Educational Research Paper proposal

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cjfh20

Download by: [Loyola Marymount University] Date: 08 October 2015, At: 00:20

Journal of Further and Higher Education

ISSN: 0309-877X (Print) 1469-9486 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjfh20

The influence of physical activity, sport and exercise motives among UK-based university students

Simon Roberts, Matthew Reeves & Angus Ryrie

To cite this article: Simon Roberts, Matthew Reeves & Angus Ryrie (2015) The influence of physical activity, sport and exercise motives among UK-based university students, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 39:4, 598-607, DOI: 10.1080/0309877X.2014.938265

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2014.938265

Published online: 11 Aug 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 322

View related articles

View Crossmark data

The influence of physical activity, sport and exercise motives among UK-based university students

Simon Roberts*, Matthew Reeves and Angus Ryrie

Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK

Recent evidence suggests that the majority of the adult population fails to achieve the recommended target of 30-minutes moderate intensity exercise, days a week. This includes university students who often have the time to engage in physical activity. The aim of this study was to determine exercise motives for a UK-based student population. The motives of 736 participants (± 20.45 years of age, SD=3.50) regarding participation or non-participation in free-time exercise, sport and physi- cal activity were measured using the Exercise Motivation Inventory-2 (EMI-2). Significant main effects were reported for age (P = 0.1) and gender (P = 0.1). Students over 23 years of age reported higher levels of motivation than the other age groups (i.e. for stress, revitalisation and avoidance of ill health). The results of this study indicate that the motivation of UK university students to engage in physical activity or exercise demonstrates gender and age differences. These findings should enable health professionals and health educators in university environ- ments to design preventative programmes aimed at reducing multiple risk behaviours among university populations. These could include gen- der-specific exercise programmes underpinned by appearance motives for female university populations.

Keywords: adult population; exercise motivation; EMI-2

Introduction

Current research clearly demonstrates that regular physical activity has a number of associated benefits for physical and mental health (Start Active, Stay Active 2011). In adult populations regular physical activity is associ- ated with decreased risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, cancer, obesity, mental health problems and musculoskeletal conditions (WHO 2010). Despite the reported positive association between physical activity and health, epidemiological evidence suggests that physical activity levels decline with age (Kwan et al. 2009). In the UK and the USA, adults (i.e. 19–64 years) are recommended to engage in 30 minutes of moderate intensity exercise, five days a week (WHO 2010). However, evidence

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

© 2014 UCU

Journal of Further and Higher Education, 2015 Vol. 39, No. 4, 598–607, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2014.938265

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5

suggests that the majority of the adult population fails to achieve this target (Gordon-Larsen et al. 2004). This demographic group extends to those young adults entering college or university, who often have both the time and opportunity to be involved in regular amounts of physical activity and exercise (Skår et al. 2011).

From a global public health perspective, it has been reported that up to 70 per cent of university students are not participating in regular free-time physical activity or exercise (Haase et al. 2004). Furthermore, high levels of inactivity continue following graduation (Calfas et al. 1994), leading to con- cerns that university students are more likely to become obese in the future (Racette et al. 2005). The multiple health risks associated with obesity include hypertension, high cholesterol, diabetes mellitus, detrimental blood lipid profiles and cardiovascular disease (Elgi et al. 2011).

For young adults, the transition from high school to university can be intimidating, as increased pressure on academic performance is often cou- pled with changes in their environment and social networks (Keller et al. 2007). Previous health-related research has reported that a considerable number of university students smoke tobacco (Thompson et al. 2007) and binge drink (Wechsler et al. 2002). A study conducted among a university population in Turkey also provided evidence that students have a lower intake of fresh fruit and vegetables (Unüsan 2004); these results have not been replicated among UK- or US-based student populations, however. Unfortunately, research examining the motivation (or otherwise) of univer- sity students to engage in physical activity, sport or exercise is limited to only a small number of studies (Kilpatrick et al. 2005; Elgi et al. 2011).

