Using Methods From Computational Decision-making to Predict Nonadherence to Fitness Goals: Protocol for an Observational Study

Marie McCarthy, Lili Zhang, Greta Monacelli, Tomas Ward, Marie McCarthy, Lili Zhang, Greta Monacelli, Tomas Ward

Abstract

Background: Can methods from computational models of decision-making be used to build a predictive model to identify individuals most likely to be nonadherent to personal fitness goals? Such a model may have significant value in the global battle against obesity. Despite growing awareness of the impact of physical inactivity on human health, sedentary behavior is increasingly linked to premature death in the developed world. The annual impact of sedentary behavior is significant, causing an estimated 2 million deaths. From a global perspective, sedentary behavior is one of the 10 leading causes of mortality and morbidity. Annually, considerable funding and countless public health initiatives are applied to promote physical fitness, with little impact on sustained behavioral change. Predictive models developed from multimodal methodologies combining data from decision-making tasks with contextual insights and objective physical activity data could be used to identify those most likely to abandon their fitness goals. This has the potential to enable development of more targeted support to ensure that those who embark on fitness programs are successful.

Objective: The aim of this study is to determine whether it is possible to use decision-making tasks such as the Iowa Gambling Task to help determine those most likely to abandon their fitness goals. Predictive models built using methods from computational models of decision-making, combining objective data from a fitness tracker with personality traits and modeling from decision-making games delivered via a mobile app, will be used to ascertain whether a predictive algorithm can identify digital personae most likely to be nonadherent to self-determined exercise goals. If it is possible to phenotype these individuals, it may be possible to tailor initiatives to support these individuals to continue exercising.

Methods: This is a siteless study design based on a bring your own device model. A total of 200 healthy adults who are novice exercisers and own a Fitbit (Fitbit Inc) physical activity tracker will be recruited via social media for this study. Participants will provide consent via the study app, which they will download from the Google Play store (Alphabet Inc) or Apple App Store (Apple Inc). They will also provide consent to share their Fitbit data. Necessary demographic information concerning age and sex will be collected as part of the recruitment process. Over 12 months, the scheduled study assessments will be pushed to the subjects to complete. The Iowa Gambling Task will be administered via a web app shared via a URL.

Results: Ethics approval was received from Dublin City University in December 2020. At manuscript submission, study recruitment was pending. The expected results will be published in 2022.

Conclusions: It is hoped that the study results will support the development of a predictive model and the study design will inform future research approaches.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04783298; https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT04783298.

Keywords: advanced analytics; computational modeling; computational psychology; decision-making games; fitness goals; fitness tracker; mobile app; mobile phone.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: MM is an employee of ICON Plc and is in receipt of a grant from the Irish Research Council.

©Marie McCarthy, Lili Zhang, Greta Monacelli, Tomas Ward. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 26.11.2021.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Screenshot of the web-based Iowa Gambling Task.

