Perceived Exercise Benefits and Barriers of Non-Exercising Female University Students in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Many individuals do not engage in sufficient physical activity due to low perceived benefits and high perceived barriers to exercise. Given the increasing incidence of obesity and obesity related health disorders, this topic requires further exploration. We used the Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale to assess perceived benefit and barrier intensities to exercise in 200 non-exercising female university students (mean age 19.3 years, SD = 1.06) in the UK. Although our participants were selected because they self reported themselves to be non-exercising, however they reported significantly higher perceived benefits from exercise than perceived barriers to exercise [t(199) = 6.18, p < 0.001], and their perceived benefit/barrier ratio was 1.33. The greatest perceived benefit from exercise was physical performance followed by the benefits of psychological outlook, preventive health, life enhancement, and then social interaction. Physical performance was rated significantly higher than all other benefits. Psychological outlook and preventive health were not rated significantly different, although both were significantly higher than life enhancement and social interaction. Life enhancement was also rated significantly higher than social interaction. The greatest perceived barrier to exercise was physical exertion, which was rated significantly higher than time expenditure, exercise milieu, and family discouragement barriers. Implications from this investigation for the design of physical activity programmes include the importance, for females, of a perception of high benefit/barrier ratio that could be conducive to participation in exercise. Applied interventions need to assist female students to ‘disengage’ from or overcome any perceived ‘unpleasantness’ of physical exertion during physical activity (decrease their perceived barriers), and to further highlight the multiple health and other benefits of regular exercising (increase their perceived benefits).

Motivations and the Level of Practicing Physical Activities by Physio-Kinetotherapy Students

“…According to our study, the Appearance and Social indices recorded low values, a fact confirmed in another study [31], which concluded that it is precisely these two indicators that set up the motivational profile of PA practice. Factors of improving quality of life and social interaction can be explained by the nature of our subjects who, due to life in the university, may have a number of opportunities to relate, and this may reduce awareness of social benefits due to PA practice [32].…”

“…Kondrič [34], found that the latent structure of motivation for student participation in sports contains six factors: socialization, popularity, fitness, and health, social status, sporting events, and relaxation through sport. Some authors [28,32,34] consider that the education process on physical exercise in students has a motivational structure that is defined by three motivational factors: enjoyment, body modeling to improve physical appearance, and socializing with friends.…”

Barreiras percebidas para a prática de atividade física em universitários da área da saúde de uma instituição de ensino superior da cidade de Fortaleza, Brasil

“…Já no Reino Unido, a preguiça foi tida como a principal barreira 15 . Diferenças nos resultados destes estudos podem estar relacionadas com as características de cada região, principalmente no que se refere ao contexto sociocultural e econômico, o qual cada amostra encontra-se inserida 18 .…”

Reliability and validity of the Exercise Benefits/Barriers scale in the elderly

“…The validity related to the construct was analyzed through the investigation of associations among the EBBS results and the evaluation of personal and clinical aspects that, according to literature, are capable of interference in the knowledge of the benefits and realization of the physical exercise (12,14,15) aiming to detect the interference of these on the EBBS result. The variables investigated were: socio-demographic (age, level of education, marital status, occupation, with whom one lives and income), anthropometric and physiological (weight, height, BMI -Body Mass Index, blood pressure), biochemical (random glucose level), lifestyle (active, sedentary, regular physical activity practice, smoking, alcohol consumption, limitations for mobility), morbidities (chronic degenerative pathologies) and falls.…”

“…It has been widely used by American, European and Asian researchers (12)(13)(14) . The EBBS was prepared based on the Health Promotion Model (HPM), which assesses the activities focused on the development of resources which maintain or intensify the well-being, for example, the physical activity.…”