Existing psychological research conducted predominantly in the USA sug- gests that participants’ motives to engage in sport differ from their motives to engage in exercise and free-time physical activity (Kilpatrick et al. 2005). More specifically, males are reported to demonstrate more performance ego- related motives such as challenge, strength and endurance (ibid). In contrast, females are reported to be motivated more by extrinsic motives such as appearance and weight management (ibid). Self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan 1985) draws a distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and suggests that internally-motivated individuals engage in an activity pri- marily for the enjoyment and satisfaction gained from participation. In con- trast, individuals who are extrinsically motivated participate in order to obtain rewards that are extrinsic to the behaviour itself (Ryan et al. 1984; Deci and Ryan 1985; Frederick and Ryan 1993, 1995). According to Ingledew et al., these different motivational orientations have different ‘cognitive, emotional and behavioural consequences’ (1997, 478), thus affecting individual exercise initiation and participation.

Other findings associated with gender have identified a number of per- sonal motivational factors (Rhodes et al. 2002). These factors include: cog- nitive and affective variables such as attitude towards physical activity

Journal of Further and Higher Education 599

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5

(McAuley and Courneya 1993); goal orientations and exercise incentives (Mullineaux et al. 2001); the perceived competence or self-efficacy of an individual (McAuley et al. 2001); the perceptual-affective responses a per- son demonstrates toward physical activity (Rodgers and Brawley 1996); and the effect of social physique anxiety (Hausenblas et al. 2004). Although a small number of US studies on student exercise motivation exist (Kilpatrick et al. 2005; Elgi et al. 2011), very little is known about exercise motives for UK-based university populations. The purpose of this study was thus to examine the differences between exercise motivation, age and gender among UK-based university students.

Method

Participants and setting

Following institutional research committee approval and written informed consent, 736 participants (± 20.45 years of age; SD = 3.50) agreed to take part in this study. The participants in this study were all education (n = 258), health (n = 171) and sport (n = 307) undergraduate students enrolled at a university in the northwest of England.

Procedure

Motives for assessing participation or non-participation in free-time exercise, sport and physical activity were measured using the Exercise Motivation Inventory-2 (EMI-2; Markland and Ingledew 1997). The EMI-2 consists of 51 items with 14 subscales. The 14 subscale statements represent a number of specific motives for engaging in free-time exercise, sport and physical activity, including: affiliation, appearance, challenge, competition, enjoy- ment, health pressures, ill health avoidance, nimbleness, positive health, re- vitalisation, social recognition, strength/endurance, stress management and weight management. The motives were then grouped into appearance/ weight, social engagement, health/fitness and enjoyment indicators (Ingledew et al. 2009). Each statement is measured on a five-point Likert scale from 0 (not at all true for me) to 5 (very true for me). Confirmatory factor analysis has demonstrated acceptable construct validity and internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients ranging from 0.729 to 0.966. Test and re-test reliability in both male and female popula- tions has also been demonstrated. The EMI-2 is thus considered a suitable and reliable instrument for measuring exercise and physical activity motives (Kilpatrick et al. 2005).

To avoid influencing the emotional state of the participants, the EMI-2 was administered in paper format, outside the traditional examination period and during timetabled lectures and seminars between the months of Septem- ber and November 2012 (López et al. 2010). The questionnaires were

600 S. Roberts et al.

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5

administered by the second author, who was available to assist with any questions or the completion of the EMI-2. He invited students to participate in the study at the beginning of each timetabled lecture. Following the end of the lecture, the students were offered the opportunity to either remain and complete the questionnaire or to leave it blank. The participants were not offered any financial incentives to take part in the study and they were also notified that they could withdraw from the study at any time.

