Adolescents' physical activity in physical education, school recess, and extra-curricular sport by motivational profiles.

Perceptual & Motor Skills: Exercise & Sport 2014, 118, 3, 663-679. © Perceptual & Motor Skills 2014

ADOLESCENTS’ PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION, SCHOOL RECESS, AND EXTRA-CURRICULAR SPORT BY MOTIVATIONAL PROFILES1, 2 DANIEL MAYORGA-VEGA AND JESÚS VICIANA Department of Physical Education and Sport, University of Granada, Spain Summary.—The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences in adolescents´ objective physical activity levels and perceived effort in physical education, school recess, and extra-curricular organized sport by motivational profiles in physical education. A sample of 102 students 11–16 yr. old completed a self-report questionnaire assessing self-determined motivation toward physical education. Subsequently, students’ objective physical activity levels (steps/min., METs, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity) and perceived effort were evaluated for each situation. Cluster analysis identified a two-cluster structure: “Moderate motivation toward physical education profile” and “High motivation toward physical education profile.” Adolescents in the second cluster had higher physical activity and perceived effort values than adolescents in the first cluster, except for METs and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in extra-curricular sport. These results support the importance of physical education teachers who should promote selfdetermined motivation toward physical education so that students can reach the recommended physical activity levels.

Childhood and adolescence are crucial periods of life, since lifestyle and healthy/unhealthy behaviors are established during these years which may influence adult behavior and health status (Ortega, Ruiz, Castillo, & Sjöström, 2008). Regular physical activity (PA) participation throughout youth is an important public health issue because it can enhance physical, psychological, and social well-being (Hallal, Victora, Azevedo, & Wells, 2006). In recognition of these benefits, the World Health Organization (2010) has recommended that young people should achieve at least 60 min. per day of moderate-to-vigorous PA. Unfortunately, nowadays young people rarely meet the minimum PA recommendation (Currie, Zanotti, Morgan, Currie, de Looze, Roberts, et al., 2012), especially during adolescence where the PA levels drop drastically (Zimmermann-Sloutskis, Wanner, Zimmermann, & Martin, 2010; Silva, Aires, Santos, Vale, Welk, & Mota, 2011). For instance, in Spain only 8–26% of adolescent girls and 27–41% of adolescent boys meet recomAddress correspondence to J. Viciana, Ph.D., Department of Physical Education and Sport, University of Granada (Spain), Ctra. Alfacar s/n, 18011, España or e-mail ([email protected]). 2 The authors thank Aliisa Hatten and Anna Szczesniak for the English revision. Daniel Mayorga-Vega is supported by a grant from the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport (AP2010-5905). 1

DOI 10.2466/06.10.PMS.118k26w0

03-PMS_Mayorga_130124.indd 663

ISSN 0031-5125

24/05/14 9:19 AM

664

D. MAYORGA-VEGA & J. VICIANA

mended guidelines for PA (Currie, et al., 2012). Schools may play an important role for PA promotion among youth (Ortega, et al., 2008). In many countries, physical education (PE) is a compulsory subject for all students; therefore, PE should play a central role in increasing adolescents’ PA (Department of Health and Human Services, 2000; Brusseau, Kulinna, TudorLocke, van der Mars, & Darst, 2011). However, PE potential is restricted by its limited curriculum time allocation (Hardman, 2008; Mayorga-Vega, Viciana, Cocca, & de Rueda Villén, 2012). School recess and extra-curricular organized sports are other schoolbased opportunities for students’ PA engagement (Fox, Cooper, & McKenna, 2004). Nevertheless, in these contexts the PA practice depends mainly on the choices and the will of the students. Motivation is a psychological feature that arouses an organism to act toward a desired goal and elicits, controls, and sustains certain goal-directed behaviors; e.g., motivation is the purpose or psychological cause of any action. Consequently, PE has been suggested to play an important role in motivating students toward a physically active lifestyle (McKenzie, 2007). Several studies have reported that students’ motivation toward PE is positively associated with their leisure-time and general PA levels (Zhang, 2009; Bagoien, Halvari, & Nesheim, 2010; Jaakkola, Washington, Yli-Piipari, 2013). For this reason, understanding the relationship between students’ motivation toward PE and PA levels during PE lessons, school recess, and extra-curricular organized sport is crucial. This knowledge could guide PE teachers in their intervention and make them aware of the consequences of the motivation fostered in their classes. Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) is a framework widely used to understand the consequences of motivation toward PE, such as PA levels (Wang, Chatzisarantis, Spray, & Biddle, 2002; Biddle & Wang, 2003; Yli-Piipari, Watt, Jaakkola, Liukkonen, & Nurmi, 2009) or perceived effort (Ullrich-French & Cox, 2009). This theory adopts a multidimensional perspective on motivation, proposing and distinguishing among reasons as to “why” individuals are encouraged to act. The theory suggests that behavioral regulation toward an activity may be ordered on a continuum according to the extent to which motivation is self-determined: intrinsically motivated (self-determined), extrinsically motivated (controlled), or amotivated (non-intentional) (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Intrinsic motivation is related to the inherent pleasure and satisfaction provided by an activity. In contrast, extrinsic motivation characterizes activities that are performed to obtain some separable outcomes such as tangible rewards, avoid punishments, or attain recognitions or approvals. Finally, amotivation is characterized by no intention of an individual to act due to different reasons such as lack of perception of competence or lack of connection between the action and the desired outcomes (Ryan, Williams, Patrick, & Deci, 2009).


