A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Outcome Expectancy Construct in Physical Activity Research

Abstract

Background: Cognition-based theories dominate physical activity (PA) research, and many include a construct broadly defined as "beliefs about the consequences of behavior" (e.g., outcome expectancies, perceived benefits) hereafter referred to as perceived consequences.

Purpose: With the quantity of available research on this topic, it is important to examine whether the literature supports perceived consequences as a predictor of PA.

Methods: A meta-analysis examining longitudinal associations between perceived consequences and PA in adults was conducted. Studies were eligible if (a) perceived consequences were measured at a time point prior to PA, and (b) the target behavior was a form of PA. An omnibus meta-analysis estimating the mean effect of all included studies, and separate meta-analyses for perceived consequences content categories were conducted.

Results: This search yielded 6,979 articles, of these, 110 studies met inclusion criteria. Studies were published between 1989 and 2020, with sample sizes ranging from 16 to 2,824. All studies were evaluated as moderate to high quality. A small positive bivariate association was identified (r = 0.11; 95% CI [0.09, 0.13]) between perceived consequences and PA. Significant associations were identified for time, health, self-evaluative, psychological, and affective consequences. There was no association between perceived weight-related consequences and PA.

Conclusions: The findings emphasize the variability with which existing studies have examined perceived consequences in the PA literature. Future research might examine whether these are important distinctions for understanding PA. Overall, the results suggest utility in examining perceived consequences as a predictor of PA, but constructs with more robust associations may require priority.

Keywords: Behavioral beliefs; Decisional balance; Exercise; Outcome expectancies; PA; Weight.

Fig. 1.

PRISMA chart detailing the study inclusion processes.

Fig. 2.

Forest plot for the omnibus meta-analysis test. In the content category column, “Combined” refers to studies which had multiple scales to measure perceived consequences, and in the omnibus meta-analysis, the mean effect across these scales was used in the calculation of the point estimate. The label “+ Undifferentiated” refers to perceived consequences scales which were undifferentiated in their content (i.e., referring to an array of different categories of consequences), and positively valenced. Some studies appear as more than one row, these are studies which contributed more than one independent sample to the analysis (e.g., an intervention vs. control group). Each square in the figure represents a study’s individual contributing correlation coefficient to the meta-analysis, with the bars depicting the confidence interval for that study. The correlation coefficients are plotted on a −1.0 to +1.0 horizontal axis. The mean effect is indicated by a diamond at the bottom of the plot.

Fig. 2.

Forest plot for the omnibus meta-analysis test. In the content category column, “Combined” refers to studies which had multiple scales to measure perceived consequences, and in the omnibus meta-analysis, the mean effect across these scales was used in the calculation of the point estimate. The label “+ Undifferentiated” refers to perceived consequences scales which were undifferentiated in their content (i.e., referring to an array of different categories of consequences), and positively valenced. Some studies appear as more than one row, these are studies which contributed more than one independent sample to the analysis (e.g., an intervention vs. control group). Each square in the figure represents a study’s individual contributing correlation coefficient to the meta-analysis, with the bars depicting the confidence interval for that study. The correlation coefficients are plotted on a −1.0 to +1.0 horizontal axis. The mean effect is indicated by a diamond at the bottom of the plot.