Effectiveness of a smartphone app in increasing physical activity amongst male adults: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Smartphones are ideal for promoting physical activity in those with little intrinsic motivation for exercise. This study tested three hypotheses: H1 - receipt of social feedback generates higher step-counts than receipt of no feedback; H2 - receipt of social feedback generates higher ste...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Harries, T, Eslambolchilar, P, Rettie, R, Stride, C, Walton, S, van Woerden, H.C
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BACKGROUND: Smartphones are ideal for promoting physical activity in those with little intrinsic motivation for exercise. This study tested three hypotheses: H1 - receipt of social feedback generates higher step-counts than receipt of no feedback; H2 - receipt of social feedback generates higher step-counts than only receiving feedback on one's own walking; H3 - receipt of feedback on one's own walking generates higher step-counts than no feedback (H3). METHODS: A parallel group randomised controlled trial measured the impact of feedback on steps-counts. Healthy male participants (n = 165) aged 18-40 were given phones pre-installed with an app that recorded steps continuously, without the need for user activation. Participants carried these with them as their main phones for a two-week run-in and six-week trial. Randomisation was to three groups: no feedback (control); personal feedback on step-counts; group feedback comparing step-counts against those taken by others in their group. The primary outcome measure, steps per day, was assessed using longitudinal multilevel regression analysis. Control variables included attitude to physical activity and perceived barriers to physical activity. RESULTS: Fifty-five participants were allocated to each group; 152 completed the study and were included in the analysis: n = 49, no feedback; n = 53, individual feedback; n = 50, individual and social feedback. The study provided support for H1 and H3 but not H2. Receipt of either form of feedback explained 7.7 % of between-subject variability in step-count (F = 6.626, p 
DOI:10.1186/s12889-016-3593-9