Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 404 items for :

  • "self report measures" x
Clear All
Restricted access

Stacy A. Clemes, Beverley M. David, Yi Zhao, Xu Han and Wendy Brown

Background:

In light of evidence linking sedentary behaviors to health outcomes, there have been calls for the measurement of sedentary behavior in surveillance studies. This study examined the convergent validity of 2 self-report measures of sitting time and accelerometer-determined sedentary time (minutes/day of <100 counts/minute).

Methods:

44 adults wore an ActiGraph accelerometer for 7 days, during which they also recorded daily sitting time in a diary, in response to a single-item question. After 7 days, participants completed a new domain-specific questionnaire to assess usual weekday and weekend-day sitting time. Total sitting times recorded from the self-report measures were compared with accelerometer-determined sedentary time.

Results:

Total sitting time calculated from the domain-specific questionnaire did not differ significantly from accelerometer-determined sedentary time on weekdays (mean difference [±SE] = –14 ± 28 mins/day) and weekend days (–4 ± 45 mins/day, both P > .05). Sitting time was significantly underestimated using the single-item specific-day question on weekdays (–173 ± 18 mins/day) and weekend days (–219 ± 23 mins/day, both P < .001).

Conclusions:

When assessed via self-report, the estimation of total sitting time is improved by summing sitting times reported across different domains. The continued improvement of self-report measures of sitting time will be important if we are to further our understanding of the links between sedentary behavior and health.

Restricted access

Craig Donnachie, Kate Hunt, Nanette Mutrie, Jason M.R. Gill and Paul Kelly

self-report assessments of PA are low ( Kowalski, Rhodes, Naylor, Tuokko, & MacDonald, 2012 ; Prince et al., 2008 ; Skender et al., 2016 ). It has been argued that although related, device-based and self-report measures assess distinct PA constructs and therefore not comparable ( Fulton et al., 2016

Full access

Louise C. Mâsse and Judith E. de Niet

Background:

Over the years, self-report measures of physical activity (PA) have been employed in applications for which their use was not supported by the validity evidence.

Methods:

To address this concern this paper 1) provided an overview of the sources of validity evidence that can be assessed with self-report measures of PA, 2) discussed the validity evidence needed to support the use of self-report in certain applications, and 3) conducted a case review of the 7-day PA Recall (7-d PAR).

Results:

This paper discussed 5 sources of validity evidence, those based on: test content; response processes; behavioral stability; relations with other variables; and sensitivity to change. The evidence needed to use self-report measures of PA in epidemiological, surveillance, and intervention studies was presented. These concepts were applied to a case review of the 7-d PAR. The review highlighted the utility of the 7-d PAR to produce valid rankings. Initial support, albeit weaker, for using the 7-d PAR to detect relative change in PA behavior was found.

Conclusion:

Overall, self-report measures can validly rank PA behavior but they cannot adequately quantify PA. There is a need to improve the accuracy of self-report measures of PA to provide unbiased estimates of PA.

Open access

Anna E. Saw, Michael Kellmann, Luana C. Main and Paul B. Gastin

Athlete self-report measures (ASRM) have the potential to provide valuable insight into the training response; however, there is a disconnect between research and practice that needs to be addressed; namely, the measure or methods used in research are not always reflective of practice, or data primarily obtained from practice lacks empirical quality. This commentary reviews existing empirical measures and the psychometric properties required to be considered acceptable for research and practice. This information will allow discerning readers to make a judgment on the quality of ASRM data being reported in research papers. Fastidious practitioners and researchers are also provided with explicit guidelines for selecting and implementing an ASRM and reporting these details in research papers.

Restricted access

Britton W. Brewer, Christine M. Caldwell, Albert J. Petitpas, Judy L. Van Raalte, Miquel Pans and Allen E. Cornelius

A sport-specific, self-report measure of identity foreclosure was developed through a systematic process that included item pool generation, expert review, administration of items to a development sample of intercollegiate student athletes (N = 326), item evaluation, and administration of scales to validation samples of intercollegiate student athletes (N = 322, N = 54, and N = 64, respectively). The process yielded two four-item scales reflecting commitment to the occupational identity of athlete and one 4-item scale reflecting active exploration of roles other than that of athlete that (a) are internally consistent and temporally stable, (b) demonstrate preliminary factorial and convergent validity, and (c) can be used to create indices of identity foreclosure tailored to the sport context. The resulting Sport-Specific Measure of Identity Foreclosure has potential utility as an assessment tool for research and practice with athletes.

Restricted access

Marquis Hawkins, Deirdre K. Tobias, Hala B. Alessa, Andrea K. Chomistek, Junaidah B. Barnett, Walter C. Willett and Susan E. Hankinson

relationships can inform intervention approaches. Therefore, we evaluated the association of PA intensity and type, using objective and self-reported measures of PA, with circulating sex hormones in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Methods Study Population The Women’s Lifestyle Validation Study is an

Restricted access

M. Renée Umstattd Meyer, Stephanie L. Baller, Shawn M. Mitchell and Stewart G. Trost

Background:

Accelerometers have become one of the most common methods of measuring physical activity (PA). Thus, validity of accelerometer data reduction approaches remains an important research area. Yet, few studies directly compare data reduction approaches and other PA measures in free-living samples.

