Exercise Habit and M-PAC

May 29, 2016 updated by: Navin Kaushal, University of Victoria

Facilitating an Exercise Habit Via the Multi-Process Action Control Model: A Randomized-Controlled Trial

The promotion of physical activity (PA) is paramount to public health, yet interventions in the social cognitive tradition have yielded negligible improvements. Two reasons for these results may be the over reliance on intention as the proximal determinant of behaviour and a lack of consideration of implicit/automatic determinants of PA. The purpose of this study was to apply Multi-Process Action Control (M-PAC), a framework centered on PA intention-translation and the gradual building of habit to examine PA change using a two-arm parallel design, randomized controlled trial.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Background: Two of the most prominent limitations of traditional social cognitive models used to understand moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) are the gap between intention and behaviour and the lack of consideration of implicit processes in behavioural enactment. Thus, new models are now being examined that attempt to consider these potential limitations. Multi-Process Action Control (M-PAC) is one such attempt to build a more comprehensive schematic, whereby intention is established via the means of constructs from traditional social cognitive theories (i.e., outcome expectations, perceived capability), but the success of translating this intention to behaviour depends on behavioural-regulation (self-regulatory tactics) (BR), affective judgments (expected pleasure) (AJ) and opportunity (time, access). Over time, M-PAC proposes that habit (stimulus -behaviour bonds) and identity (role-behaviour bonds) develop from performing the behaviour and largely contribute to the maintenance of PA.

Aim: The purpose of this study was to conduct at two-arm parallel design, RCT to determine if the M-PAC experimental group would demonstrate greater change in PA and post-intention constructs across time.

Methods: Participants (n=94) were inactive new gym members and were randomized into a control or M-PAC experimental group. The experimental group attended a workshop and received a booster phone call follow-up at week four. Measures for both groups included accelerometry and M-PAC at baseline and at week eight.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

94

Phase

  • Phase 2
  • Phase 3

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Canada
    • British Columbia
      • Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, V8W 2Y2
        • University of Victoria

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 65 years (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • New gym member
  • age 18-65
  • Par-Q pass

Exclusion Criteria:

  • age <18 or 65+
  • Par-Q fail

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: PREVENTION
  • Allocation: RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: PARALLEL
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
EXPERIMENTAL: Intervention
Those who were randomized into the intervention group attended a workshop where the PI delivered a presentation that focused on establishing a preparatory exercise habit by using the M-PAC approach and proposed habit model. Participants were then provided with instructions on completing their exercise plan sheet.
Behavioral: M-PAC Group
Participants attended a workshop, completed a worksheet and received a booster phone call follow-up at week four.
NO_INTERVENTION: Control
Participants exercised on their own without receiving any instructions.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
GT3X+ Actigraph Activity Monitors (for measuring physical activity)
Time Frame: Baseline to week eight
Participants wear accelerometers for one week at baseline and at week eight to record their physical activity.
Baseline to week eight

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Self-Report Behavioural Automaticity Index (self report, survey question)
Time Frame: Baseline, week four, week eight
The Self-Report Behavioral Automaticity Index (SRBAI) was used to assess preparatory habit. The SRBAI consists of 4 items on a 5-point Likert scale with 1 being strongly disagree to 5 being strongly agree. The question stem stated ''When I prepare to exercise…'' which was then followed by four items on the scale: ''I do it without having to consciously remember'', ''I do it automatically'', ''I do it without thinking'', and ''I start before I realize I am doing it''.
Baseline, week four, week eight

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Environmental Cues (self report, survey question)
Time Frame: Baseline, week four, week eight
The following item was used to assess if participants implemented the use of cues: "I use cues at home to remind me to exercise (e.g. placing a water bottle on my desk or gym clothes on the bed). The item was rated on a five point Likert scale which ranged from "1=strongly disagree" to "5= strongly agree".
Baseline, week four, week eight
Temporal Consistency (self report, survey question)
Time Frame: Baseline, week four, week eight
The item was worded "How consistently do you exercise at the same time each day? (e.g., exercising every morning at 7 am, or exercising daily after supper)". The question was asked on a five point Likert scale which range from "1=not consistent at all" to "5=very consistent".
Baseline, week four, week eight

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

University of Victoria

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Navin Kaushal, PhD, University of Victoria

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

January 1, 2015

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

May 1, 2015

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

May 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 11, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 26, 2016

First Posted (ESTIMATE)

May 27, 2016

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)

June 1, 2016

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 29, 2016

Last Verified

May 1, 2016

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 14-306

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Public Health

Clinical Trials on M-PAC Group

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Spain

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Subscribe