24/05/14 9:19 AM

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AND MOTIVATIONAL PROFILES

665

Previous studies found that adolescents with profiles of higher selfdetermined motivation toward PE were more physically active (Wang & Biddle, 2001; Wang, et al., 2002; Biddle & Wang, 2003; Ullrich-French & Cox, 2009; Yli-Piipari, et al., 2009; Kalaja, Jaakkola, & Liukkonen, 2010). Unfortunately, in these research studies PA levels were assessed through selfreport questionnaires despite their limited validity among youth (Shephard, 2003). Likewise, previous studies assessed the general PA levels instead of specific, school-based opportunities for PA such as PE, school recess, and extra-curricular organized sports. Additionally, to the authors’ knowledge there is no study examining the differences in students’ perceived effort in these three important school-based contexts. Research Purpose 1. To examine the self-determined motivation toward PE profiles in Spanish high school students involved in an extra-curricular organized sport. Research Purpose 2. To evaluate the differences in adolescents’ objective PA levels and perceived effort in PE, school recess and extra-curricular organized sport between self-determined motivational profiles in PE. Hypothesis. Students with higher self-determined motivation toward PE would show greater PA and perceived effort in each school-based context. METHOD Participants A sample of 102 high school students (52 boys, 50 girls) participated in the present study. The participants were Spanish students 11–16 years old (M age = 12.5 yr., SD = 1.6; M body mass = 53.0 kg, SD = 12.6; M height = 1.58 m, SD = 0.1; M BMI = 21.1 kg/m2, SD = 3.7) who belonged to the same school center. Unlike physical education and school recess, extra-curricular organized sports are activities in which not all adolescents are enrolled. Consequently, to examine this important opportunity for students’ PA engagement, the inclusion criterion was participation in extracurricular organized sport activities. Adolescents and their legal guardians were fully informed about all the features of the study, and written informed consent was obtained from all the adolescents’ legal guardians. The study protocol was also approved by The Ethical Committee of the University of Granada. Measures Motivation.—Self-determined motivation toward PE was measured by the Spanish version of the Sport Motivation Scale (Pelletier, Fortier,


24/05/14 9:19 AM

666


Vallerand, Tuson, Brière, & Blais, 1995). The questionnaire consists of a 28-item scale with seven subscales that measure three types of intrinsic motivation (intrinsic motivation to know, to accomplish things, and to experience stimulation), three forms of regulation for extrinsic motivation (identified, introjected, and external), and amotivation. For each dimension, four items are rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale with prompts, 1: Does not correspond at all, 4: Corresponds moderately, and 7: Corresponds exactly. Participants are asked, “Why do you practice PE?”, and items represented possible answers to that question, reflecting the different types of motivation. When calculating the scores on intrinsic motivation, because Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) only considers the unique dimension of intrinsic motivation, all 12 items measuring three different types of intrinsic motivation were combined as in previous studies (Yli-Piipari, et al., 2009; e.g., Kalaja, et al., 2010). The next step was to formulate a Relative Autonomy Index (RAI, also called Self-determination Index), achieved by weighting the scores of the subscales to derive a single score [RAI = (2 × intrinsic motivation) + (1 × identified regulation) – (1 × external regulation) – (2 × amotivation)] (Vallerand & Ratelle, 2002). The reason of this is that the various motivation types are theoretically posited to lie on a continuum of self-determination from intrinsic motivation to amotivation; therefore, weights are given based on the position of the particular motivation type on the continuum (Vallerand, Fortier, & Gaya, 1997). Hence, the RAI integrates scores on the motivation subscales into a single score corresponding to each participant’s position on the continuum. A more positive index indicates greater self-determined motivation toward PE. The Spanish version of the Sport Motivation Scale has adequate psychometric properties (CFI = 0.90; RMSEA = 0.06; Cronbach’s coefficient α ranged from .73 to .79) (Núñez Alonso, Martín-Albo Lucas, & Navarro Izquierdo, 2007). Anthropometrics.—Height and body mass were measured with PE clothing (shorts and tee shirts) and barefoot. Height was assessed to the nearest 0.1 cm in the Frankfort plane using a stadiometer (Holtain Ltd., Crymmych, Pembs, United Kingdom), and body mass was measured to the nearest 0.1 kg using a Seca scale (Seca, Ltd., Hamburg, Germany). Two measurements of both height and body mass were performed and the mean of each was retained. Afterward, BMI was calculated as body mass divided by height squared (kg/m2). Adolescents’ weight status was categorized according to the BMI international cut-off values as non-overweight and overweight/obese (Cole, Bellizzi, Flegal, & Dietz, 2000). Physical activity.—Objective PA levels were estimated by a SenseWear Pro2 Armband (HealthWear Bodymedia, Pittsburgh, Penn., USA). The SenseWear Pro2 Armband is a multiple-sensor device collecting data from


24/05/14 9:19 AM


667

a skin temperature sensor, near-body temperature sensor, heat flux sensor, galvanic skin response sensor, and a biaxial accelerometer. The information from the sensors together with gender, age, height, and body mass, are incorporated into proprietary algorithms to estimate several PA parameters. These algorithms are activity-specific and are automatically applied on the basis of an analysis of the pattern of signals from the sensors. The armband was worn on the back of the upper right arm attached with an adjustable strap. Total number of steps, average metabolic equivalent of task (METs), time of moderate-to-vigorous PA (minutes ≥ 3 METs), and PA duration (min.) were calculated using InnerView Professional software (Version 5.1), including data from all sensors together with gender, age, body mass, and height. To standardize each variable for data analysis, the average number of steps per minute and the ratio of time in moderate-to-vigorous PA to total time per session were calculated. PA measurements using the SenseWear Pro2 Armband have adequate test-retest reliability (Brazeau, Karelis, Mignault, Lacroix, Prud´homme, & Rabasa-Lhoret, 2011) and criterion-related validity among young people (Arvidsson, Slinde, Larsson, & Hulthén, 2007). Perceived effort.—The perceived effort students made in each specific context was measured by the effort subscale of the Spanish version of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (McAuley, Duncan, & Tammen, 1989). For the perceived effort dimension, four items are rated on a 7-point Likerttype scale with anchors 1: Strongly disagree and 7: Strongly agree. Items were contextualized to PE, school recess, and extra-curricular organized sport for each situation (e.g., “I put a lot of effort into this PE class”). When calculating the score for perceived effort, a negatively worded item was reverse scored and then the four items were averaged. A more positive score indicates the student´s greater perceived effort in a specific context and vice versa. The Spanish version of the effort subscale demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach’s α = .83) (Moreno-Murcia, Cervelló Gimeno, Montero Carretero, Vera Lacárcel, & García Calvo, 2012). Procedure The principal and the PE teacher of a high school center were contacted and informed about the project and the permission to conduct the study was requested. After the school approvals were obtained, adolescents and their legal guardians were fully informed about the study. Since PA levels during the extra-curricular organized sport constituted one context for evaluation, only the students that were involved in an extra-curricular organized sport in the same school center were asked to participate. The legal guardians of the participants signed informed consent. The present study was carried out during two weeks. Anthropometric data and motivation toward PE were collected during regularly sched-


24/05/14 9:19 AM

668


uled PE classes throughout the first week. In the first PE session, body mass and height measurements were taken. Then, during the second PE lesson, the Sport Motivation Scale questionnaire was administered by a trained research assistant in quiet conditions in classrooms after a short introduction and instructions. Completion of the entire questionnaire took about 30–40 min. During the second week, students’ objective PA levels and perceived effort were evaluated in a PE lesson, school recess time, and extra-curricular organized sport session. Beforehand, in a previous PE lesson (i.e., in a different session than the “measured PE lesson”) students were instructed how to correctly place the SenseWear Pro2 Armband and then were familiarized with it. Students placed the device on the arm at the beginning of each monitored session. The research assistant was available but not in the room (so students could not see him), to avoid affecting the students’ behavior. After each monitored session, the perceived effort questionnaire was administered (5–10 min.). PE classes and extra-curricular organized sport sessions were taught by the same teacher, with the same content (introduction to basketball) and in the same sports facilities, for all participants. The methods and objectives in each session were related to the context, meaning both were structured sessions, but the PE classes had an educational approach whereas the extra-curricular organized sport sessions had a technique/ tactical approach. During school recess, participants were allowed to do every activity they usually do; that means they were in an unstructured and freechoice session. The teacher and students were urged to maintain what they usually do in each situation. Data Analysis Descriptive statistics were calculated for all the variables. Before commencing the cluster analyses, data were screened to identify potential outliers. Neither univariate outliers (z ± 3.0) nor multivariate outliers (Mahalanobis distance criterion; p < .001) were identified. Following Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, and Tatham (2006), two cluster analyses were carried out to examine motivational profiles. The data were randomly split into two similar subsamples (50% of whole sample). First, a hierarchical cluster analysis following Ward’s method was conducted as an exploratory analysis to identify the motivational profiles in the first subsample. The Euclidean distance was used as a similarity measure, and the dendogram was inspected to estimate the number of clusters. Secondly, to verify the results of these exploratory cluster profiles, the clusters emerging from the exploratory analysis were utilized as the basis for the K-means cluster analysis in the second subsample. Finally, a K-means cluster analysis of the whole sample was conducted (Aldenderfer & Blashfield, 1984).


24/05/14 9:19 AM


669

After the cluster analyses were conducted, a chi-squared analysis was carried out to test ratio differences of students between the clusters that emerged, as well as the ratio of gender, age, and weight status. In addition, a one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and a oneway univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to test the differences between the motivation toward PE profiles (clusters). Differences in motivation as well as PA levels and perceived effort in each situation (PE, school recess, and extra-curricular organized sport) were taken into account. All the variables were previously standardized using z scores. All statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS Version 15.0 for Windows (SPSS® Inc., Chicago, IL). Significance was set at p < .05. RESULTS Cluster Analysis A hierarchical cluster analysis following Ward’s method was carried out with the first subsample (n = 51). The dendogram of this analysis clearly identified two clusters (cluster 1, n = 16, 31%, RAI = 2.40 ± 1.89; cluster 2, n = 35, 69%, RAI = 10.02 ± 2.27). Subsequently, to verify the results of these exploratory cluster profiles, the K-means cluster analysis was utilized in the second subsample (n = 51). The K-means analysis using the second subsample confirmed the 2-cluster structure (cluster 1, n = 18, 35%, RAI = 1.95 ± 2.13; cluster 2, n = 33, 65%, RAI = 9.88 ± 2.37). Because analyses for both subsamples yielded similar cluster solutions, the whole sample was included in the following analyses. Finally, the K-means cluster analysis for the whole sample identified two clusters (Fig. 1). The first cluster was labeled as “Moderate motivation toward PE profile” (n = 34, 33%) and included students with moderate intrinsic motivation to know, intrinsic motivation to accomplish things, intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation, identified regulation, introjected regulation, external regulation, and amotivation. The second cluster was labeled as “High motivation toward PE profile” (n = 68, 67%) and included students with high intrinsic motivation to know, intrinsic motivation to accomplish things, intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation, identified regulation, and introjected regulation, moderate external regulation, and low amotivation. As a descriptive analysis, the chi-square test showed that the “High motivation toward PE profile” had a statistically significant greater number of students (χ21 = 11.33, p = .001). Additionally, the chi-square analysis showed that the “High motivation toward PE profile” had a statistically significant higher amount of younger students and a lower amount of older students than the “Moderate motivation toward PE profile” (χ22 = 69.75, p < .001, Cramér’s V = 0.83); in the “High motivation toward PE profile,” 66