Objective:

To compare PA estimates provided by 3 accelerometer data reduction approaches, steps, and 2 self-reported estimates: Crouter’s 2-regression model, Crouter’s refined 2-regression model, the weighted cut-point method adopted in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES; 2003–2004 and 2005–2006 cycles), steps, IPAQ, and 7-day PA recall.

Methods:

A worksite sample (N = 87) completed online-surveys and wore ActiGraph GT1M accelerometers and pedometers (SW-200) during waking hours for 7 consecutive days. Daily time spent in sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous intensity activity and percentage of participants meeting PA recommendations were calculated and compared.

Results:

Crouter’s 2-regression (161.8 ± 52.3 minutes/day) and refined 2-regression (137.6 ± 40.3 minutes/day) models provided significantly higher estimates of moderate and vigorous PA and proportions of those meeting PA recommendations (91% and 92%, respectively) as compared with the NHANES weighted cut-point method (39.5 ± 20.2 minutes/day, 18%). Differences between other measures were also significant.

Conclusions:

When comparing 3 accelerometer cut-point methods, steps, and self-report measures, estimates of PA participation vary substantially.

Full access

Elva M. Arredondo, Tamar Mendelson, Christina Holub, Nancy Espinoza and Simon Marshall

Context:

The validity of physical activity (PA) self-report measures can be a problem when using these measures with target populations that differ from the population for which the measures were originally developed.

Objectives:

Describe an approach to further tailor PA self-report measures to a target community, and report on focus group and cognitive interview findings.

Process:

Topics relevant to culturally tailoring measures are discussed, including translation, focus groups, and cognitive interviews. We describe examples from our own work, including focus groups and cognitive interviews conducted to assess Latinos’ interpretations of PA questions derived from various epidemiological surveys that were developed in White communities.

Findings:

Findings from focus groups and cognitive interviews provide valuable information about the comprehension, interpretation, and cultural relevance of the PA questions to Latino communities.

Conclusions:

It is recommended that investigators collect formative data to better assess the equivalence of items being applied to a different cultural group. Guidelines for cultural attunement of self-report instruments are described to promote more uniform and rigorous processes of adaptation and facilitate cross-cultural investigations.

Restricted access

Keith P. Gennuso, Charles E. Matthews and Lisa H. Colbert

Background:

The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of 2 currently available physical activity surveys for assessing time spent in sedentary behavior (SB) in older adults.

Methods:

Fifty-eight adults (≥65 years) completed the Yale Physical Activity Survey for Older Adults (YPAS) and Community Health Activities Model Program for Seniors (CHAMPS) before and after a 10-day period during which they wore an ActiGraph accelerometer (ACC). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) examined test-retest reliability. Overall percent agreement and a kappa statistic examined YPAS validity. Lin’s concordance correlation, Pearson correlation, and Bland-Altman analysis examined CHAMPS validity.

Results:

Both surveys had moderate test-retest reliability (ICC: YPAS = 0.59 (P < .001), CHAMPS = 0.64 (P < .001)) and significantly underestimated SB time. Agreement between YPAS and ACC was low (κ = −0.0003); however, there was a linear increase (P < .01) in ACC-derived SB time across YPAS response categories. There was poor agreement between ACC-derived SB and CHAMPS (Lin’s r = .005; 95% CI, −0.010 to 0.020), and no linear trend across CHAMPS quartiles (P = .53).

Conclusions:

Neither of the surveys should be used as the sole measure of SB in a study; though the YPAS has the ability to rank individuals, providing it with some merit for use in correlational SB research.

Restricted access

John R. Sirard, Peter Hannan, Gretchen J. Cutler and Dianne Nuemark-Sztainer

Background:

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate self-reported physical activity of young adults using 1-week and 1-year recall measures with an accelerometer as the criterion measure.

Methods:

Participants were a subsample (N = 121, 24 ± 1.7 yrs) from a large longitudinal cohort study. Participants completed a detailed 1-year physical activity recall, wore an accelerometer for 1 week and then completed a brief 1-week physical activity recall when they returned the accelerometer.

Results:

Mean values for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) from the 3 instruments were 3.2, 2.2, and 13.7 hours/wk for the accelerometer, 1-week recall, and 1-year recall, respectively (all different from each other, P < .001). Spearman correlations for moderate, vigorous, and MVPA between the accelerometer and the 1-week recall (0.30, 0.50, and 0.40, respectively) and the 1-year recall (0.31, 0.42, and 0.44, respectively) demonstrated adequate validity.

Conclusions:

Both recall instruments may be used for ranking physical activity at the group level. At the individual level, the 1-week recall performed much better in terms of absolute value of physical activity. The 1-year recall overestimated total physical activity but additional research is needed to fully test its validity.