Exercise Psychology
What Is Exercise Psychology
​
Exercise psychology professionals are concerned with how involvement in sport, exercise, and physical activity may improve personal growth, development and well-being throughout a person's lifespan. Additionally, sports psychologists are also interested in assisting coaches in working with athletes as well as improving athletes' motivation levels. Sports psychology has been defined as (i) ‘the study of the psychological and mental factors that influence and are influenced by participation and performance in sport, exercise, and physical activity, and (ii) ‘the application of the knowledge gained through this study to everyday settings’ [American Psychological Association].
​
What is Physical Activity?
​
This section introduces you to the fundamental models linking physical activity and health. Additionally, we outline the difficulties faced by applied social psychologists in the field of physical activity and health. The aim, therefore, is to provide necessary contextual awareness of the health, social, and economic problems existing by inactive population groups in a developed world. The emphasis is on the significance of applied social psychology to inform and drive interventions to increase the levels of physical activity behaviour in sedentary population groups. Also, the different social-psychological theoretical methods to physical activity behaviour will be discussed. Individuals often discuss sport, exercise, and physical activity in a diverse, unstructured way, and sometimes use the terms synonymously. It appears, that people do not understand the differences between these modes of physical activity. It is, therefore, necessary that these terms are correctly defined before discussing the importance of physical activity to health and how social psychology can contribute to an understanding of these behaviours.
​
The term physical activity is usually used to refer to all modes of physical movement that expends energy, regardless of features ( i.e. type, location, model, and intensity). Pate et al. (1995) defined physical activity as ‘any bodily movement produced by skeletal muscles that result in energy expenditure’. Physical activity can, therefore, be deemed as an umbrella term under which other more specific forms of physical activity fall (e.g. exercise and sport are subtypes of physical activity). Exercise has been commonly referred to as structured physical activity with the overriding purpose of improving individuals physical health benefits (i.e. losing weight). Examples of these types of exercise activities include jogging, cycling, swimming, rowing, and walking.
Sport is another mode of physical activity but is more organised and structured than exercise. Traditional sports normally has explicit sets of rules, and usually includes competition with others. Exercise can, however, also be less structured with certain professions requiring physical movements (lifting and moving objects) while others require walking to complete work objectives. Essentially, exercise has several elements that determine the degree of health benefit it can provide (i.e. type, intensity, frequency, and duration). Exercises that involve and recruits large muscle groups over extended periods and is of a vigorous intensity tends to be preferred by exercise professionals because this type of exercise places a greater degree of physiological stress on the cardiovascular system and conceivably increases the daily energy expenditure of the individual. If individuals perform the exercise activity frequently it can assist in ameliorating risk from cardiovascular disease, promote skeletal and psychological health, and can reduce the risk of other illnesses (i.e. cancer, type II diabetes, and obesity).
​
The Physical Inactivity Epidemic
​
There is a strong body of evidence that supports the inter-relationship between regular and vigorous physical activity and cardiovascular, skeletal, and mental health. Research has also focused on the descriptive epidemiology of physical sedentariness among populations in the developed world. Such research aims to understand the degree to which people achieve the suggested levels of physical activity associated with good health.
​
Results from such studies have suggested that there is an epidemic of inactivity among these populations. Evidence from national health surveys in the United States (Centres for Disease Control and Prevention 2014) and the United Kingdom (British Heart Foundation 2015) reports that approximately 30 per cent of people did not participate in any physical activity. In 2012, Scotland and England met the guidelines (67% of males over 16 years). More males achieved the recommendations than females with physical activity declining with age for both genders. For example, in Scotland, 68% of females aged 16-to-24 achieved the physical activity guidelines, but in women aged over 75 only 21% did. Data from the Welsh Health Survey (2013) reported that 37% of males and 23% of females were active on five or more days per week (data based on pre-2011 guidelines). Forty-seven per cent of females were active for one day or less in the past week. Males aged between 16-34 were the most active, with 44% performing physical activity on five or more days. However, activity levels then declined with age. In females, the percentage of those active remained similar between 16-to-54 years (26%). With activity declining after 55 years and only 9% of females over 75 meeting recommendations in physical activity.