24/05/14 9:19 AM

670


FIG. 1. Motivation toward physical education profiles (Cluster 1, n = 34; Cluster 2, n = 68). Values are means, and error bars represent two standard errors. IM = Intrinsic motivation.

students were 11–12 yr. old, two were 13–14 yr. old, and none were 15–16 yr. old; “Moderate motivation toward PE profile,” 6 were 11–12 yr. old, 10 were 13–14 yr. old, and 18 were 15–16 yr. old). However, the chi-squared analysis showed that the two profiles had similar representation of boys and girls (χ21 = 0.31, p = .58, V = 0.06; “High motivation toward PE profile,” 36 boys and 32 girls; “Moderate motivation toward PE profile,” 16 boys and 18 girls) or weigh status categories (χ21 = 0.34, p = .56, V = 0.06; “High motivation toward PE profile,” 44 non-overweight and 24 overweight/ obese; “Moderate motivation toward PE profile,” 20 non-overweight and 14 overweight/obese). Cluster Differences The means, standard deviations, and Z scores, as well as the means comparison with a one-way MANOVA, followed by a one-way ANOVA, for the two motivation toward PE profiles on motivation, objective PA, and perceived effort values under each situation are shown in Table 1. The MANOVA results indicated overall statistically significant differences between motivational profiles on motivation toward PE, the source of which was the “High motivation toward PE profile” having statistically significant higher intrinsic motivation to know, intrinsic motivation to


24/05/14 9:19 AM

671

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AND MOTIVATIONAL PROFILES TABLE 1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO MOTIVATIONAL PROFILES IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Variable

Cluster 1 (n = 34) “Moderate motivation toward physical education profile”

Cluster 2 (n = 68) “High motivation toward physical education profile” z

MANOVAa F

η2p

44.05‡

0.77

66.05‡

0.40

M

SD

z

M

SD

IM to know

4.27

0.92

−0.89

5.87

0.95

0.44

IM to accomplish things

4.96

0.99

−0.64

5.98

0.93

0.32

26.19‡

0.21 0.21

Motivation toward physical education

IM to experience stimulation

4.50

1.05

−0.65

5.68

1.10

0.32

26.84‡

Identified regulation

4.54

1.11

−0.46

5.30

1.03

0.23

11.69‡

0.11

Introjected regulation

4.27

0.87

−0.66

5.43

1.14

0.33

27.79‡

0.22

External regulation

4.41

0.77

0.19

4.09

1.28

−0.10

1.84

0.02

Amotivation

3.56

1.04

1.07

1.47

0.75

−0.53 134.80‡

0.57

Relative autonomy index

2.16

2.00

−1.21

9.95

2.30

0.61 283.20‡

0.74

9.32‡

0.28

Physical education Steps (steps/min.) Metabolic energy of task (METs)

41.69

16.39

−0.66

54.81

8.98

0.33

26.71‡

0.21

4.17

1.14

−0.53

5.02

0.95

0.26

15.61‡

0.14

Moderate-to-vigorous physical activityb

0.63

0.25

−0.62

0.79

0.12

0.29

21.37‡

0.18

Perceived effort

5.21

1.01

−0.41

5.85

1.01

0.19

8.63†

0.08

32.25‡

0.58

School recess Steps (steps/min.) Metabolic energy of task (METs)

21.65

16.94

−0.99

61.38

21.48

0.48

84.60‡

0.46

2.97

1.17

−0.87

5.02

1.30

0.43

57.6‡

0.37


0.39

0.27

−1.05

0.85

0.15

0.52 114.70‡

0.54

Perceived effort

4.79

1.16

−0.26

5.26

1.27

0.12

3.19

0.03

31.62‡

0.57

Extra-curricular organized sport Steps (steps/min.)

58.40

8.67

−0.43

66.28

13.49

0.19

9.11†

0.09

Metabolic energy of task (METs)

6.53

0.79

0.62

5.48

1.10

−0.32

23.08‡

0.19


0.93

0.08

0.21

0.90

0.10

−0.12

2.42

0.02

Perceived effort 5.45 1.31 −0.36 6.04 0.95 0.17 6.43† 0.06 Note.—IM = intrinsic motivation; aOne-way multivariate analyses of variance followed by one-way univariate analysis of variance; bratio of time ≥ 3 METs to total time session. †p < .01. ‡p < .001.