Data analysis

Data were initially screened for missing or implausible values and assump- tions for normality, linearity and homogeneity of variances were conducted using Kolmogorov Smirnov and Levene’s tests. The second phase of the analysis examined age group and gender differences across exercise motives. This was achieved through the use of a Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) design for each age group and gender. In each analy- sis, the dependant variable was an exercise motive identified within the EMI-2 instrument; the within-subject factors were student age and gender across exercise motives. Statistical data analysis was carried out using SPSS version 20.0 for Windows and the alpha value was set initially at P > 0.05.

Results

Analysis of the MANOVA across exercise motives revealed a significant main effect for age, F(14, 708) = 5.87, p < 0.01, partial eta squared = 0.02), a significant main effect for gender F(14, 708) = 13.78, p < 0.01, par- tial eta squared = 0.02) and a significant interactive effect for age group and gender F(14, 708) = 12.45, p < 0.01, partial eta squared = 0.02). These results suggest that, within the subjects tested, significant variation in motives towards free-time exercise, sport and physical activity were preva- lent between all the age groups tested; and across gender. In accordance with previous methodologies each of the 14 subscales was then subject to a factorial Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). To reduce the possibility of a type 1 error, we applied a Bonferroni adjustment, to the alpha level of 0.05. The criterion for statistical significance was therefore readjusted to p < 0.03.

Age differences

When the results for age were conducted with the Bonferroni adjustment (i.e. p < 0.03) the over 23 age group reported higher levels of motivation than the other age groups (i.e. < 23 years old) for stress F(5, 730) = 3.01, p < 0.01, partial eta squared = 0.02), revitalisation F(5, 730) = 2.46, p < 0.03, partial eta squared = 0.17) and ill health avoidance F(5, 730) = 2.37, p < 0.03, partial eta squared = 0.17).

Journal of Further and Higher Education 601

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5

Gender differences

ANOVA analyses also revealed significant gender effects for the motiva- tional variables: revitalisation F(1, 734) = 1.50, p < 0.03 partial eta squared = 0.63), enjoyment F(1, 734) = 28.04, p < 0.01 partial eta squared = 0.03), challenge F(1, 734) = 33.36, p < 0.01 partial eta squared = 0.43), social F (1, 734) = 49.47, p < 0.01 partial eta squared = 0.64), affiliation F(1, 734) = 19.07, p < 0.01 partial eta squared = 0.22), competition F(1, 734) = 120.77, p < 0.01 partial eta squared = 0.14), weight management F(1, 734) = 121.34, p < 0.01 partial eta squared = 0.24), appearance F(1, 734) = 1.45, p < 0.03 partial eta squared = 0.17) and strength F(1, 734) = 79.36, p < 0.01 partial eta squared = 0.43). Asillustrated in Table 1, males reported higher motives than females for 12 of the 14 EMI-2 subscales, including: affiliation, ill-health avoidance, health pressure, revitalisation, enjoyment, challenge, stress management, nimbleness, positive health, social recogni- tion, competition and strength, and endurance.

Table 1. Questionnaire sub-scales by gender (ANOVA).

