Using the EZ-diffusion model to score a Single-Category Implicit Association Test of physical activity |
| |
| Institution: | 1. The Pennsylvania State University, Department of Kinesiology, USA;2. Central Queensland University, School of Human, Health, and Social Sciences, Australia;3. The Pennsylvania State University, Department of Human Development and Family Studies, USA;1. Ariel University, Ariel, Israel;2. Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel;1. Department of Psychology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, USA;2. Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA;1. Institute of Physical Education, Health & Leisure Studies, National Cheng Kung University, NO. 1, University Road, Tainan City 701, Taiwan, ROC;2. Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, National Central University, Jhongli 320, Taiwan, ROC;3. Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, UK;4. Department of Psychology, Goldsmiths College, University of London, London, UK;1. Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Groningen, 9712 TS Groningen, The Netherlands;2. Department of Psychology, Vanderbilt University, USA;3. Department of Cognitive, Linguistic & Psychological Sciences, Brown University, USA;4. School of Psychology, University of Newcastle, Australia;5. School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Australia;6. Department of Psychology, Syracuse University, USA;7. Department of Clinical Psychology, Utrecht University, The Netherlands;8. Psychologisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Germany;9. Department of Psychometrics & Statistical Techniques, University of Groningen, The Netherlands;10. Department of Psychology, University of Zürich, Switzerland;11. Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts - Amherst, USA;12. Cologne, Germany;13. Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands;1. Concordia University Wisconsin, Department of Occupational Therapy, 12800 N. Lake Shore Drive, Mequon, WI 53097, USA;2. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Department of Kinesiology, PO Box 413, Milwaukee, WI 53201, USA;3. University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, Department of Kinesiology & Community Health, 906 S. Goodwin Ave, Urbana, IL 61801, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | ObjectiveThe Single-Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT) has been used as a method for assessing automatic evaluations of physical activity, but measurement artifact or consciously-held attitudes could be confounding the outcome scores of these measures. The objective of these two studies was to address these measurement concerns by testing the validity of a novel SC-IAT scoring technique.DesignStudy 1 was a cross-sectional study, and study 2 was a prospective study.MethodIn study 1, undergraduate students (N = 104) completed SC-IATs for physical activity, flowers, and sedentary behavior. In study 2, undergraduate students (N = 91) completed a SC-IAT for physical activity, self-reported affective and instrumental attitudes toward physical activity, physical activity intentions, and wore an accelerometer for two weeks. The EZ-diffusion model was used to decompose the SC-IAT into three process component scores including the information processing efficiency score.ResultsIn study 1, a series of structural equation model comparisons revealed that the information processing score did not share variability across distinct SC-IATs, suggesting it does not represent systematic measurement artifact. In study 2, the information processing efficiency score was shown to be unrelated to self-reported affective and instrumental attitudes toward physical activity, and positively related to physical activity behavior, above and beyond the traditional D-score of the SC-IAT.ConclusionsThe information processing efficiency score is a valid measure of automatic evaluations of physical activity. |
| |
| Keywords: | Automatic evaluations Response time measures Exercise Implicit attitudes |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
