Personality traits can predict which exercise intensities we enjoy most, and the magnitude of stress reduction experienced following a training program

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to determine if personality can predict physical fitness, enjoyment of exercise by intensity, and engagement in an exercise program in the general population.

Methods: Participants were assigned to either an 8-week home-based cycling and strength training intervention or a resting control group.

Results: Personality traits were strong predictors of baseline fitness levels, and of enjoyment of different exercise intensities. For example, conscientiousness predicted greater general fitness and more weekly hours of physical activity, whereas extraversion and neuroticism predicted higher V̇O_2peak and poorer heart rate recovery, respectively. Extraversion also predicted greater enjoyment of highest intensity activities, whereas neuroticism predicted lower enjoyment of activities which required sustained effort. Importantly, those who scored high on neuroticism benefited the most from potential stress-reducing effects of aerobic training.

Discussion: These findings provide insight into how personality can determine engagement with physical activity, and the degree to which one enjoys different forms of exercise, thus aiding the development of tailored exercise programs.

Keywords: Big Five; exercise tailoring; fitness; neuroticism; physical activity.

Figure 1

Study Design demonstrating the order in which exercise sessions were carried out. Participants rated how much they enjoyed their session after each lab task and after each home-based session in week 1 only.

Figure 2

Regressions of extraversion on V̇O_2peak (R2 = 0.15, p < 0.001) and Peak cycling power output (R2 = 0.16, p < 0.001) on a cycling V̇O_2peak test. Birth sex (n = 132, female = 56) was also a significant predictor in both models (p < 0.001), see Table 3.

Figure 3

Regressions of conscientiousness on self-reported weekly hours of physical activity (R2 = 0.12, p = 0.001), and of neuroticism on HRR after a V̇O_2peak test (R2 = 0.13, p = 0.003). Gender was a significant predictor in the conscientiousness model (p = 0.014) but not in the neuroticism model; (n = 132, female = 56), see Table 3.

Figure 4

Relationship between neuroticism scores and changes in stress after the 8-week period. The prediction was significant in the intervention group only (R² = 0.17, p = 0.003).