Dependent variable Gender Mean Std. error

Stress Male 2.10 0.066 Female 2.02 0.047

Revitalisation Male 2.34 0.057 Female 2.20 0.041

Enjoyment Male 2.64 0.066 Female 2.21 0.047

Challenge Male 2.35 0.063 Female 1.89 0.045

Social Male 1.69 0.057 Female 1.17 0.041

Affiliation Male 2.11 0.068 Female 1.76 0.049

Competition Male 2.66 0.079 Female 1.55 0.057

Health Pressure Male 0.87 0.053 Female 0.87 0.038

Ill-health avoidance Male 2.24 0.061 Female 2.25 0.044

Positive health Male 2.96 0.054 Female 2.94 0.039

Weight management Male 2.08 0.066 Female 2.97 0.047

Appearance Male 2.12 0.057 Female 2.22 0.041

Strength Male 2.94 0.062 Female 2.25 0.045

Nimbleness Male 2.12 0.067 Female 2.07 0.048

602 S. Roberts et al.

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5

The mean scores displayed in Table 1 reveal that females reported higher weight management (M = 2.97) and appearance (M = 2.23) motives than males. Table 2 shows the mean rankings for the 14 EMI-2 subscales for the university sample who participated in this study. The basic characteristics of this study sample reported positive health (M = 2.95, SD = 0.85) and weight management (M = 2.67, SD = 1.12) as the most important motives for participation in free-time physical activity, exercise or sport. Affiliation (M = 1.88, SD = 1.10), social recognition (M = 1.35, SD = 0.94) and health pressures (M = 0.87, SD = 0.85) were reported as the least important motives for participation by males and females.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine UK university students’ motives for engaging in free-time physical activity, sport or exercise. Our findings show that these motives differed according to both age and gender. Overall, the largest motive for engaging in free-time physical activity, sport or exer- cise was attributed to health-related reasons (i.e. positive health and weight management). These results are partly similar to those reported by Elgi et al. (2011); however, our findings suggest appearance motives were less important than those reported previously. Our findings also suggest that extrinsic motives for participation in exercise were stronger for those stu- dents aged ≥ 23 years for general health issues and ill-health avoidance. These finding contrast with those of Elgi et al. (2011), who report that younger students (i.e. ≤ 20 years old) were more motivated by health- related reasons. It may well be that as university students become older they

Table 2. Mean rankings for the 14 EMI-2 subscales.

Ranking Motivator Mean SD

1 Positive health 2.95 0.85 2 Weight management 2.67 1.12 3 Strength 2.49 1.03 4 Enjoyment 2.36 1.06 5 Revitalisation 2.25 0.90 6 Ill-health avoidance 2.25 0.98 7 Appearance 2.19 0.89 8 Nimbleness 2.09 1.06 9 Challenge 2.05 1.02 10 Stress 2.05 1.05 11 Competition 1.93 1.37 12 Affiliation 1.88 1.10 13 Social 1.35 0.94 14 Health pressures 0.87 0.85

Journal of Further and Higher Education 603

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5

become more aware of the importance of physical activity and health. Addi- tionally, as a university student nears the end of their studies, their lifestyle management possibly improves. At the moment, however, this is specula- tive, and requires further scientific investigation. The disparity between our findings and those reported previously by Elgi et al. (2011), however, do suggest further investigations are warranted.

This study also confirmed previous findings (Wechsler et al. 2002) that different motives exist for males and females regarding participation in free- time physical activity, sport or exercise. The finding that males and females differed on 12 of the 14 EMI-2 motivational subscales is also consistent with previous research (Elgi et al. 2011). Specifically, the findings revealed that males were motivated by more intrinsic-related variables, whereas females were motivated by more extrinsic motivational factors. The extent of the differences between males and females appears to be regulated by specific sports performance and appearance-related motives. When the moti- vational reasons for participation in free-time physical activity, sport and exercise were adjusted for gender to account for the risk of making a type 1 error, males were found to be motivated by more sports performance vari- ables (i.e. challenge, affiliation, competition and strength). This finding is consistent with previous studies (Biddle and Mutrie 2001; López et al. 2010). Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory proposes that humans are driven by their fundamental psychological needs: for compe- tence, autonomy and relatedness (social needs). Biddle (1995) suggests that competence is central to achievement motivation and, as such, tends to dominate the conceptualisation of goals.

However, the need for autonomy or self-determination (Biddle 1995) is seen as a major driving force for the formation of motives. Results from the current study would appear to support this supposition. The female partici- pants in our study reported more weight management and appearance motives for participating in exercise and physical activity. The evidence from both this study and those conducted in the USA (Kilpatrick et al. 2005; Elgi et al. 2011) clearly demonstrate that male and female motives for participating in physical activity and exercise are markedly different. Although female participants in our study generally highlighted the impor- tance of weight control and appearance as motives for exercise, it does not follow that they will actually carry out the behaviour. Therefore, within the university setting, it is suggested that further research and practical interven- tion work is undertaken to establish actual participation rates. An even more appropriate response would be to proactively design physical activity and exercise programmes to meet the motivational needs of both female and male students.