A European Commission report on physical activity levels (2014) presented findings from interviews conducted in all 28 European Union (EU) states, examining the physical activity levels of individuals. Self‑reported rates of regularly exercising or participating in sport varied considerably by country (although issues of report and recall bias, may show differences between countries). Bulgaria had the lowest prevalence, with only 2% of adults in these countries reporting that they exercised regularly. Ireland had the highest reported prevalence of regular exercise (16%). In the United Kingdom 10% of adults stated that they exercise or play sport regularly, higher than the EU average of 8%, these were both slightly lower than found in 2009 (UK = 14%, EU = 9%).
​
Figure 1. Adults regularly exercising or playing sport by country, EU 2013 (British Heart Foundation 2015)
The principal premise of the theory of reasoned action has been reinforced in various studies on different behaviours (Sheppard et al. 1988), including exercise (Hausenblas et al. 1997). In the exercise field, investigations of the theory of reasoned action have offered evidence for the overall predictive value of intentions and have suggested that individuals’ attitudes influence their intents with a negligible role for subjective norms (Hagger et al. 2002b). Seminal research applying the theory of reasoned action in the exercise setting has also that the large effect of attitudes and small effect of subjective norms on intentions are not influenced by whether belief-based or direct measures of attitudes and subjective norms have been applied (Theodorakis et al. 1991a). Furthermore, studies have suggested that the effects of attitudes on intentions persist over time (Hagger et al. 2001).
Conditions of the theory of reasoned action
​
While research has repeatedly supported the validity of the theory of reasoned action (Sheppard et al. 1988), three conditions, defined by Ajzen and Fishbein (1980), restrict the value of the theory of reasoned action in predicting and describing behaviour. These are the conditions of correspondence, stability, and volitional control. The condition of correspondence states that the predictive efficacy of the theory of reasoned action variables such as intention is developed when measures of intentions and measures of behaviour are articulated in a manner that resembles in four significant ways: action (e.g. exercise); target at which action is directed (e.g. three times per week); time at which the behaviour is performed (e.g. over the next two months); and the context in which the action is accomplished (e.g. during leisure time). If the measures of constructs such as intentions do not match, the behaviour in one or more of these components, the predictive validity of intentions will decrease.
The second condition infers those intentions will predict behaviour if intentions have not altered before the behaviour is identified. Conversely, intentions are more liable to change the longer the time interval between assessments of intentions and behaviour. This is because of the increased probability that new information will be made available to the individual which would possibly change or modify their intentions.
Lastly. the third condition suggests that intentions will only predict behaviours that are under the volitional control of the individual (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). Normally behaviours are under complete volitional control when they can be performed at will and are not aided or impeded by personal and/or environmental factors (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980; Ajzen 1985). When other factors impact the performance of behaviour and the individual cannot control the effect these other factors have on behaviour, intentions may be less effective as predictors of behaviour.
​
The theory of planned behaviour
​
While the theory of reasoned action has been effective in predicting and explaining engagement in physical activities, the conditions of complete control were suggested to be impractical and a key constraint of this model. This led to Ajzen suggesting the model of planned behaviour to account for behaviours that are not under volitional control. The theory of planned behaviour suggests that intention is a vital determinant of social behaviour, and that intention is a function of attitudes and subjective norms with related behavioural and normative beliefs. Additionally, the theory of planned behaviour recognises that intentions explain behaviour only when it is under complete volitional control. However, the theory of planned behaviour also suggests that when perceived control over behaviour is challenging, an additional factor, perceived behavioural control, can influence the performance of behaviour (Ajzen 1985).
According to Ajzen (1991), the view of perceived behavioural control denotes the normal perceptions of control. Ajzen compared it to Bandura’s (1977) construct of self-efficacy that captures judgements of how well an individual can perform volitional behaviours needed to produce key outcomes. The construct of perceived behavioural control is also emphasised by a set of control beliefs and the perceived power of these beliefs (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). Control beliefs refer to the perceived presence of factors that may aid or impede the performance of the behaviour, and perceived power refers to the perceived bearing that facilitative or inhibiting features may have on the performance of behaviour (Ajzen 1991).
The addition of perceived behavioural control in the model of reasoned action is vital because it shows the personal and environmental features that affect the performance of behaviour (Ajzen 1985). Therefore, the investigator can appraise which behaviours are under the volitional control of the individual and the degree to which the behaviour is inhibited by personal and/or environmental factors. Ajzen (1991) postulated that when control over the behaviour was challenging, perceived behavioural control would exert two types of effects within the theory of planned behaviour. Firstly, perceived behavioural control would affect intentions together with attitudes and subjective norms. This reflects the motivational influence of perceived control on decisions to exercise. For instance, an individual conveying positive attitudes and subjective norms toward exercise, but low perceived behavioural control is unlikely to report stronger intentions to exercise than an individual reporting similar positive attitudes and subjective norms but higher levels of perceived behavioural control. Secondly, perceived behavioural control may predict behaviour directly particularly when perceptions of behavioural control are representative. This mirrors the effect of actual, real constraints or barriers to performing the behaviour. In this case, perceived behavioural control is a representative measure of actual control over the behaviour (Ajzen 1991).
​
Several studies have indicated that the theory of planned behaviour is superior to the theory of reasoned action in predicting and explaining volitional behaviour (Armitage and Conner 2001). For instance, meta-analytic evidence (Armitage and Conner, 2001) has reinforced the constant effect of perceived behavioural control on behavioural intentions. Furthermore, it has been suggested that the effect of perceived behavioural control on intentions is strong and that it is not subjective by questionnaire format or social allure (Armitage and Conner 1999a). Moreover, studies have shown that the effect of perceived behavioural control on intentions is specifically evident for behaviours that are problematic to apply, are not under the control of volitional practices and for individuals who do not believe that they could control behaviour and outcomes (Sheeran, 2002). Lastly, several studies have shown that the effects of perceived behavioural control on intentions remain constant over time (Hagger et al. 2001).
Despite this supporting evidence, a few studies have determined that, in comparison to the effect of perceived behavioural control on intentions, the direct effect of perceived behavioural control on behaviour is trivial (Armitage and Conner 2001), and non-significant when belief-based methods of behavioural control are applied and when perceptions of control are not representative (Notani 1998).
In the exercise field, studies have reinforced the premise of the theory of planned behaviour in an array of exercise settings (Hagger et al. 2002b). Evidence indicates that the theory of planned behaviour has a greater predictive value than the health belief model and protection motivation theory (Quine et al. 1998). Furthermore, several studies have demonstrated that perceived behavioural control predicts both intentions and behaviour comparably Hagger et al. 2002a). Research has reported that perceived behavioural control regulates the attitude–intention association so that attitudes predict intentions only among people who report high levels of perceived behavioural control (Ajzen 1991).
​
Several studies have also acknowledged positive control beliefs involving barriers and facilitating factors linked to exercise (i.e., such as ‘bad weather’, ‘age’, ‘heart pain’, ‘costs’, ‘fatigue’, ‘no time’ [Godin et al. 1991]). As with behavioural and normative beliefs, studies have shown that control beliefs differ substantially across distinctive populations and behaviours. For example, studies in the exercise sphere have acknowledged ‘age’ and ‘fear of having a heart attack’ among the control beliefs for older and clinical populations (Godin et al. 1991), however, these beliefs do not feature among the control beliefs of the younger populace.
Social Cognitive Theories of Clients Exercise Behaviour
​
Understanding regular participation in exercise requires an understanding of the psychological constructs that predict and explain exercise behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). This section aims to review the formative and applied research in social psychology on theories of social cognition and exercise behaviour. Conjoint to these theories is the inclusion of belief-based concepts including attitudes and motivational constructs such as intentions that are learned from preceding experience. Another important aspect of these models is that they focus on the development of motivation and the processes that lead to intentions. They do not challenge the more automatic processes that led to intentions nor do they aim to clarify the mechanisms by which intentions are transformed into behaviour.