24/05/14 9:19 AM

672


accomplish things, intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation, identified regulation, introjected regulation, and lower amotivation, as well as higher RAI than the students within the “Moderate motivation toward PE profile.” There were also statistically significant differences between motivation toward PE profiles on PA levels and perceived effort during PE lessons: the “High motivation toward PE profile” group showed higher values of steps, METs, moderate-to-vigorous PA, and perceived effort than the “Moderate motivation toward PE profile” group. Similarly, during school recess, motivation toward PE profiles in PA levels and perceived effort differed: the “High motivation toward PE profile” group showed statistically significant higher values of steps, METs, and moderate-to-vigorous PA than the “Moderate motivation toward PE profile” group. During the extra-curricular organized sport, there were similar overall statistically significant differences between motivation toward PE profiles in PA levels and perceived effort, but only for higher values of steps and perceived effort in the “High motivation toward PE profile” group. Nevertheless, the students within the “Moderate motivation toward PE profile” showed statistically significant higher values of METs. DISCUSSION Motivational Profiles The first purpose of this study was to examine the motivation toward PE profiles in Spanish high school students involved in an extra-curricular organized sport. A cluster analysis was used to identify profiles of motivation toward PE. Two motivational clusters emerged: “Moderate motivation toward PE profile” included students with moderate intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation; “High motivation toward PE profile” had high intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, and introjected regulation, moderate external regulation, and low amotivation. The results of previous studies regarding the number of motivational profiles in PE that emerged within high school students are contradictory. While several studies also found two motivational clusters (Yli-Piipari, et al., 2009; Kalaja, et al., 2010; Navas Martínez, Soriano Llorca, & Holgado Tello, 2012), in other research studies three (Ntoumanis, 2002; Wang, et al., 2002; Boiché, Sarrazin, Frederick, Pelletier, & Chanal, 2008), four (Biddle & Wang, 2003; Moreno, Hellín, Hellín, Cervelló, & Sicilia, 2008), and five (Wang & Biddle, 2001; Ullrich-French & Cox, 2009) motivational profiles emerged. In all previous studies that found two motivational clusters, students showed low and high motivational profiles (Yli-Piipari, et al., 2009; Kalaja, et al., 2010; Navas Martínez, et al., 2012) instead of moderate and high motivational profiles as in the present study. This difference could be due to the fact that the current study only included students involved in


24/05/14 9:19 AM


673

some extra-curricular organized sport and not the general population of students as in previous research studies. The PE classes include students who may or may not include PA in their leisure time. Because the motivation toward PE is positively related with leisure-time PA practice in this age range (Cox, Smith, & Williams, 2008), sedentary adolescents who may have a low motivational profile were not studied. Almagro, Sáenz-López, and Moreno-Murcia (2012) also found moderate and high motivational profiles in their study of high school students involved in regular sports. According to the theoretical framework (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000), introjected and extrinsic regulations are located toward the extrinsic endpoint of the self-determination continuum. Students in the higher profile should report relatively low introjected regulation and extrinsic motivation (Ntoumanis, 2002; Wang, et al., 2002; Boiché, et al., 2008; UllrichFrench & Cox, 2009). However, although extrinsic regulation levels were moderate, the values of introjected regulation were relatively high. Vallerand, et al. (1997) suggested that introjected regulation can sometimes lead to adaptive consequences in an educational context. Students may internalize the value of participating in various school activities. In the context of PE, e.g., some students may decide to be actively involved, not because they enjoy PE but to please their parents or peers. Yli-Piipari, et al. (2009) found similar results in a PE context. There were no adolescents in a “Low motivation toward PE profile,” and the majority of the students had a high motivation toward PE profile. Moreno, et al. (2008) found that participants who exercised were associated with the highly motivated cluster, and those that did not exercise were associated with the low motivated cluster. In most studies carried out with general students, lower profiles had substantially smaller sample sizes than the profiles with high or moderate scores (Wang & Biddle, 2001; Ntoumanis, 2002; Wang, et al., 2002; Boiché, et al., 2008; Moreno, et al., 2008; Ullrich-French & Cox, 2009). There should not be much concern regarding the students’ motivation toward PE, at least among students involved in extra-curricular organized sport activities. Gender, Age, and Weight Status Regarding the possible association between cluster membership and gender, age, or weight status, the two profiles had similar representation of boys and girls, and of non-overweight and overweight/obese participants; but older students were under-represented in the high motivation cluster and overrepresented in the moderate motivation cluster. Several previous studies did not find an association between gender and cluster membership (Ntoumanis, 2002; Boiché, et al., 2008; Ullrich-French & Cox, 2009), but other researchers found that girls were mainly in the lower motivated clusters (Wang & Biddle, 2001; Moreno, et al., 2008). Among


