3.8 Article

The Motivational Impact of Wearable Healthy Lifestyle Technologies: A Self-determination Perspective on Fitbits With Adolescents

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH EDUCATION
Volume 48, Issue 5, Pages 287-297

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/19325037.2017.1343161

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Considerable numbers of young people are not meeting physical activity guidelines. Wearable fitness devices can provide opportunities for physical activity promotion. Purpose: The aim of the study was to explore whether wearable healthy lifestyle technologies impacted on adolescents' (13- to 14-year-olds) motivation for physical activity. Methods: The study was a mixed method sequential design. Participants were 84 adolescents (44 girls, 40 boys) from 6 physical education classes. Pupils were issued with a Fitbit to wear for 8 weeks and completed pre-/posttest questionnaires that assessed motivational regulation and psychological need satisfaction. Adolescents also engaged in focus group interviews after wearing the Fitbit for 8 weeks. Quantitative data were analyzed using a repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to explore differences between gender and time. Qualitative data analysis was conducted deductively using self-determination theory. Results: The quantitative findings identified significant reductions in need satisfaction and autonomous motivation and significant increases in amotivation after 8 weeks. Qualitative evidence suggested short-term increases in motivation through feelings of competition, guilt, and internal pressure. Discussion: Findings suggest that healthy lifestyle technology may have negative motivational consequences. Translation to Health Education Practice: Certified Health Education Specialists should support young people to personalize health targets in order to critically engage with normalized health targets.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available