Intentions and Social Cognitive Models of Exercise Behaviour
​
Numerous social psychological theories of human motivation feature the concept of intention. These theories propose that people are logical decision-makers who engage in the targeted behaviour by processing the accessible information concerning the advantages and disadvantages associated with that behaviour. Theories of planned behaviour also share the belief that human motivation is unidimensional (Deci and Ryan 1985) and that the notion of intentions, which represents motivation, is the most direct factor of human action (Ajzen 1991). Essentially, these theories concentrate on intention development and do not provide an explanation for the processes that underpin the representation of previously formed intentions (Ajzen 2006).
The Health Belief Model
​
The health belief model suggests that an individual’s readiness (intention) to perform a health behaviour is a function of the individual’s perceived susceptibility to a health condition and the apparent severity of that condition (Rosenstock 1974). This model suggests that readiness is determined by the individual’s beliefs about the benefits to be gained by specific behaviour, offset by their perceived barriers to doing that behaviour. Finally, the model suggests that readiness may not result in an apparent action unless some initiating event transpires to set the action process in motion.
​
Generally, the health belief model suggests that if an individual feels exposed to an illness, and if they perceived it to be severe, and they believe that a particular health behaviour will reduce the health threat associated with that illness, then they will have a high degree of readiness to engage in the health behaviour. For example, individuals may feel susceptible to cardiovascular disease because they have a poor diet and have been told by their doctor that they have hypertension. They may also believe that regular exercise will reduce the threat of cardiovascular disease. According to the health belief model, these perceptions are likely to motivate the individual to engage in exercise behaviours (Figure 2).
​
Protection Motivation Theory
Rogers (1983) proposed the protection motivation theory (Figure 3) which is comparable to the health belief model and suggests that the performance of health behaviour is a function of two distinct considerations: (i) threat appraisals and (ii) coping appraisals concerning an illness that poses a significant health risk. As in the health belief model, threat/risk appraisals result from two sets of beliefs: perceived susceptibility and perceived severity. Perceived susceptibility is the individuals' belief that they are vulnerable to the health threat and perceived severity is the individual's belief that the occurrence of the disease will have severe effects. Coping appraisals involve beliefs that a given behaviour will be effective in reducing the health threat (response efficacy) and beliefs that the individual possesses the necessary means to perform the health behaviour (self-efficacy beliefs), and beliefs regarding the perceived costs associated with performing the health behaviour (Rogers 1983). Protection motivation theory predicts that individuals will implement a health behaviour if they deem a disease to be severe and likely to occur and if they perceive that health behaviour is effective in reducing the health threat, something that they believe they are capable of doing.
.
Figure 2. The health belief model
Figure 3. Protection Motivation Theory
Considerations towards designing interventions based on the health belief model and the protection motivation theory
An important aspect concerning the design of any proposed intervention is the information provided/gathered about the content of interventions. Generally the greater the relative importance of a factor in predicting intentions, the more probable it is that changing that factor will influence intentions and finally the individual’s behaviour. Studies that have adopted the health belief model and the protection motivation theory have demonstrated that appraisals related to the health risk (i.e. perceived susceptibility/vulnerability and perceived severity) can affect intentions to exercise. Milne et al. (2006) has suggested that manipulation of the threat and coping appraisals may be the most effective method in an attempt to change exercise behaviour.
The Reasoned Action Theory
Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) developed the reasoned action concept which has been regarded as one of the most significant models of intentional behaviour. According to this theory, the performance of volitional behaviours (i.e. exercise) can be predicted from an individual’s specified intention to engage in the behaviour. Ajzen and Fishbein conjectured that intention suggests the degree of planning an individual puts into their impending behaviour and signifies how hard individuals are prepared to try and how much effort they believe they will exert in the performance of that behaviour.
The intention is assumed to be the most immediate or proximal precursor of behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). The intention is a function of a set of personal and normative perceptions regarding the performance of the behaviour, the attitudes and the subjective norms. Attitudes signify an overall positive or negative appraisal towards the target behaviour. Subjective norms represent perceived influences that may exert on the performance of the behaviour. The theory of reasoned action predicts that the more positive an individual’s attitude and subjective norm, the stronger their intentions to perform the behaviour. Lastly, intentions are hypothesised to lead directly to behavioural engagement and intentions are suggested to mediate the effects of attitudes and subjective norms on behaviour. Intentions are thus necessary to alter attitudes and subjective norms into behaviour.
Figure 4. Reasoned Action and Planned Behaviour
The principal premise of the theory of reasoned action has been reinforced in various studies on different behaviours (Sheppard et al. 1988), including exercise (Hausenblas et al. 1997). In the exercise field, investigations of the theory of reasoned action have offered evidence for the overall predictive value of intentions and have suggested that individuals’ attitudes influence their intents with a negligible role for subjective norms (Hagger et al. 2002b). Seminal research applying the theory of reasoned action in the exercise setting has also that the large effect of attitudes and small effect of subjective norms on intentions are not influenced by whether belief-based or direct measures of attitudes and subjective norms have been applied (Theodorakis et al. 1991a). Furthermore, studies have suggested that the effects of attitudes on intentions persist over time (Hagger et al. 2001).
Conditions of the theory of reasoned action
​
While research has repeatedly supported the validity of the theory of reasoned action (Sheppard et al. 1988), three conditions, defined by Ajzen and Fishbein (1980), restrict the value of the theory of reasoned action in predicting and describing behaviour. These are the conditions of correspondence, stability, and volitional control. The condition of correspondence states that the predictive efficacy of the theory of reasoned action variables such as intention is developed when measures of intentions and measures of behaviour are articulated in a manner that resembles in four significant ways: action (e.g. exercise); target at which action is directed (e.g. three times per week); time at which the behaviour is performed (e.g. over the next two months); and the context in which the action is accomplished (e.g. during leisure time). If the measures of constructs such as intentions do not match, the behaviour in one or more of these components, the predictive validity of intentions will decrease.
The second condition infers those intentions will predict behaviour if intentions have not altered before the behaviour is identified. Conversely, intentions are more liable to change the longer the time interval between assessments of intentions and behaviour. This is because of the increased probability that new information will be made available to the individual which would possibly change or modify their intentions.
Lastly. the third condition suggests that intentions will only predict behaviours that are under the volitional control of the individual (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). Normally behaviours are under complete volitional control when they can be performed at will and are not aided or impeded by personal and/or environmental factors (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980; Ajzen 1985). When other factors impact the performance of behaviour and the individual cannot control the effect these other factors have on behaviour, intentions may be less effective as predictors of behaviour.
​
The theory of planned behaviour
​
While the theory of reasoned action has been effective in predicting and explaining engagement in physical activities, the conditions of complete control were suggested to be impractical and a key constraint of this model. This led to Ajzen suggesting the model of planned behaviour to account for behaviours that are not under volitional control. The theory of planned behaviour suggests that intention is a vital determinant of social behaviour, and that intention is a function of attitudes and subjective norms with related behavioural and normative beliefs. Additionally, the theory of planned behaviour recognises that intentions explain behaviour only when it is under complete volitional control. However, the theory of planned behaviour also suggests that when perceived control over behaviour is challenging, an additional factor, perceived behavioural control, can influence the performance of behaviour (Ajzen 1985).
According to Ajzen (1991), the view of perceived behavioural control denotes the normal perceptions of control. Ajzen compared it to Bandura’s (1977) construct of self-efficacy that captures judgements of how well an individual can perform volitional behaviours needed to produce key outcomes. The construct of perceived behavioural control is also emphasised by a set of control beliefs and the perceived power of these beliefs (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). Control beliefs refer to the perceived presence of factors that may aid or impede the performance of the behaviour, and perceived power refers to the perceived bearing that facilitative or inhibiting features may have on the performance of behaviour (Ajzen 1991).
The addition of perceived behavioural control in the model of reasoned action is vital because it shows the personal and environmental features that affect the performance of behaviour (Ajzen 1985). Therefore, the investigator can appraise which behaviours are under the volitional control of the individual and the degree to which the behaviour is inhibited by personal and/or environmental factors. Ajzen (1991) postulated that when control over the behaviour was challenging, perceived behavioural control would exert two types of effects within the theory of planned behaviour. Firstly, perceived behavioural control would affect intentions together with attitudes and subjective norms. This reflects the motivational influence of perceived control on decisions to exercise. For instance, an individual conveying positive attitudes and subjective norms toward exercise, but low perceived behavioural control is unlikely to report stronger intentions to exercise than an individual reporting similar positive attitudes and subjective norms but higher levels of perceived behavioural control. Secondly, perceived behavioural control may predict behaviour directly particularly when perceptions of behavioural control are representative. This mirrors the effect of actual, real constraints or barriers to performing the behaviour. In this case, perceived behavioural control is a representative measure of actual control over the behaviour (Ajzen 1991).
​
Several studies have indicated that the theory of planned behaviour is superior to the theory of reasoned action in predicting and explaining volitional behaviour (Armitage and Conner 2001). For instance, meta-analytic evidence (Armitage and Conner, 2001) has reinforced the constant effect of perceived behavioural control on behavioural intentions. Furthermore, it has been suggested that the effect of perceived behavioural control on intentions is strong and that it is not subjective by questionnaire format or social allure (Armitage and Conner 1999a). Moreover, studies have shown that the effect of perceived behavioural control on intentions is specifically evident for behaviours that are problematic to apply, are not under the control of volitional practices and for individuals who do not believe that they could control behaviour and outcomes (Sheeran, 2002). Lastly, several studies have shown that the effects of perceived behavioural control on intentions remain constant over time (Hagger et al. 2001).
Despite this supporting evidence, a few studies have determined that, in comparison to the effect of perceived behavioural control on intentions, the direct effect of perceived behavioural control on behaviour is trivial (Armitage and Conner 2001), and non-significant when belief-based methods of behavioural control are applied and when perceptions of control are not representative (Notani 1998).
In the exercise field, studies have reinforced the premise of the theory of planned behaviour in an array of exercise settings (Hagger et al. 2002b). Evidence indicates that the theory of planned behaviour has a greater predictive value than the health belief model and protection motivation theory (Quine et al. 1998). Furthermore, several studies have demonstrated that perceived behavioural control predicts both intentions and behaviour comparably Hagger et al. 2002a). Research has reported that perceived behavioural control regulates the attitude–intention association so that attitudes predict intentions only among people who report high levels of perceived behavioural control (Ajzen 1991).
​
A number of studies have also acknowledged positive control beliefs involving barriers and facilitating factors linked to exercise (i.e., such as ‘bad weather’, ‘age’, ‘heart pain’, ‘costs’, ‘fatigue’, ‘no time’ [Godin et al. 1991]). As with behavioural and normative beliefs, studies have shown that control beliefs differ substantially across distinctive populations and behaviours. For example, studies in the exercise sphere have acknowledged ‘age’ and ‘fear of having a heart attack’ among the control beliefs for older and clinical populations (Godin et al. 1991), however, these beliefs do not feature among the control beliefs of the younger populace.
Planning interventions centred on the theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour
​
Pragmatic research from trials implementing the concepts of reasoned action and planned behaviour have informed the development of interventions to promote exercise behaviour (Hardeman et al. 2002). Considering that seminal research has indicated that the theory of planned behaviour is more favourable compared to other models of social cognition such as the health belief model and the theory of reasoned action (Hausenblas et al. 1997; Quine et al. 1998), it can be proposed that exercise interventions should target attitudes and perceived behavioural control. These interventions should not target subjective norms or psychological variables promoted by the health belief model because these constructs have marginal effects on intention and behaviour.
