical activity, sedentary, and neutral stimuli. Explicit attitudes toward physical activity and intention to be physically active were self-reported. Results accounting for age, sex, gender, level of physical activity, body mass index, and chronic health condition confirmed a main tendency to approach physical activity stimuli (i.e., faster reaction to approach vs. avoid; p = .001) and to avoid sedentary stimuli (i.e., faster reaction to avoid vs. approach; p &lt; .001). Results based on neutral stimuli revealed a generic approach tendency in early adulthood (i.e., faster approach before age 53 and fewer errors before age 36) and a generic avoidance tendency in older adults (i.e., more errors after age 60). When accounting for these generic tendencies, results showed a greater tendency (i.e., fewer errors) to avoid than approach sedentary stimuli after aged 50, but not before (p = .026). Exploratory analyses showed that, irrespective of age, participants were faster at approaching physical activity (p = .028) and avoiding sedentary stimuli (p = .041) when they considered physical activity as pleasant and enjoyable (explicit attitude). However, results showed no evidence of an association between approach-avoidance tendencies and the intention to be physically active. Taken together, these results suggest that both age and explicit attitudes can affect the general tendency to approach physical activity stimuli and to avoid sedentary stimuli.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7051414You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7051414You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7051414You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Aging, Attitude, Exercise, Geriatrics, Health, Intention, Personality, Reaction Time, Sedentary Behavior
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Behavioral/Cognitive Neuroscience, Humans
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Neuro. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
2022-09-09 22:34:03
Florent Lebon