There were a small number of limitations to this particular study. First, we did not collect any objective physical activity data, thus patterns and fre- quency of physical activity among the current sample is unknown. Second,

604 S. Roberts et al.

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5

the EMI-2 does not distinguish between exercise and sport specifically, so it was not possible to establish what type of ‘sports’ (e.g. endurance sports or game sports) or ‘exercise’ activities the students were actually performing. This form of data would be useful in designing future exercise initiatives for university students and therefore will be incorporated into a follow-up study. Finally, our sample size of 736 students contains a high proportion of students enrolled on either sport- or health-related courses, which means it may not be totally representative of a ‘typical’ UK-based university student.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to examine the differences between exercise motivation, age and gender among UK-based university students. Previous studies have highlighted that university students do not meet the recom- mended level of free-time physical activity or exercise, and consequently there are concerns that they are at risk of multiple health problems follow- ing graduation. Currently very little is known about UK students’ motiva- tions for participating in free-time physical activity, sport or exercise. The results of this study indicate that such motivations differ according to age and gender. These findings should enable health professionals and health educators in university environments to design preventative programmes aimed at reducing multiple risks behaviours among university populations. These could include gender-specific exercise programmes underpinned by appearance motives for female students.

Notes on contributors Dr Simon Roberts is currently a senior lecturer in sport and exercise pedagogy at Liverpool John Moores University. He has published widely on a number of sport and educational topics, including physical activity motives and the influences of rel- ative age effects.

Matthew Reeves is a senior lecturer in sport pedagogy at Liverpool John Moores University.

Angus Ryrie is a senior lecturer in sports coaching at Liverpool John Moores Uni- versity.

References Active, Start, Stay Active. 2011. A report on physical activity from the four home

countries’ Chief Medical Officers. London: Department of Health, Physical Activity, Health Improvement and Protection.

Biddle, S.J.H. 1995. Exercise motivation across the lifespan. I S. Biddle, ed. Euro- pean perspectives on exercise and sport psychology. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 3–25.

Journal of Further and Higher Education 605

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5

Biddle, S.J.H. & N. Mutrie. 2001. Psychology of physical activity: Determinants, well-being and interventions. London: Routledge.

Calfas, K.J., J.F. Sallis, C.Y. Lovato, and J. Campbell. 1994. Physical activity and its determinants before and after college graduation. Medicine, Exercise, Nutri- tion, and Health 3: 323–34.

Deci, E.L., R.M. Ryan, and R.M. 1985. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.

Elgi, T., H.W. Bland, B.F. Melton, and D.R. Czech. 2011. Influence of age, sex, and race on college students’ exercise motivation of physical activity. Journal of American College Health 59: 399–405.

Frederick, C.M. and R.M. Ryan. 1993. Differences in motivation for sport and exercise and their relations with participation and mental health. Journal of Sport Behavior 16: 124–46.

Frederick, C.M. and R.M. Ryan. 1995. Self-determination in sport: A review using cognitive evaluative theory. International Journal of Sport Psychology 26: 5– 23.

Gordon-Larsen, P., M.C. Nelson, and B.M. Popkin. 2004. Longitudinal physical activity and sedentary behavior trends. American Journal of Preventive Medi- cine 27: 277–83.

Haase, A., A. Steptoe, J.F. Sallis, and J. Wardle. 2004. Leisure time physical activ- ity in university students from 23 countries: Associations with health beliefs, risk awareness and national economic development. Preventive Medicine 39: 182–90.

Hausenblas, H.A., B.W. Brewer, and J.L. Van Raalte. 2004. Self-presentation and exercise. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 16: 3–18.

Ingledew, D.K., D. Markland, and A. Medley. 1998. Exercise motives and stages of change. Journal of Health Psychology 3: 477–89.

