Characterizing Relationships with Exercise Partners: Communication, Closeness, and Performance

C. Hill, Emery J. Max, G. M. Wittenbaum, D. Feltz
{"title":"Characterizing Relationships with Exercise Partners: Communication, Closeness, and Performance","authors":"C. Hill, Emery J. Max, G. M. Wittenbaum, D. Feltz","doi":"10.23937/2469-5718/1510167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social influence research in exercise has highlighted the motivation-boosting potential of working out with an exercise partner or group, but to the authors’ knowledge there has been no research to date characterizing the typical dyadic exercise relationship, which is an interpersonal relationship that includes regular co-exercise. If exercise partners are motivational, then characterizing their relationship is important. A sample of 555 undergraduates were administered a survey, 383 of whom met inclusion criteria and reported having or having had an exercise partner. Participants (77%) reported that their exercise relationships typically emerged out of previously existing relationships. Participants reported (on a 1-7 Inclusion of Other in Self Scale) that they were very close with their exercise partners (M = 5.07 + 1.56) and that (out of 10 discussion topic categories) they talked about a number of topics outside of exercise (M = 6.53 + 2.50) and during typical workouts (M = 4.21 + 2.69). Exercise dyadic relationships were characterized by mutual goal facilitation, and participants whose exercise relationships had dissolved or failed reported significantly lower interpersonal closeness, lower communication breadth, and more performance-based goals than participants who reported an ongoing exercise relationship (ps < 0.05). Participants exercised more often the more an exercise relationship was defined by exercise (p < 0.05), suggesting that exercise relationships that revolved around exercise were more immediately productive than exercise relationships that did not prioritize exercise.","PeriodicalId":91298,"journal":{"name":"International journal of sports and exercise medicine","volume":"228 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of sports and exercise medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23937/2469-5718/1510167","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Social influence research in exercise has highlighted the motivation-boosting potential of working out with an exercise partner or group, but to the authors’ knowledge there has been no research to date characterizing the typical dyadic exercise relationship, which is an interpersonal relationship that includes regular co-exercise. If exercise partners are motivational, then characterizing their relationship is important. A sample of 555 undergraduates were administered a survey, 383 of whom met inclusion criteria and reported having or having had an exercise partner. Participants (77%) reported that their exercise relationships typically emerged out of previously existing relationships. Participants reported (on a 1-7 Inclusion of Other in Self Scale) that they were very close with their exercise partners (M = 5.07 + 1.56) and that (out of 10 discussion topic categories) they talked about a number of topics outside of exercise (M = 6.53 + 2.50) and during typical workouts (M = 4.21 + 2.69). Exercise dyadic relationships were characterized by mutual goal facilitation, and participants whose exercise relationships had dissolved or failed reported significantly lower interpersonal closeness, lower communication breadth, and more performance-based goals than participants who reported an ongoing exercise relationship (ps < 0.05). Participants exercised more often the more an exercise relationship was defined by exercise (p < 0.05), suggesting that exercise relationships that revolved around exercise were more immediately productive than exercise relationships that did not prioritize exercise.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与运动伙伴的关系特征:沟通、亲密和表现
运动的社会影响研究强调了与运动伙伴或团体一起锻炼的动力增强潜力,但据作者所知,迄今为止还没有研究描述典型的二元运动关系,这是一种包括定期共同运动的人际关系。如果运动伙伴具有激励作用,那么描述他们之间的关系就很重要。555名大学生参与了一项调查,其中383人符合纳入标准,并报告有或曾经有一个锻炼伙伴。参与者(77%)报告说,他们的运动关系通常是从以前存在的关系中产生的。参与者报告(在1-7的自我量表中包含他人)他们与运动伙伴非常亲密(M = 5.07 + 1.56),并且(在10个讨论主题类别中)他们在运动之外(M = 6.53 + 2.50)和在典型锻炼期间(M = 4.21 + 2.69)谈论许多话题。运动二元关系的特征是相互目标促进,与持续运动关系的参与者相比,运动关系解散或失败的参与者报告的人际亲密度、沟通广度和基于绩效的目标显著降低(ps < 0.05)。参与者运动的频率越高,运动关系越被定义为运动(p < 0.05),这表明以运动为中心的运动关系比不以运动为重点的运动关系更能立即产生效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Screening for Relative Energy Deficiency in Male Volleyball Players and the Usefulness of Accelerometers Detraining in Older Women: Influence of Previous Resistance Training with Different Exercise Orders on Muscular Strength, Flexibility and Functional Capacity HIIT vs. MICT to Improve Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Exercise Capacity in Older Adult The Effect of Short-Term Hyperbaric Treatment on Long COVID Symptoms: A Pilot Study Comparison of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior among Brazilian Preschool Children during the COVID-19 Physical Distancing Period
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1