These theories predicted that an individuals motivation for an activity such as long term exercise adherence was based on the expected outcome and the value or importance of that outcome.
Self-Efficacy by Bandura (1977) is considered to be a situation specific form of self confidence. For example an individual may have confidence in long distance running mainly on hilly courses, but not on flat ones. They may not have sprinters speed, or a kick at end of flat races, but have long distance hill endurance. There are 4 sources of self efficacy listed in their degree of influence, past performance accomplishments, vicarious experiences (modeling), social persuasion, and physiological/affective states. Good past performances in running hilly courses would help self efficacy. An example of modeling would be watching a video of someone with similar characteristics of the runner running a hilly course with ease. A trusted friend giving encouragement would be example of social persuasion. And physiologic thoughts of pain and fatigue on hills could lower self efficacy. Although, a positive emotional state (affective) due to a cool weather report for the race on the hilly course could up the runner’s self efficacy. In reference to exercise adherence, I had a client tell me one reason he hated exercise was that his high school PE teacher made his class run laps until they were severely knackered. Consequently, any thought of exercise brings back this negative physiologic memory, that leads to no exercise.
Theory of Reasoned Action, Fisbein & Ajzen (1975) – Simply put if an individual has a positive attitude toward exercise and feels social pressure to exercise from significant others, such as family, friends, and coworkers then they should have strong intention to exercise that may result in them exercising, according to this theory.
Theory of Planned Behavior, Ajzen (1985) extended the Theory of Reasoned Action with the construct of perceived behavioral control (PBC). In other words, a strong sense of personal control over one’s exercise behavior is essential for adherence. An example is allowing client’s input when a trainer is designing their program.
Self-Determination Theory (SDT), Deci & Ryan (1985) proposes 3 primary psychosocial needs for the individual, a need for self-determination (autonomy, self-dependent behavior), mastery-competence, and social interaction-relatedness. This theory is represented in the model below:
| Type of motivation | Motives | Level of Self Determination | |
| intrinsic | intrinsic | Pleasure, satisfaction | High |
| extrinsic | integrated regulation | Confirming sense of self | ^ |
| extrinsic | identified regulation | Achieving personal goals | ^ |
| extrinsic | introjected regulation | Sense of obligation | ^ |
| extrinsic | external regulation | Gain reward, avoid punishment | ^ |
| amotivation | amotivation | None | Low |
In SDT model above the continuum of motivation from top to bottom are intrinsic motivation going down to amotivation, with extrinsic motivation in the middle. Intrinsic motivation applied to fitness participation has reasons of inherent pleasure, satisfaction, fun or personal challenge. Extrinsic motivation is related to external rewards or pressure that motivate behavior. For example, extrinsic motivation in the form of introjected regulation is behavior dictated by self imposed pressure – such as to avoid feelings of guilt for not exercising. Amotivation at the bottom is absence of motivation, such as a person says “I am not disciplined enough to exercise over many months or years”. Fitness maybe unimportant for them, and/or they take their health for granted. Self-determination increases from amotivation to intrinsic motivation. SDT would predict that high intrinsic motivation leading to long term exercise adherence might result from exercise interventions that are aimed at enhancing an individuals sense of competence and autonomy. Also, they would be conducted in a positive, mutually supportive environment wherein satisfying social interactions can take place.
The Health Belief Model (HBM), Becker & Maiman (1975) is a psychosocial model intended to help predict compliance with preventive health recommendations. It was used in a comprehensive study of exercise behavior by Slenker, Price, Roberts, and Jurs (1984) that found perceived barriers to action explained 40% of the variance in jogging adherence. Thus, exercise leaders were encouraged to educate clients in overcoming perceived barriers, such as time problems, family and work responsibilities, that interfere with exercise participation.
Noland & Feldman (1984) modified the Health Belief Model (above) to form the Exercise Behavior Model (EBM). The model predicts that people are ready to exercise if they have an internal locus of control for exercise, a positive attitude toward physical activity, a positive self concept, and positive values for health, physical appearance, and fitness. Internal locus of control means the individual believed results were contingent on their own behavior or on some relatively permanent personal characteristic, such as their intelligence. External locus of control refers to results attributed to outside forces, such as luck, chance, fate, or as controlled by others. Again, this model also suggests that if barriers are perceived greater than the benefits of exercise, an individual will not participate regardless of a favorable exercise predisposition or modifying factors that support exercise. Modifying factors included demographic variables (age, sex, race), social variables (social class, social support), structural variables (knowledge of exercise), and physical variables (health status, physical fitness).