24/05/14 9:19 AM

674


students involved in extra-curricular sport activities, there is no concern about girls’ motivation. For age, previous studies have found the same trend as the present study (Wang & Biddle, 2001; Boiché, et al., 2008). Nevertheless, Ullrich-French and Cox (2009) did not confirm statistically significant differences in the distribution of cluster membership by age or grade, possibly because they did not include older adolescents (only 11- to 14-yr.-olds) as the present study (11- to 16-yr.-olds) or others (11- to 15-yr.olds, Wang & Biddle, 2001; 11- to 17-yr.-olds, Boiché, et al., 2008), where there might be greater differences. Longitudinal studies have shown that motivation toward PE decreases during youth (Xiang, McBride, & Guan, 2004; Gao, Lee, Solmon, & Zhang, 2009; Barkoukis, Ntoumanis, & Thogersen-Ntoumani, 2010). High school PE teachers should be aware of this and support motivation of youth, especially among older students. Lastly, there are no studies examining the students’ motivation profiles according to their weight status. Objective Physical Activity Levels and Perceived Effort The second purpose was to evaluate the differences in students’ objective PA levels and perceived effort in PE, school recess, and extra-curricular organized sport among different profiles of motivation toward PE. Self-Determination Theory links more self-determined regulations to positive consequences of motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000) such as PA (Zhang, 2009; Bagoien, et al., 2010) or perceived effort (Zhang, 2009). In the present study, students within the “High motivation toward PE profile” had more steps and higher METs, moderate-to-vigorous PA, and perceived effort during PE and school recess (actually, the η2p value of perceived effort in school recess was small) than the students within the “Moderate motivation toward PE profile.” On the other hand, although students within the “High motivation toward PE profile” also had more steps and perceived effort, METs were lower and no differences were found for moderate-tovigorous PA levels. MET is an excellent measure of relative PA intensity. However, in measures of absolute intensity such as steps or speed, relative activity intensity for adolescents with lower physical fitness is higher; so, students within the “Moderate motivation toward PE profile” may have had higher METs because they are less physically fit. Extra-curricular organized sport teachers usually focus on adolescents’ performance on tasks of relatively high intensity, which could explain the higher METs during the extra-curricular organized sport among “Moderate motivation toward PE profile” students despite fewer steps. Previous studies found that students within the higher motivation toward PE profiles reported higher PA than the students within the lower motivational profiles (Wang & Biddle, 2001; Wang, et al., 2002; Biddle & Wang,


24/05/14 9:19 AM


675

2003; Ullrich-French & Cox, 2009; Yli-Piipari, et al., 2009; Kalaja, et al., 2010). Unfortunately, all previous studies used self-report questionnaires to assess students’ PA. As these self-report questionnaires measures have shown limited reliability and validity among youth (Shephard, 2003), objective measures should be used. All of these studies addressed PA levels in general or leisure time, but to the authors’ knowledge there was no study examining the important situations for recommended PA in venues such as PE, school recess, or extra-curricular organized sports (Fox, et al., 2004). Lonsdale, Sabiston, Raedeke, Ha, and Sum (2009) found that students with higher self-determined motivation toward PE had greater objectively measured levels of PA during a structured PE lesson and free choice period. In addition, as shown in the current results (e.g., steps, η2p = 0.21 in PE lessons and η2p = 0.46 in school recesses), the differences were greater during the free choice period than during the PE lesson. However, these authors did not use a cluster analysis approach to examine the “natural groups,” but used the higher and lower tertiles. Furthermore, PA levels in the free choice period were performed during a PE lesson time and not during school recess. Finally, as far as perceived effort is concerned, Ullrich-French and Cox (2009) found that students with higher motivation toward PE profiles reported higher effort in PE than the students within the lower motivational profiles. Unfortunately, no similar studies addressing the perceived effort during school recess or extra-curricular organized sports were found. Limitations and Conclusions A limitation of this study was the use of a cross-sectional design, which does not allow causal inferences regarding the relationship between self-determined motivation profiles and PA involvement. Additionally, in relation to the objectives of the present study, the inclusion criterion was participation in an extra-curricular organized sport. Therefore, the sample of the present study was self-selected to be more motivated and the present results can not be generalized to all adolescents. Future studies should focus only on PA opportunity periods at school (i.e., physical education and school recess) or to examine the leisure-time PA levels. Additionally, future research should confirm the previous results of daily PA levels through objective measures. Finally, the use of a single monitored session in each situation might be another limitation. Although multiple assessments would produce more reliable data, with the use of objective measures sometimes it is not practical. Furthermore, in the present study a previous familiarization session with the PA instrument was carried out, since no researcher was present during the monitored sessions, to reduce the Hawthorne effect. Lastly,


24/05/14 9:19 AM

676


it is worth pointing out that additional measures such as conducting the study with students from the same school and the same teacher, or using the same facilities for each situation, were taken to obtain more reliable data. This study is the first to examine the differences in adolescents’ objectively measured PA levels and perceived effort during PE classes, school recess, and extra-curricular organized sport between motivational profiles in PE. The results showed that students with higher motivation toward PE showed greater PA levels and perceived effort than their peers with lower motivation. Additionally, the difference in PA levels between motivational profiles was greater in school recess than the supervised PE lesson, thus providing preliminary evidence that the benefits of self-determined motivation toward PE may be greater in unstructured school contexts. Because PA engagement during PE lessons is insufficient, PE teachers should promote motivation toward PE, encouraging the students to achieve healthy moderate-to-vigorous PA levels during their free time. REFERENCES

ALDENDERFER, M. S., & BLASHFIELD, R. K. (1984) Cluster analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. ALMAGRO, B. J., SÁENZ-LÓPEZ, P., & MORENO-MURCIA, J. A. (2012) Perfiles motivacionales de deportistas adolescentes españoles [Motivational profiles of Spanish adolescent athletes]. Revista de Psicología del Deporte, 21, 223-231. ARVIDSSON, D., SLINDE, F., LARSSON, S., & HULTHÉN, L. (2007) Energy cost of physical activities in children: validation of SenseWear Armband. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 39, 2076-2084. BAGOIEN, T. E., HALVARI, H., & NESHEIM, H. (2010) Self-determined motivation in physical education and its links to motivation for leisure-time physical activity, physical activity, and well-being in general. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 111, 407-432. BARKOUKIS, V., NTOUMANIS, N., & THOGERSEN-NTOUMANI, C. (2010) Developmental changes in achievement motivation and affect in physical education: growth trajectories and demographic differences. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 11, 83-90. BIDDLE, S. J. H., & WANG, C. K. J. (2003) Motivation and self-perception profiles and links with physical activity in adolescent girls. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 687-701. BOICHÉ, J. C. S., SARRAZIN, P. G., FREDERICK, M. E., PELLETIER, L. G., & CHANAL, J. P. (2008) Students’ motivational profiles and achievement outcomes in physical education: a self-determination perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 688-701. BRAZEAU, A., KARELIS, A. D., MIGNAULT, D., LACROIX, M., PRUD´HOMME, D., & RABASA-LHORET, R. (2011) Test-retest reliability of a portable monitor to assess energy expenditure. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 36, 339-343. BRUSSEAU, T. A., KULINNA, P. H., TUDOR-LOCKE, C., VAN DER MARS, H., & DARST, P. W. (2011) Children’s step counts on weekend, physical education, and non-physical education days. Journal of Human Kinetics, 27, 125-135. COLE, T. J., BELLIZZI, M. C., FLEGAL, K. M., & DIETZ, W. H. (2000) Establishing a standard definition for child overweight and obesity worldwide: international survey. British Medical Journal, 320, 1240-1243.


24/05/14 9:19 AM


677

COX, A. E., SMITH, A. L., & WILLIAMS, L. (2008) Change in physical education motivation and physical activity behavior during middle school. Journal of Adolescent Health, 43, 506-513. CURRIE, C., ZANOTTI, C., MORGAN, A., CURRIE, D., DE LOOZE, M., ROBERTS, C., SAMDAL, O., SMITH, O. R. F., & BARNEKOW, V. (Eds.) (2012) Social determinants of health and wellbeing among young people. Health Behaviour in School-aged Children study: international report from the 2009/2010 survey. Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO Regional Office for Europe, Health Policy for Children and Adolescents. DECI, E. L., & RYAN, R. M. (1985) Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum. DECI, E. L., & RYAN, R. M. (2000) The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. (2000) Healthy People 2010: understanding and improving health. (2nd ed.) Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. FOX, K., COOPER, A., & MCKENNA, J. (2004) The school and promotion of children’s health-enhancing physical activity: perspectives from the United Kingdom. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 23, 336-355. GAO, Z., LEE, A. M., SOLMON, M. A., & ZHANG, T. (2009) Changes in middle school students’ motivation toward physical education over one school year. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 28, 378-399. HAIR, J. F., BLACK, B., BABIN, B., ANDERSON, R. E., & TATHAM, R. L. (2006) Multivariate data analysis. (6th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. HALLAL, P. C., VICTORA, C. G., AZEVEDO, M. R., & WELLS, J. C. (2006) Adolescent physical activity and health: a systematic review. Sports Medicine, 36, 1019-1030. HARDMAN, K. (2008) Physical education in schools: a global perspective. Kinesiology, 40, 5-28. JAAKKOLA, T., WASHINGTON, T., & YLI-PIIPARI, S. (2013) The association between motivation in school physical education and self-reported physical activity during Finnish junior high school: a self-determination theory approach. European Physical Education Review, 19, 127-141. KALAJA, S., JAAKKOLA, T., & LIUKKONEN, J. (2010) Fundamental movement skills and motivational factors influencing engagement in physical activity. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 111, 115-128. LONSDALE, C., SABISTON, C. M., RAEDEKE, T. D., HA, A. S. C., & SUM, R. K. W. (2009) Selfdetermined motivation and students´ physical activity during structured physical education lessons and free choice periods. Preventive Medicine, 48, 69-73. MAYORGA-VEGA, D., VICIANA, J., COCCA, A., & DE RUEDA VILLÉN, B. (2012) Effect of a physical fitness program on physical self-concept and physical fitness elements in primary school students. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 115, 984-996. MCAULEY, E., DUNCAN, T., & TAMMEN, V. V. (1989) Psychometric properties of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory in a competitive sport setting: a confirmatory factor analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 60, 48-58. MCKENZIE, T. L. (2007) The preparation of physical educators: a public health perspective. Quest, 59, 346-357. MORENO, J. A., HELLÍN, P., HELLÍN, G., CERVELLÓ, E., & SICILIA, A. (2008) Assessment of motivation in Spanish physical education students: applying achievement goals and self-determination theories. The Open Education Journal, 1, 15-22.


24/05/14 9:19 AM

678


MORENO-MURCIA, J. A., CERVELLÓ GIMENO, E., MONTERO CARRETERO, C., VERA LACÁRCEL, J. A., & GARCÍA CALVO, T. (2012) Metas sociales, necesidades psicológicas básicas y motivación intrínseca como predictores de la percepción del esfuerzo en las clases de educación física [Social goals, basic psychological needs, and intrinsic motivation as predictors of the perception of effort in physical education]. Revista de Psicología del Deporte, 21, 215-221. NAVAS MARTÍNEZ, L., SORIANO LLORCA, J. A., & HOLGADO TELLO, F. P. (2012) Metas múltiples y rendimiento académico: perfiles motivacionales en educación física [Multiple goals and academic performance: motivational profiles in physical education]. Revista Mexicana de Psicología, 29, 33-39. [Abstract] NTOUMANIS, N. (2002) Motivational clusters in a sample of British physical education classes. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 3, 177-194. NÚÑEZ ALONSO, J. L., MARTÍN-ALBO LUCAS, J., & NAVARRO IZQUIERDO, J. G. (2007) Propiedades psicométricas de la version española de la Escala de Motivación Deportiva [Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Sport Motivation Scale]. Revista de Psicología del Deporte, 16, 211-223. ORTEGA, F. B., RUIZ, J. R., CASTILLO, M. J., & SJÖSTRÖM, M. (2008) Physical fitness in childhood and adolescence: a powerful marker of health. International Journal of Obesity, 32, 1-11. PELLETIER, L. G., FORTIER, M. S., VALLERAND, R. J., TUSON, K. M., BRIÈRE, N. M., & BLAIS, M. R. (1995) Toward a new measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation in sports: the Sport Motivation Scale (SMS). Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17, 35-53. RYAN, R. M., WILLIAMS, G. C., PATRICK, H., & DECI, E. L. (2009) Self-determination theory and physical activity: the dynamics of motivation in development and wellness. Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 6, 107-124. SHEPHARD, R. J. (2003) Limits to the measurement of habitual physical activity by questionnaires. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 37, 197-206. SILVA, P., AIRES, L., SANTOS, R. M., VALE, S., WELK, G. J., & MOTA, J. (2011) Lifespan snapshot of physical activity assessed by accelerometry in Porto. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 8, 352-360. ULLRICH-FRENCH, S., & COX, A. (2009) Using cluster analysis to examine the combinations of motivation regulations of physical education students. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 31, 358-379. VALLERAND, R. J., FORTIER, M. S., & GAYA, F. (1997) Self-determination and persistence in a real-life setting: toward a motivational model of high school dropout. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1161-1176. VALLERAND, R. J., & RATELLE, C. F. (2002) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: a hierarchical model. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: Univer. of Rochester Press. Pp. 37-63. WANG, C. K. J., & BIDDLE, S. J. H. (2001) Young people’s motivational profiles in physical activity: a cluster analysis. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 23, 1-22. WANG, C. K. J., CHATZISARANTIS, N. L. D., SPRAY, C. M., & BIDDLE, S. J. H. (2002) Achievement goal profiles in school physical education: differences in self-determination, sport ability beliefs, and physical activity. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 433-445. WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. (2010) Global recommendation on physical activity for health. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.


24/05/14 9:19 AM


679

XIANG, P., MCBRIDE, R., & GUAN, J. M. (2004) Children’s motivation in elementary physical education: a longitudinal study. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75, 71-80. YLI-PIIPARI, S., WATT, A., JAAKKOLA, T., LIUKKONEN, J., & NURMI, J. (2009) Relationship between physical education students’ motivational profiles, enjoyment, state anxiety, and self-reported physical activity. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, 8, 327336. ZHANG, T. (2009) Relations among school students’ self-determined motivation, perceived enjoyment, effort, and physical activity behaviors. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 109, 783-790. ZIMMERMANN-SLOUTSKIS, D., WANNER, M., ZIMMERMANN, E., & MARTIN, B. W. (2010) Physical activity levels and determinants of change in young adults: a longitudinal panel study. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 7, 1-13. Accepted March 25, 2014.


24/05/14 9:19 AM

Analysis of motivational profiles of satisfaction and importance of physical education in high school adolescents.

Physical activity levels of adolescents with and without intellectual disabilities during physical education and recess.

Relationships between physical education students' motivational profiles, enjoyment, state anxiety, and self-reported physical activity.

Motivational profiles and achievement goal dominance in physical education.

Outside-school physical activity participation and motivation in physical education.

Increasing children's physical activity during school recess periods.

Barriers to delivering extracurricular school sport and physical activity in Wales: a qualitative study of 5x60 officers' views and perspectives.

A Comparison of Children's Physical Activity Levels in Physical Education, Recess, and Exergaming.

Increasing physical activity of children during school recess.

Physical Activity Trajectories During Daily Middle School Physical Education.

Recess physical activity and perceived school environment among elementary school children.

Effects of daily physical education on physical fitness and weight status in middle school adolescents.

Characteristics of extracurricular physical activity and cognitive performance in adolescents. The AVENA study.

Motivational profiles in physical education and their relation to the theory of planned behavior.

Physical activity counseling in medical school education: a systematic review.

Association between physical activity, participation in Physical Education classes, and social isolation in adolescents.

Motivational considerations in physical activity involvement.

Increasing physical activity levels in primary school physical education: The SHARP Principles Model.

Physical education or playtime: which is more effective at promoting physical activity in primary school children?

Consistency of Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity in Middle School Physical Education.

Prediction of enjoyment in school physical education.

School reform: the role of physical education policy in physical activity of elementary school children in Alabama's Black Belt Region.

A Motivational Model of Physical Education and Links to Enjoyment, Knowledge, Performance, Total Physical Activity and Body Mass Index.

Variations in adolescents' motivational characteristics across gender and physical activity patterns: A latent class analysis approach.