Background
The interplay of physical activity (PA) with affective well-being (AWB) is highly critical to both health behaviors and health outcomes. Current prominent theories presume AWB to be crucial for PA maintenance, and PA is evidenced to foster mental health. However, thus far, PA-AWB associations have mainly been researched in laboratory settings and with interventional designs, but the everyday life perspective had not been focused on, mostly due to technological limitations. In the course of digitization, the number of studies using device-based methods to research the within-subject association of physical activity and affective well-being (PA-AWB) under ecological valid conditions increased rapidly, but a recent comprehensive systematic review of evidence across populations, age groups, and distinct AWB components remained inconclusive.
Objectives
Therefore, we aimed to firstly review daily-life studies that assessed intensive longitudinal device-based (e.g., electronic smartphone diaries and accelerometry) and real-time PA-AWB data, secondly to develop and apply a quality assessment tool applicable to those studies, and thirdly to discuss findings and draw implications for research and practice.
Methods
To this end, the literature was searched in three databases (Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus) up to November 2022. The systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and had been pre-registered (PROSPERO id: CRD42021277327). A modified quality assessment tool was developed to illustrate the risk of bias of included studies.
Results
The review of findings showed that, in general, already short PA bouts in everyday life, which clearly differ from structured exercise sessions, are positively associated with AWB. In particular, feelings of energy relate to incidental (non-exercise and unstructured) activity, and PA-AWB associations depend on population characteristics. The quality assessment revealed overall moderate study quality; however, the methods applied were largely heterogeneous between investigations. Overall, the reviewed evidence on PA-AWB associations in everyday life is ambiguous; for example, no clear patterns of directions and strengths of PA-AWB relationships depending on PA and AWB components (such as intensity, emotions, affect, mood) emerged.
Conclusions
The reviewed evidence can fuel discussions on whether the World Health Organization’s notion “every move counts” may be extended to everyday life AWB. Concurrently, the PA-AWB relationship findings endorse prominent theories highlighting the critical role of AWB in everyday PA engagement and maintenance. However, the review also clearly highlights the need to advance and harmonize methodological approaches for more fine-grained investigations on which specific PA/AWB characteristics, contextual factors, and biological determinants underly PA-AWB associations in everyday life. This will enable the field to tackle pressing challenges such as the issue of causality of PA-AWB associations, which will help to shape and refine existing theories to ultimately predict and improve health behavior, thereby feeding into precision medicine approaches.