References

    1. World Health Organization . Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018–2030: More Active People for a Healthier World. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. pp. 1–101.
    1. Physical activity. World Health Organization. [2021-10-21]. .
    1. Strava reveals 2020 quitters day. Sports Insight. 2020. [2021-10-21]. .
    1. Sperandei S, Vieira MC, Reis AC. Adherence to physical activity in an unsupervised setting: explanatory variables for high attrition rates among fitness center members. J Sci Med Sport. 2016 Nov;19(11):916–20. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2015.12.522.S1440-2440(16)00006-2
    1. Emeterio I, García-Unanue J, Iglesias-Soler E, Felipe J, Gallardo L. Prediction of abandonment in Spanish fitness centres. Eur J Sport Sci. 2019 Mar 22;19(2):217–24. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2018.1510036.
    1. Shilts MK, Horowitz M, Townsend MS. Goal setting as a strategy for dietary and physical activity behavior change: a review of the literature. Am J Health Promot. 2004 Aug 26;19(2):81–93. doi: 10.4278/0890-1171-19.2.81.
    1. Tosi HL, Locke EA, Latham GP. A theory of goal setting and task performance. Acad Manag Rev. 1991 Apr;16(2):480. doi: 10.2307/258875.
    1. Locke EA, Latham GP. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: a 35-year odyssey. Am Psychol. 2002 Sep;57(9):705–17. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.57.9.705.
    1. Locke EA, Latham GP. The development of goal setting theory: a half century retrospective. Motivat Sci. 2019 Jun;5(2):93–105. doi: 10.1037/mot0000127.
    1. Swann C, Rosenbaum S, Lawrence A, Vella SA, McEwan D, Ekkekakis P. Updating goal-setting theory in physical activity promotion: a critical conceptual review. Health Psychol Rev. 2021 Mar 27;15(1):34–50. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2019.1706616.
    1. Bandura A. Self-Efficacy in Changing Societies. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; 1995.
    1. Daniali S, Darani F, Eslami A, Mazaheri M. Relationship between self-efficacy and physical activity, medication adherence in chronic disease patients. Adv Biomed Res. 2017;6(1):63. doi: 10.4103/2277-9175.190997. ABR-6-63
    1. Bauman AE, Reis RS, Sallis JF, Wells JC, Loos RJ, Martin BW. Correlates of physical activity: why are some people physically active and others not? Lancet. 2012 Jul;380(9838):258–71. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60735-1.
    1. Bandura A. Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Educ Behav. 2004 Apr 30;31(2):143–64. doi: 10.1177/1090198104263660.
    1. Marcus BH, Selby VC, Niaura RS, Rossi JS. Self-efficacy and the stages of exercise behavior change. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1992 Mar;63(1):60–6. doi: 10.1080/02701367.1992.10607557.
    1. Denollet J. DS14: standard assessment of negative affectivity, social inhibition, and Type D personality. Psychosom Med. 2005;67(1):89–97. doi: 10.1097/01.psy.0000149256.81953.49.67/1/89
    1. Denollet J, Brutsaert DL. Personality, disease severity, and the risk of long-term cardiac events in patients with a decreased ejection fraction after myocardial infarction. Circulation. 1998 Jan 20;97(2):167–73. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.97.2.167.
    1. Wu J, Moser DK. Type D personality predicts poor medication adherence in patients with heart failure in the USA. Int J Behav Med. 2014 Nov 6;21(5):833–42. doi: 10.1007/s12529-013-9366-2.
    1. Molloy G, Randall G, Wikman A, Perkins-Porras L, Messerli-Bürgy N, Steptoe A. Type D personality, self-efficacy, and medication adherence following an acute coronary syndrome. Psychosom Med. 2012 Jan;74(1):100–6. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e31823a5b2f.PSY.0b013e31823a5b2f
    1. Li X, Zhang S, Xu H, Tang X, Zhou H, Yuan J, Wang X, Qu Z, Wang F, Zhu H, Guo S, Tian D, Zhang W. Type D personality predicts poor medication adherence in chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a six-month follow-up study. PLoS One. 2016 Feb 19;11(2):e0146892. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146892. PONE-D-15-38387
    1. Conti C, Carrozzino D, Patierno C, Vitacolonna E, Fulcheri M. The clinical link between type D personality and diabetes. Front Psychiatry. 2016 Jun 21;7:113. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00113. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00113.
    1. Wiencierz S, Williams L. Type D personality and physical inactivity: the mediating effects of low self-efficacy. J Health Psychol. 2017 Jul 01;22(8):1025–34. doi: 10.1177/1359105315622557.1359105315622557
    1. Shao Y, Yin H, Wan C. Type D personality as a predictor of self-efficacy and social support in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2017 Mar;Volume 13:855–61. doi: 10.2147/ndt.s128432.
    1. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF. The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am J Health Promot. 1997 Aug 26;12(1):38–48. doi: 10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.38.
    1. Bridle C, Riemsma RP, Pattenden J, Sowden AJ, Mather L, Watt IS, Walker A. Systematic review of the effectiveness of health behavior interventions based on the transtheoretical model. Psychol Health. 2007 Feb 01;20(3):283–301. doi: 10.1080/08870440512331333997.
    1. Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am Psychol. 1982;37(2):122–47. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.37.2.122.
    1. World Health Organization . Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010. pp. 1–58.
    1. Ahn W, Dai J, Vassileva J, Busemeyer J, Stout J. Computational modeling for addiction medicine: from cognitive models to clinical applications. Prog Brain Res. 2016;224:53–65. doi: 10.1016/bs.pbr.2015.07.032.S0079-6123(15)00138-7