Ingledew, D.K., D. Markland, and E. Ferguson. 2009. Three levels of exercise motivation. Applied Psychology: Health and Wellbeing 1: 336–55.

Keller, S., J.E. Maddock, W. Hannӧver, J.R. Thyrian, and H.D. Basler. 2007. Multi- ple health risk behaviors in German first year university students. Preventive Medicine 46: 189–95.

Kilpatrick, M., E. Hebert, and J. Bartholomew. 2005. College students’ motivation for physical activity: Differentiating men’s and women’s motives for sport par- ticipation and exercise. Journal of American College Health 54: 87–94.

Kwan, M.T.W., S.R. Bray, and K.A. Martin Ginis. 2009. Predicting physical activ- ity during transition to first-year university: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of American College Health 58: 45–42.

López, M.G., A.G. Gallegos, and A.B. Extremera. 2010. Perceived barriers by uni- versity students in the practice of physical activities. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine 9: 374–81.

Markland, D. and D.K. Ingledew. 1997. The measurement of exercise motives: Fac- torial validity and invariance across gender of a revised Exercise Motivations Inventory. British Journal of Health Psychology 2: 361–76.

McAuley, E. & K.S. Courneya. 1993. Adherence to exercise and physical activity as health promoting behaviors: Attitudinal and self-efficacy influences. Applied and Preventive Psychology 2: 65–77.

McAuley, E., M.M. Peña, and G.J. Jerome. 2001. Self-efficacy as a determinant and an outcome of exercise. In G. Roberts, ed. Advances in motivation in sport and exercise. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 235–61.

606 S. Roberts et al.

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5

Mullineaux, D.R., C.A. Barnes, and E.F. Barnes. 2001. Factors affecting the likeli- hood to engage in adequate physical activity to promote health. Journal of Sports Sciences 19: 279–88.

Racette, S.B., S.S. Deusinger, M.J. Strube, G.R. Highstein, and H.R. Deusinger. 2005. Weight changes, exercise, and dietary patterns during freshman and sophomore years of college. Journal of American College Health 53: 245–51.

Rhodes, R.E., K.S. Courneya, and L.W. Jones. 2002. Personality, the theory of planned behavior, and exercise: A unique role for extroversion’s activity facet. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 32: 1721–36.

Rodgers, W.M. and L.R. Brawley. 1996. The influence of outcome expectancy and self-efficacy on the behavioral intentions of novice exercisers. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 26: 618–25.

Ryan, R.M. and E.L. Deci. 2000. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic defini- tions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25 (1): 54–67.

Ryan, R.M., R.J. Vallerand, and E.L. Deci. 1984. Intrinsic motivation in sport: A cognitive evaluation theory interpretation. In W.F. Straub and J.M. Williams, eds. Cognitive sport psychology. Lansing, NY: Sport Science Associates, 231–42.

Skår, S., F.F. Sniehotta, G.J. Molloy, A. Prestwich, and V. Araújo-soares. 2011. Do brief online planning interventions increase physical activity amongst university students? A randomised controlled trial. Psychology and Health 26: 399–417.

Thompson, B., G. Coronda, L. Chen, et al. 2007. Prevalence and characteristics of smokers at 30 Pacific Northwest colleges and universities. Nicotine and Tobacco Research 9: 429–38.

Unüsan, N. 2004. Fruit and vegetable consumption among Turkish university stu- dents. International Journal for Vitamin and Nutrition Research 74: 341–48.

Wechsler, H., J.E. Lee, M. Kuo, M. Seibring, T. Nelson, and H. Lee. 2002. Trends in college binge drinking during a period of increased prevention efforts: Findings from four Harvard School of Public Health College of Alcohol Study surveys, 1993–2001. Journal of American College Health 50: 203–17.

World Health Organization. 2010. Global recommendations on physical activity for health. Geneva: WHO.

Journal of Further and Higher Education 607

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

L oy

ol a

M ar

ym ou

nt U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 00

:2 0

08 O

ct ob

er 2

01 5