​
The theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour recommend that attitudes and perceived behavioural control can change by altering the individual underlying belief mechanisms. According to Ajzen (1991), modifications in beliefs are likely to generate noticeable changes in attitudes, subjective norms, and/or perceptions of control only when the significant beliefs are targeted. Modal salient beliefs are the most regularly mentioned beliefs concerning the behaviour produced from the target population. Modal salient beliefs can be identified by using open-ended questionnaire techniques that require individuals to recall and list beliefs about the target behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980).
​
When salient beliefs have been identified, the theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour suggest persuasive communications in the form of leaflets, face-to-face discussion, observational modelling, or any other appropriate means that can be positively employed in designing the interventions. Persuasive communications are requests that may include arguments endorsing the positive aspects and outcomes of the target behaviour while at the same time modulating the negative features. One of the key facets of research implementing the theory of planned behaviour is concerned with the proposition that arguments are most persuasive when they are centred on accessible beliefs rather than non-accessible beliefs
​
For instance, a persuasive request that focuses on a change in the individual’s attitude towards exercise may take the form of the following text that focuses on the advantages and moderates the shortcomings of exercise:
​
-
Participating in regular exercise has numerous benefits. You may learn how to play a new sport as well as improving your general level of fitness and well-being at the same time. Exercise can also be great fun. It does not cause injuries or make you feel unpleasantly hot and sweaty if you exercise at intensity, you feel comfortable with.
​
This persuasive request should be effective in altering a young individual’s attitude because it focuses on the accessible behavioural beliefs of young people. Unfortunately, in the exercise sphere, limited studies have assessed the benefit of the theory of planned behaviour in promoting involvement in physical activities and many have produced inconsistent outcomes with substantial limits. For example, Rodgers and Brawley (1993) administered an exercise intervention to generate modifications in the subject’s affective attitudes and self-efficacy, resulting in related increases in participation in an exercise programme. Conversely, Smith and Biddle (1999), reported that an intervention targeting salient beliefs was not successful in altering attitudes, subjective norms, perception of control, and intentions. Such inconsistent results may be due to interventions aiming at non-accessible behavioural beliefs.
​
While the theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour provide general guidance on how to change intentions and behaviour, they do not specify how persuasive messages should be organised so that maximum effects can be attained. Specialists need to refer to theories of persuasion in enhancing the effectiveness of persuasive messages. The elaboration likelihood model is an accepted model of persuasion that has been widely used in studies of attitude alteration (Petty and Cacioppo 1986). The elaboration likelihood model postulates that there are two methods of changing attitudes.
​
Firstly, there is an essential path in which attitude changes because of thoughtful elaboration processes. Elaboration denotes the extent to which an individual is motivated to think carefully about the arguments enclosed in persuasive communication. Elaboration can be identified by calculating the number of thought processes that a person generates during information processing and/ or by assessing the quality of arguments presented in the persuasive communication (Petty and Cacioppo 1986). Secondly, there is a peripheral course to attitude change, which occurs because of non-thoughtful processes such as inference, associative, and exploratory methods. The elaboration likelihood model predicts that attitude change that occurs from the essential path determines greater temporal persistence and resistance to persuasion than attitude change that occurs from the peripheral route.
​
The elaboration likelihood model has been widely used in studies of social attitudes (Petty and Cacioppo 1986) but limited studies have applied it in combination with the theory of planned behaviour. However, Quine and associates (2001) demonstrated that a sequence of persuasive messages that motivate young cyclists to elaborate accessible beliefs was positive in changing behavioural beliefs and normative beliefs but not control beliefs associated with wearing a cycle helmet. The elaboration likelihood model supplements the theory of planned behaviour: the theory of planned behaviour helps identify accessible beliefs and the elaboration likelihood model specifies how arguments that are based on accessible belief can be structured and communicated so that maximum and lasting effects on attitude change can be achieved.