    1. Bechara A, Damasio AR, Damasio H, Anderson SW. Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition. 1994 Apr;50(1-3):7–15. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90018-3.
    1. Buelow MT, Suhr JA. Construct validity of the Iowa Gambling Task. Neuropsychol Rev. 2009 Mar 5;19(1):102–14. doi: 10.1007/s11065-009-9083-4.
    1. Cavedini P, Bassi T, Ubbiali A, Casolari A, Giordani S, Zorzi C, Bellodi L. Neuropsychological investigation of decision-making in anorexia nervosa. Psychiatry Res. 2004 Jul 15;127(3):259–66. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2004.03.012.S0165178104000988
    1. Steingroever H, Pachur T, Šmíra M, Lee MD. Bayesian techniques for analyzing group differences in the Iowa Gambling Task: a case study of intuitive and deliberate decision-makers. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Jun 6;25(3):951–70. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1331-7. 10.3758/s13423-017-1331-7
    1. Arkes HR, Herren LT, Isen AM. The role of potential loss in the influence of affect on risk-taking behavior. Organizat Behav Hum Decis Proc. 1988 Oct;42(2):181–93. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(88)90011-8.
    1. Nygren TE. Reacting to perceived high- and low-risk win–lose opportunities in a risky decision-making task: is it framing or affect or both? Motivat Emot. 1998:73–98. doi: 10.1023/A:1023096709380.
    1. Suhr JA, Tsanadis J. Affect and personality correlates of the Iowa Gambling Task. Personal Indiv Diff. 2007 Jul;43(1):27–36. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.11.004.
    1. Buelow MT, Suhr JA. Personality characteristics and state mood influence individual deck selections on the Iowa Gambling Task. Personal Indiv Diff. 2013 Apr;54(5):593–7. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.019.
    1. Bechara A, Damasio H, Damasio A. Emotion, decision making and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cereb Cortex. 2000 Mar;10(3):295–307. doi: 10.1093/cercor/10.3.295.
    1. Bull PN, Tippett LJ, Addis DR. Decision making in healthy participants on the Iowa Gambling Task: new insights from an operant approach. Front Psychol. 2015 Apr 07;6:391. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00391. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00391.
    1. Lin C, Song T, Chen Y, Lee W, Chiu Y. Reexamining the validity and reliability of the clinical version of the iowa gambling task: evidence from a normal subject group. Front Psychol. 2013;4:220. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00220. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00220.
    1. Aram S, Levy L, Patel JB, Anderson AA, Zaragoza R, Dashtestani H, Chowdhry FA, Gandjbakhche A, Tracy JK. The Iowa Gambling Task: a review of the historical evolution, scientific basis, and use in functional neuroimaging. SAGE Open. 2019 Jul 02;9(3):215824401985691. doi: 10.1177/2158244019856911.
    1. Steingroever H, Wetzels R, Horstmann A, Neumann J, Wagenmakers E. Performance of healthy participants on the Iowa Gambling Task. Psychol Assess. 2013 Mar;25(1):180–93. doi: 10.1037/a0029929.2012-25099-001
    1. Suhr J, Hammers D. Who fails the Iowa Gambling Test (IGT)? Personality, neuropsychological, and near-infrared spectroscopy findings in healthy young controls. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2010 Jun 17;25(4):293–302. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acq017.acq017
    1. Chiu Y, Lin C, Huang J, Lin S, Lee P, Hsieh J. Immediate gain is long-term loss: are there foresighted decision makers in the Iowa Gambling Task? Behav Brain Funct. 2008 Mar 19;4(1):13. doi: 10.1186/1744-9081-4-13. 1744-9081-4-13
    1. Busemeyer JR, Stout JC. A contribution of cognitive decision models to clinical assessment: decomposing performance on the Bechara gambling task. Psychol Assess. 2002;14(3):253–62. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.14.3.253.
    1. Ahn W, Busemeyer J, Wagenmakers E, Stout J. Comparison of decision learning models using the generalization criterion method. Cogn Sci. 2008 Dec;32(8):1376–402. doi: 10.1080/03640210802352992. doi: 10.1080/03640210802352992.
    1. Fridberg DJ, Queller S, Ahn W, Kim W, Bishara AJ, Busemeyer JR, Porrino L, Stout JC. Cognitive mechanisms underlying risky decision-making in chronic cannabis users. J Math Psychol. 2010 Feb 01;54(1):28–38. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2009.10.002.
    1. Ahn W, Krawitz A, Kim W, Busmeyer JR, Brown JW. A model-based fMRI analysis with hierarchical Bayesian parameter estimation. J Neurosci Psychol Econ. 2011 May;4(2):95–110. doi: 10.1037/a0020684.
    1. Dai J, Kerestes R, Upton DJ, Busemeyer JR, Stout JC. An improved cognitive model of the Iowa and Soochow Gambling Tasks with regard to model fitting performance and tests of parameter consistency. Front Psychol. 2015 Mar 12;6:229. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00229. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00229.
    1. Worthy DA, Pang B, Byrne KA. Decomposing the roles of perseveration and expected value representation in models of the Iowa Gambling Task. Front Psychol. 2013;4:640. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00640. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00640.
    1. Haines N, Vassileva J, Ahn W. The outcome-representation learning model: a novel reinforcement learning model of the iowa gambling task. Cogn Sci. 2018 Nov 05;42(8):2534–61. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12688.
    1. Steingroever H, Wetzels R, Wagenmakers E. Absolute performance of reinforcement-learning models for the Iowa Gambling Task. Decision. 2014;1(3):161–83. doi: 10.1037/dec0000005.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera