Moving On!: A Physical Activity Transition Program for Student-Athletes
Project Team- Dr. Erin Reifsteck, Dr. DeAnne Brooks, Dr. Diane Gill
Maintaining a physically active lifestyle after college can be challenging for student-athletes.
Given the physical and mental health concerns associated with dropping from high activity to
inactivity, evidence-based programs are needed to prepare student-athletes for this transition.
With funding from the NCAA Innovations in Research and Practice Grant Program, our research
team conducted a pilot study of Moving On!, a theory-driven, evidence-based program that helps
student-athletes make healthy transitions to life after college sports. Through the Moving On!
curriculum, student-athletes are:
 exposed to lifetime physical activities such as yoga, kickboxing, and dancing;
 equipped with specific strategies to plan for their lifestyle transition by learning to set
effective goals, prepare for unexpected challenges, and discover practical solutions;
 provided the opportunity to develop a game plan for next season: life.
Moving On! was piloted with Division I and Division III student-athletes during the spring 2015
semester. Former student-athletes, current student-athletes, and athletics department
administrators provided positive feedback about the value, demand, and appeal of the Moving
On! program. Following pilot implementation, evaluation, and revisions, a facilitator guide and
student-athlete workbook were developed so that Moving On! may be adopted for use across a
range of NCAA member institutions.
For more information about this
project, or to find out how to bring
Moving On! to your campus, please
contact Principal Investigator,
Dr. Erin Reifsteck:
[email protected]
NCAA Innovations in Research and Practice Grant Program
Moving On!: A Physical Activity Transition Program for Student-Athletes
FINAL REPORT
January 2016
Erin J. Reifsteck, Ph.D. (Principal Investigator)
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Institute to Promote Athlete Health & Wellness
420 Coleman Building
Greensboro, NC 27412
DeAnne D. Brooks, Ed.D.
Salem College
Diane L. Gill, Ph.D.
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Research for this project was conducted with the support of the NCAA. Any opinions, findings
and conclusions are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National
Collegiate Athletic Association.
Problem Statement
Many student-athletes fail to maintain healthy physical activity participation after
transitioning out of competitive sports, and former student-athlete alumni are no more active than
non-athlete college alumni (Reifsteck, Gill, & Brooks, 2013; Sorenson et al., 2015). Despite the
health consequences (e.g., development of cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors) of dropping
from high activity to inactivity (Witkowski & Spangenburg, 2008), programs that promote
lifestyle physical activity among transitioning student-athletes are rare. Whereas extensive
research exists on emotional and career transitions after retirement from sport (e.g., Douglas &
Carless, 2009; Houle, Brewer, & Kluck, 2010; Lally & Kerr, 2005; Lavallee, Gordon, & Grove,
1997; Stambulova, Alfermann, Statler, & Cote, 2009; Taylor & Ogilvie, 1994), few research
studies focus specifically on how college athletes transition to physically active lifestyles
(Reifsteck et al., 2013; Reifsteck, Gill, & Labban, 2016).
Many athletics departments offer life skills programs, but they are largely targeted at the
transition into college and maintaining eligibility (e.g., study skills, time management, substance
abuse prevention). Services related to the transition to life after college athletics are not as
common and usually focus on career transition. The common perception is that student-athletes
value health and physical activity and will continue to be active throughout their lives, but the
evidence suggests otherwise (Reifsteck et al. 2013; Sorenson et al., 2015). Therefore, this project
improves existing practices by helping college student-athletes transition from highly structured
and competitive collegiate athletics to lifetime physical activity. This research is significant and,
to our knowledge, the first to develop an intervention to promote physical activity among
transitioning student-athletes. An evidence-based physical activity transition program to enhance
the long-term health and well-being of student-athletes fits with the NCAA’s holistic approach to
developing student-athletes during their college careers and beyond.
Research suggests that individuals are more likely to maintain physical activity when
exercise behavior is integrated into self-identity (Springer et al., 2013). Maintenance of physical
activity is further enhanced when it is motivated by self-determined reasons (e.g., value and
enjoy activity; Strachan et al., 2012). The objective of this project was to pilot test Moving On!, a
physical activity transition program for student-athletes that is theory-driven and incorporates
evidence-based cognitive-behavioral strategies to promote lifetime physical activity. The specific
aims were as follows:
Aim 1: To pilot test Moving On!, a physical activity transition program that targets
the link between identity, motivation, and physical activity for transitioning studentathletes. Moving On! is grounded in a theory-based conceptual model connecting identity,
motivation, and physical activity. The goals of the pilot test were to: 1) implement Moving On!
to demonstrate the feasibility of offering the 4-session program to student-athletes who are
transitioning out of college, 2) determine the appeal of the program to student-athletes and
athletics department administrators, and 3) identify program content and instructional strategies
that need revision. Primary outcome measures included post-session ratings of the Moving On!
program as well as focus group interviews with participants, former student-athletes, and
athletics department administrators.
Aim 2: To assess the extent to which Moving On! changes relevant theoretical
constructs in student-athlete participants. Moving On! is designed to target theory-based
constructs (i.e., exercise identity and self-determined motivation) that impact physical activity
behaviors (Reifsteck et al., 2013; Reifsteck et al., 2016). Pre, post, and follow-up survey
measures of identity and motivation were the primary outcomes used to determine whether the
1
program was successful at targeting these constructs. Secondary outcome measures, including
intentions to exercise, self-efficacy for exercise, and actual physical behavior, were also assessed
in pre, post, and follow-up surveys. Comments from focus group interviews were also examined.
See Data and Methodology section for details of survey measures.
To achieve these aims, student-athletes (N=13) in their final year of eligibility
participated in the pilot study of Moving On!. The program was first reviewed by former studentathletes (N=7) and their feedback/ recommendations were collected in a focus group interview.
After reviewing and incorporating feedback, the program was implemented with current studentathletes, and evaluated through ratings and post-program focus group interviews. Our central
hypothesis was that participation in Moving On! would foster identity and self-determined
motivation for physical activity among transitioning student-athletes. Research indicates that
physical activity-related identity, motivation, and participation can be changed through targeted
interventions (e.g., Caruso & Gill, 1992; Strachan et al., 2012; Strachan & Whaley, 2013; Ryan
et al., 2009). This approach also reflects the American College of Sports Medicine guidelines for
promoting adherence (ACSM, 2013). The goal of this project was to demonstrate the feasibility
of Moving On! and provide a blueprint for implementing larger-scale programming to promote
the long-term health of all student-athletes. The physical and mental health benefits of physical
activity participation depend upon maintaining activity throughout the lifespan (Sarna et al,
1993; Sorenson et al. 2015). Participating in programs like Moving On! may help studentathletes avoid the abrupt changes that occur through detraining (Gill et al., 2003; Liu et al., 2008)
following a competitive sport career, and thus promote the physical and mental health benefits of
continued regular physical activity for student-athletes (USDHHS, 2008).
Literature Review
According to identity theory (Burke et al., 2003; Burke & Reitzes, 1981; Stryker &
Burke, 2000), identity functions to self-regulate behavior. When sport, exercise, and physical
activity are central to a person’s self-identity, s/he is more likely to engage in those activities
(Brewer et al., 1993; Kendzierski & Morganstein, 2009; Reifsteck, et al., 2013; Reifsteck et al.,
2016; Strachan et al., 2005). When exercise identity is a valued component of an individual’s
self-concept, it plays an important role in maintaining exercise behavior (Anderson et al., 1994;
2001; Strachan et al., 2012; Vlachopoulos et al, 2011). However, “athlete” identity is not
necessarily the same as “exerciser” identity. Athletic identity, which is rooted more specifically
in competitive sport, is often the primary source of self-identity for competitive athletes (Brewer
et al., 1993). As such, athletic identity may be related to participation in competitive sport
training, but may not relate as strongly to lifetime physical activity participation (Reifsteck et al.,
2016). Thus, developing a broader exercise identity may be key to promoting lifelong physical
activity outside of sport.
Self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan et al., 2009) posits that
motivation exists along a continuum from totally external to self-determined and volitional.
Fulfilling the basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness can move
individuals up the motivation continuum toward more self-determined motivation (Edmunds et
al., 2006). Specifically, a person is likely to have higher self-determined motivation if they feel
in control, competent, and connected to others through the activity. Considerable research
supports the tenets of SDT and the importance of self-determined motivation in exercise contexts
(e.g., Edmunds et al., 2006; Markland & Tobin, 2004; Thorgersen-Ntoumani & Ntroumanis,
2006).
2
In general, people are less motivated to participate in exercise compared to sport (Ryan et
al., 2009). This is especially likely to be an issue for student-athletes who are transitioning out of
college sport and losing other motivators to be active (e.g., scholarships, coaches, teammates).
Stephan and colleagues (2003; 2007) argued that implementing transitional programs might
prevent an abrupt change in physical activity that could threaten an athlete’s identity, self-worth,
and long-term health. Our proposed research project tests the feasibility of one such program. As
illustrated in Figure 1, the ultimate goal of the Moving On! program is to foster physical activity
participation among student-athletes after they leave college. The short-term goal is to foster
exercise identity and self-determined motivation, which in turn influence physical activity
participation.
Conceptual Framework
Moving On! focuses on helping student-athletes transition from a sport-based identity to a
broader exercise identity. The program also includes cognitive-behavioral strategies that enhance
self-determined motivation for physical activity and help student-athletes plan for lifetime
physical activity after college. See Figure 1 for a visual depiction of the conceptual framework
underlying the program.
Figure 1. Conceptual Model of a Physical Activity Transition Program for Student-Athletes
The Moving On! program content and specific strategies were carefully designed to foster
a broader active-based identity and self-determined motivation for physical activity (see Table
1).
Methodology and Data Collection
The purpose of this study was to develop and pilot test a physical activity transition
program for NCAA student-athletes. Our project consisted of three phases: (1) development; (2)
implementation; and (3) data analysis/program revision. A focus group of 7 former studentathletes recruited from the local community reviewed materials in the development phase. In the
implementation phase, 13 current NCAA student-athletes voluntarily participated in the program.
These participants and 4 athletics department administrators reviewed the program and provided
feedback in the data analysis/program revision phase. Current student-athletes from one midsized southeastern Division I (DI) university were initially recruited to participate in the 4session Moving On! program. Due to logistical issues including turnover among key athletics
department personnel, program implementation was slightly delayed and participation rates were
3
initially lower than expected. However, an additional pilot of the program in an alternative halfday workshop format was also conducted at a nearby small Division III (DIII) college. The small
sample in this pilot study allows for rich, in-depth review of the program by the participants.
Table 1. Program Components and Strategies
Component
Identity
SelfDetermined
Motivation:
Competence
SelfDetermined
Motivation:
Autonomy
SelfDetermined
Motivation:
Relatedness
Increase
Knowledge
about PA
Guidelines
Goal Setting
and PA
Promotion
Strategies
Objectives
Program Strategies
Explore impact of transition on identity Reflection activity followed by group discussion provides
and help student-athletes transition from a the opportunity to explore likely identity changes through
narrow, sport-based identity (i.e., athletic the transition (e.g., Who I am now; Who I would like to be).
identity) to a broader active-based
Student-athletes are prompted to consider the role that
identity (i.e., exercise identity).
physical activity will play in their future lives.
Develop competence in a wider range of Each session includes a 20-minute guided physical activity
lifetime physical activities and build self- session with activities that are transferable to life after
efficacy for maintaining physical activity college and require minimal equipment or resources.
after college.
Examples include walking, yoga, kickboxing, and dancing.
Activities are designed to be fun, develop new skills, and
low to moderate intensity to promote intrinsic enjoyment.
Encourage choice in activities to promote Activities are guided by the facilitator but emphasize
personal agency in developing a
student-athletes’ self-determination by choosing their own
physically active lifestyle.
goals and developing their own action plans for physical
activity.
Encourage social support and create
Sessions are interactive and group-based, encouraging
connections to others through physical
positive shared experiences through physical activity
activity participation in order to increase
self-determined motivation.
Increase knowledge about physical
Student-athlete workbooks include a physical activity fact
activity guidelines and benefits to
sheet. An interactive presentation tests student-athletes’
promote greater intentions to participate current knowledge about the benefits of regular physical
in long-term physical activity.
activity and risks of inactivity. Student-athletes learn how
exercise intensity is measured and have the opportunity to
practice measuring their heart rate during physical activity.
Adopt effective goal setting practices;
Student-athletes are provided with guidelines on “SMART”
Create action plans that identify potential goal setting strategies. Through worksheets in the
barriers to maintaining physical activity workbook, student-athletes practice setting weekly activity
and behavioral strategies to overcome
goals and recording their activity in an exercise log.
barriers.
Guided activities also challenge student-athletes to create an
action plan for how they will integrate physical activity in
the future.
Prior to beginning the Moving On! program, the current student-athlete participants
completed established measures (pretest) of physical activity-related identity, motivation,
participation, self-efficacy, and future intentions (see Table 2). Participants completed these
measures again immediately upon completion of the program (posttest) and also one month later
(follow-up). Ratings of each program session were provided by participants at the conclusion of
each session. After the program was completed, participants provided ratings and feedback about
their overall experience with Moving On!. Participants were also invited to participate in a focus
group interview where they were asked about their experience overall as well as with specific
program components. Athletics department administrators reviewed the program during a
separate focus group interview and provided feedback about the program’s fit with the
department’s mission and support structure.
4
Table 2. Description of Survey Measures
Primary outcome measures- Identity
Athletic Identity: Athletic Identity Measurement Scale (Brewer et al., 1993), α= .82 (Reifsteck et al., 2016);
Scale: 7-49
Exercise Identity: Exercise Identity Scale (Anderson & Cychosz, 1994), α= .92 (Reifsteck et al., 2016);
Scale: 9-63
Primary outcome measures- Self-Determined Motivation
Motivation Continuum: Behavioral Regulation for Exercise Questionnaire-2 (Markland & Tobin, 2004) plus
additional subscale (McLachlan, Spray, & Hagger, 2011), α= .74-.90 for subscales (Reifsteck, 2014); Scale: 1-5
Perceived Competence, Autonomy, and Relatedness: Psychological Need Satisfaction in Exercise Scale (Wilson,
Rodgers, & Rodgers, 2006), α= .90-.91 for subscales (Wilson et al., 2006); Scale: 1-6
Secondary outcome measures- Physical Activity Intentions, Self-Efficacy, and Participation
Weekly Physical Activity Participation: Godin Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire (Godin & Shephard, 1985),
r=.62-.81 (Godin & Shephard, 1997): Scale: converted to unit score using 9 x # of times participated in strenuous
activity + 5 x # of times participated in moderate activity (Godin, 2011)
Self-Efficacy for Exercise: e.g., How confident are you that you could be physically active when: …I feel that I
don’t have time; When I am in tired; etc. (Marcus & Forsyth, 2009): r=.90 (Marcus et al., 1992); Scale: 1-5
Intention to Exercise in the Future: e.g., I intend to exercise regularly after college; Scale: 1-7
Phase 1: Development (Fall 2014). Content and materials for the Moving On! program,
including a draft of a student-athlete workbook with discussion activities, were developed. A
focus group of 7 former student-athletes reviewed the program materials and provided insights
about their own transition experiences. Former student-athletes were asked about how their
physical activity has changed since leaving college, why they are active or inactive, and
especially how they would design a program to increase physical activity participation in
transitioning student-athletes. Feedback from the former student-athletes was incorporated into
the program prior to implementation.
Phase 2: Implementation (Spring 2015). The standard version of Moving On! was
piloted on a Division I campus during the spring 2015 semester. The standard program consists
of four one-hour sessions over four weeks (1 session per week). The first session includes an
overview of physical activity benefits and risks, recommendations, and initial goal-setting.
Session 2 focuses on current identities and likely identity changes through the transition. Session
3 emphasizes revised goal-setting and strategies for overcoming barriers. Session 4 reviews
previous sessions and focuses on planning for the transition out of college and staying physically
active. Physical activities are built into each of the four sessions to provide active experiences
with varied lifetime physical activities (e.g., yoga, dancing). Activity sessions include choice and
skill development to promote autonomy and competence. To foster relatedness, all sessions have
group-based activities. A modified version of Moving On! was piloted on a Division III campus
during the spring semester and consists of the same content as the standard program but is
structured as one 4-hour workshop rather than four 1-hour weekly sessions.
Phase 3: Data Analysis/Program Revision (April - December 2015). Analysis of primary
and secondary outcome measures and program feedback were used to guide revisions and
enhance the program for implementation with larger groups of student-athletes in the future. A
facilitator guide and revised student-athlete workbook were developed to help promote adoption
and sustainability of the program and enable program content and materials to be implemented at
other universities.
Data Analyses. Because statistical significance tests are affected by small sample size,
they were not used to assess the survey data collected in this project. However, effect size,
5
which is not affected by sample size, can be used to assess differences when sample sizes are
small and power is low (Kramer & Rosenthal, 1999). Therefore, changes in relevant outcome
measures were assessed by effect sizes from dependent samples t-tests. Conservative effect sizes
for repeated measures were estimated using Hedges’ g correction (Lakens, 2013). These values
are interpreted cautiously and are partially informed by widely employed guidelines from Cohen
(1988): small, >.20; medium, >.50; and large, >.80. Descriptive statistics were used to
summarize participant ratings of the program. The focus group sessions with former and current
student-athletes and athletics department administrators were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed
for common emergent themes. See Table 3 for depiction of how data sources were used to meet
the evaluation goals of the project.
Table 3. Data Sources Used to Meet Evaluation Goals
Former
student-athlete
focus group
Pre, post, and
follow-up
surveys
(pre-program)
(student-athletes)
Data Sources
Session and
Overall Program
Evaluation
Ratings
Studentathlete focus
group
Athletics Dept.
administrators
focus group
(post-program)
(post-program)
(student-athletes)
Evaluation Goals
Determine the appeal
of Moving On! to
student-athletes and
athletic dept.
administrators
Identify program
structure and session
content/strategies
needing revision
Investigate extent to
which Moving On!
affects theoretical
constructs (e.g.,
identity, motivation)
Determine the effect
of the program on
physical activity
intentions, selfefficacy, and behavior
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Findings
Participant Overview
Prior to implementing Moving On! with current student-athletes, 7 former NCAA
student-athletes (Male: N=4; Female: N=3) were recruited to participate in a focus group
interview in which they discussed their own transitional experiences as well as reviewed
program content and provided feedback. The former student-athletes ranged in age from 22 years
old to 38 years old and identified primarily as African-American (N=4) or White (N=3). Six of
the 7 former student-athletes participated at the Division I level in cross country/track (N=4),
football (N=1), or volleyball (N=1). One participant was a dual-sport athlete (soccer, ice hockey)
at the Division II level.
6
A total of 13 student-athletes participated in the standard (DI university: N=6) or
modified version (DIII college: N=7) of the Moving On! program. Participants identified
predominantly as female (N=11; Male: N=2) and African-American (N=8; White: N=3;
Multiracial: N=2). Student-athletes from a variety of sports, including basketball (N=7),
volleyball (N=2), cheerleading (N=1), soccer (N=1), softball (N=1), and tennis (N=1),
participated in this pilot.
Following implementation and evaluation of the program with current student-athletes, 4
athletics department administrators (White: N=4; Female: N=2; Male: N=2) from the DI
university participated in a separate focus group interview where they reviewed the Moving On!
program and provided feedback on the value, demand, and feasibility of continuing the program
within the collegiate athletics department setting.
Summary of Project Goals and Related Findings
There were two aims for this project: mainly, to conduct an initial pilot of Moving On! to
determine the feasibility of implementing such a program within a college athletics environment;
and secondarily, to assess preliminary evidence of Moving On!’s effect on relevant outcome
variables of interest. Findings related to each aim and evaluation goal are presented in the
sections that follow.
Aim 1: The primary aim for this feasibility study was to pilot the Moving On! physical activity
transition program. The main project evaluation goals corresponding to this aim were:
1) Determine the appeal/demand of Moving On! to student-athletes and athletics
department administrators
 Data Sources: program evaluation ratings; focus group interviews with current
student-athletes, former student-athletes, and athletics department administrators
2) Identify program structure and session content/strategies needing revision
 Data Sources: program evaluation ratings; focus group interviews with current
student-athletes, former student-athletes, and athletics department administrators
Aim 1 Main Findings:
Appeal of Moving On!
Evaluation Ratings. At the end of each of the four sessions, the DI student-athletes
completed anonymous evaluation forms where they provided ratings and comments on their
experience in that session. All ratings were on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly
agree). The participants provided generally high ratings (≥4) across the four sessions for each
criteria. At the end of the program, student-athletes at both the DI university and DIII college
rated their overall experience with Moving On!. Findings were very positive with no criteria
receiving lower than a 4 (agree) and most ratings averaging close to 5 (strongly agree).
7
Post-Session Ratings
I enjoyed the physical activity in the session
4.83
4.75
4.80
4.50
I learned something new from the physical activity
portion
4.83
4.75
4.60
4.00
I enjoyed the presentation/group discussion
5.00
4.75
4.80
4.75
I learned something from the presentation/group
discussion
5.00
4.75
4.60
4.75
Overall I enjoyed the session
4.83
4.75
4.60
4.75
Overall the session increased my knowledge
4.67
4.75
4.80
4.00
1.00
1=Strongly Disagree, 5= Strongly Agree
2.00
Session 4
Session 3
3.00
Session 2
4.00
5.00
Session 1
Post-Program Ratings
Average across all criteria
4.84
I would recommend Moving On! to other studentathletes
I feel more prepared to transition to a physically
active lifestyle after college
4.92
4.77
Overall I enjoyed the program
4.92
Overall the program increased my knowledge
1=Strongly Disagree, 5= Strongly Agree
4.75
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
In their post-session and post-program evaluations, participants also provided open-ended
feedback regarding what they liked most about Moving On!. In describing which specific
aspects of Moving On! they enjoyed the most or worked best, participants cited the goal-setting
activities, group discussions, and the physical activity demonstrations as particularly helpful.
They especially enjoyed the yoga, kickboxing, and dance activities included in the program and
appreciated learning new information and alternative options for staying physically active.
8
Specific to knowledge gains as a result of participating in Moving On!, participants cited:
“awareness of lifestyle change”; “alternative, fun ways to workout”; and “knowledge on how to
go about my future goals.”
Focus Group Interviews. During focus groups, student-athletes described their
participation in Moving On! as being a valuable and positive experience:
Thanks for everything. Like it really has helped! Um, I definitely am more
like conscious about, “Oh, I should probably go run today. Or I should
probably go walk.” And just for health purposes, not even for the game or
anything like that. Um, I think it will definitely make the transition easier
after graduation.
As a result of the program, participants’ knowledge of physical activity options increased.
They also gained insight that health-related physical activity differs from the competitionfocused physical activity they engaged in as student-athletes:
Just more of a knowledge of what type of different exercises you could do
than the exercises you’re used to doing. Or knowing you can do more
activities that are better or just different to keep the excitement of working
out.
Our mindset goes to, “Oh, we need to lift heavy for 45 minutes to get the
results that we’re used to.” But then you brought in the information like,
well, there’s being sports-ready and then there’s just being healthy.
To be healthy you still get results and it's 20 minutes of strenuous activity. I
mean, you won't look like a body builder, but you're gonna be healthy …so
it's like that was just something that was like shocking, because all we've
known is sports!
I think it’s just knowing like, Oh, you can do fun things to work out!
Participants expressed their appreciation of the program’s structure, especially the
inclusion of physical activities, the student-athlete workbook, and the group discussions:
And it’s the activities like the dancing, the yoga, and the kickboxing. ‘Cause
it’s one thing to look up videos or be told about it but it’s something else to
actually experience it and to actually have a short demonstration.
I think it’ll be easier now. Like this, I really liked the booklet because it
helped to be able to write down…jot down hopes and the questions that are
asked and are able to respond—they’re important questions. And it’s
informative as well.
I think it was helpful to see that other athletes have trouble with
transitioning. Like I have that trouble, right, ‘cause I haven’t played softball
in a while because of an injury. But seeing that it happens to other people
was, I don’t know, good.
9
Administrators valued the resources provided through Moving On! as a supplement to
their efforts to support student-athletes:
I think our whole reason for doing what we do is to prepare our student
athletes for success ... and, you know, part of being successful in life and
having the energy to achieve is being healthy... and having that energy level,
and staying active is such an important part of that.
Any other campuses I've been on, I've never really heard conversations
about, you know, that part of preparing them for success after they're done
with their time on campus ... I don't think I've seen that be a focus, but it's so
important.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
Former student-athletes who participated in focus groups during program development
articulated the limitations they felt from having a lack of knowledge about health-related
physical activity and also expressed the need to address a strong athletic identity held by studentathletes:
You're feeling like, I know how to exercise 'cause I do it every day.
But…training is totally different than exercise.
The question [in the student-athlete workbook] about how would you
describe yourself. When people would ask me that, it was so weird because
you do just always say it, like I’m a volleyball player. Like okay, what else
are you? Well, not much. I’m a volleyball player; that is what I do.
Former student-athletes endorsed Moving On! as a program that addresses important
elements related to the transition out of collegiate athletics:
It seems to make sense to me. It's kind of like a “How To” guide, be your
own person and not be so like just a product of your environment. Like, set
your own environment.
Revisions to Moving On!
Evaluation Ratings. In their post-session and post-program evaluations, participants
were also asked to provide open-ended feedback/suggestions for improvement. Few suggestions
for improving the program were offered, with most comments indicating a demand for
expanding the duration, content, and frequency of the program sessions. Based on this feedback,
participants appeared to value their experience in Moving On! and desired additional program
offerings. Specific examples of comments reflecting this sentiment included:
I would love to continue this!
Great program that I hope more people attend in the future.
The program was very helpful and taught me how to plan more efficiently for the future.
I am going to recommend it to everyone.
10
Focus Group Interviews. The student athletes who participated in the standard 4-session
version of the Moving On! program suggested adding more sessions or extending the time of
each session:
I remember we were leaving after I think the second one and we were like,
“this is a lot more fun than I thought it was gonna be!” Like, I wish we had
more sessions!
To have more time together would be very beneficial.
So whether you made this one session a week longer or you doubled it up, say
we meet on Wednesdays and Thursdays… because there's a lot of information,
and to go from week to week, you kind of retain it and kind of remember
things, but … I feel like there's much more that could be taught along with
this.
Both administrators and program participants recognized the important role that nutrition
plays in a healthy lifestyle. They also recognized that, like physical activity, nutritional needs for
post-competitive athletes vary from those of current student-athletes. The student-athletes
suggested expanding Moving On! content to include a component focused on nutrition:
One session or something and just having nutrition… Like how to like switch
it up to how much you would actually need to eat versus like how much we're
used to eating.
And so it's like to go from that to like scaling it back down… just help with
like what to snack on, what to eat, and stuff like that would be beneficial.
You’re so used to just eating a lot, so you can have the carbs and just the energy to keep
playing. But like now that you're not playing, that knocks out like four hours worth of
energy that you need. But you're still in the habit of eating …And so adding that
[information to the program] would be helpful.
Participants saw Moving On! as a valuable resource for student-athletes and offered tips
for recruiting more student-athletes in transition. In particular, they suggested reaching out to
coaches to encourage participation among their student-athletes:
Talk to the coaches at that university so they can go and talk to their senior players and
say I think this would be a good program for you to help transition after you graduate.
Just talking to the head coach, because I don't think there's one head coach
here who wouldn't like this program for their seniors. So I think like if you just
pitched to them like what the program is about, I know they will at least take
the time to talk to this person.
Program participants and administrators felt that Moving On! would have a
greater sustained impact if it incorporated additional accessible resources such as
mobile “apps” that participants could access beyond the program:
11
I feel like I would want a good app to have. So that way I could just access it
really fast and just see everything that I need to work on. Like, oh! Well I’ve
only worked out twice this week, I need to tighten up. (Participant)
So, if there was some way to create an app that tracked some of the basic
measures within the paper workbook that would make them part of an overall
network of former student athletes. (Administrator)
Aim 2: The secondary aim for this pilot study was to collect preliminary data to assess the
extent to which Moving On! impacts relevant theoretical constructs– primarily exercise identity
and self-determined motivation. The main project evaluation goals related to this aim were:
3) Investigate extent to which Moving On! affects theoretical constructs (e.g., identity,
motivation)
 Data Sources: current student-athlete surveys; focus group interviews
4) Determine the effect of the program on physical activity intentions, self-efficacy, and
behavior
 Data Sources: current student-athlete surveys; focus group interviews
Aim 2 Main Findings:
Effects on identity and motivation
Current Student-Athlete Survey Data. Pre-, post-, and follow-up survey data from the
DI student-athletes who participated in the standard 4-session program were collected, while
DIII participants in the modified program completed pre- and follow-up surveys only. Due to
the length of the survey and the conceptually impossible nature of observing changes in behavior
and other stable constructs within the timeframe of the modified format, an immediate post-test
was not administered to the DIII student-athletes. In order to overcome logistical challenges and
to coordinate efforts accordingly, the Moving On! program was implemented later in the spring
semester than originally planned. Because of the delayed implementation, it was challenging to
reach all student-athletes, particularly the DIII student-athletes, at the one-month follow-up time
point as they were no longer on campus. However, retention of the DI participant group was high
(see Table 4).
Table 4. Survey Completion Rates
Pre-Test
N=6
DI University
N=7
DIII College
Post-Test
N=6
--
Follow-Up Survey
N=5
N=4
Only findings from the DI student-athletes who completed the standard version of
Moving On! and all three surveys (pre-, post-, and follow-up) are reported here. These findings
are limited by the small sample size and are intended to provide a preliminary picture of the
potential impact of the Moving On! program. Upon completion of program development and
optimization, a longitudinal fully-powered randomized controlled trial is needed to evaluate the
full impact of Moving On! on attitudes and behaviors, especially in relationship to a control
group.
12
Motivation. Intrinsic (e.g., I exercise because it’s fun), integrated (Exercise is essential to
my identity and sense of self), and identified (e.g., It’s important to me to exercise regularly)
regulations are the most self-determined forms of motivation. Overall, as Table 5 shows, changes
in self-determined motivation were positive but small. Identified regulation increased slightly
from pre- to post-test, with a continued small positive increase one month later, suggesting
enhanced values and goals for exercise among participants. Intrinsic regulation changed little at
the post-test, but became more positive at the follow-up, suggesting a small positive effect on
exercise enjoyment.
Need Fulfillment. Fulfilling the basic needs of competence (e.g., I feel capable of
completing exercises that are challenging to me), autonomy (e.g., I feel free to exercise in my
own way), and relatedness (e.g., I feel like I share a common bond with people who are
important to me when we exercise together) leads to more self-determined motivation for
physical activity. Again, changes were mostly positive but small. Competence and autonomy
showed small to moderate improvements at the one month follow-up, suggesting that
participants perceived greater skill and choice in their activities. Interestingly, participants
reported decreases in feelings of relatedness. As suggested by participants’ comments in focus
group interviews, student-athletes are likely to lose connection to others (e.g., teammates,
coaches) when they transition out of the structured environment of their college teams and may
benefit by seeking out lifestyle physical activities with a group element. For example, one former
student-athlete who is regularly active said, “I do belong to a kickboxing gym and it is a group
class so I think the similarity between that and volleyball comes together because I don't know
how to like workout by myself and I don't want to." Perhaps participating in a program like
Moving On!, which provides an opportunity to discuss the transition and develop relationships
with other transitioning student-athletes, can buffer this loss of connection, similar to the effect
that the team environment in kickboxing has for this former student-athlete.
Identity. Identity-related perceptions did not change at the post-test, but exercise identity
(e.g., I consider myself an exerciser) became slightly stronger at the follow-up, whereas athletic
identity (e.g., I consider myself and athlete) slightly decreased. These changes reflect the goal of
the Moving On! program to bolster a broader active identity that is inclusive of a physically
active lifestyle beyond competitive sport. These small positive changes in motivation and
identity are promising, but added research with a control group and larger samples is needed to
confirm these findings. See Table 5 for means and effect sizes at pre-test, post-test, and followup.
Table 5. Mean Changes in Identity and Motivation from Pre-Test to Post-Test to Follow-Up
among DI participants (N=5)
Outcome
Pre-Test Post-Test
Effect
Variable
M
M
Size*
Intrinsic
3.80
3.90
0.09
Integrated
3.50
3.65
0.11
Identified
4.05
4.20
0.18
Competence
5.40
5.47
0.12
Autonomy
5.30
5.37
0.10
Relatedness
5.17
5.00
0.30
Exercise Identity
46.60
46.00
0.04
Athletic Identity
43.00
42.60
0.07
*Effect sizes reflect changes from baseline (pre-test)
Description
Negligible (+)
Negligible (+)
Small (+)
Negligible (+)
Negligible (+)
Small (-)
Negligible (-)
Negligible (+)
13
Follow-Up
M
4.05
3.65
4.20
5.60
5.60
4.83
48.40
42.20
Effect
Size*
0.26
0.13
0.18
0.33
0.44
0.47
0.16
0.16
Description
Small (+)
Negligible (+)
Small (+)
Small (+)
Small/Mod. (+)
Moderate (-)
Small (+)
Small (-)
Focus Group Interviews. In focus group interviews following completion of Moving
On!, student-athletes’ comments reflected an awareness of motivational challenges related to
continuing their physical activity participation without the structured environment of college
athletics. On the other hand, they also expressed a new appreciation for their autonomy in
making their own choices for physical activity in the future.
You have to figure out your own workout plan. You don’t have one set for you. Your
coach is not going to be like, hey, you’ve got to do this, this, this, and this. That’s what
we’re doing at practice today. You have to sit there and think, what do I need to work on
today? And that, I think, would be the most difficult to me.
I’m looking forward to it. I’m looking forward to the independency…I think
that at times it’s going to be difficult but, like what she was saying, with the
booklet, being able to recognize the difference between setting goals and
setting specific goals…cause right now I have a general plan. I know what I
want to do but don’t have the specifics that I’m going to need to get there. So
that’s something different that I never really thought of before.
Findings from the focus group interviews also suggest that Moving On! fosters an
understanding that student-athletes’ identities and related physical activity experiences are likely
to evolve through the transition out of college sports:
Like this is a big deal. We’re transitioning. We’re not gonna be athletes any more.
I mean, even though they're two different like categories for like being prepared for our
sports and being prepared for- well, just being healthy. We're just used to being prepared
for sports…
Effects on physical activity intentions, self-efficacy, and behavior
Current Student-Athlete Survey Data. Physical activity intentions, self-efficacy, and
actual behavior were measured as secondary outcomes of the Moving On! program because,
theoretically, they are impacted by the mediating variables (e.g., identity, self-determined
motivation) targeted in the program. Following the Moving On! program, participants reported
slightly greater intentions to be physically active after college from pre- to post-test and large
improvements from pre-test to follow-up. Confidence in ability to be physically active, or selfefficacy, appeared to continually decrease from pre- to post-test to follow-up. While this finding
contradicts the goals of the Moving On! program, it likely reflects the development of more
realistic perceptions of physical activity barriers. For instance, Moving On! encourages studentathletes to consider and set more intentional goals for the future, and discussion activities
provide the opportunity for participants to critically reflect on potential challenges and barriers of
the “real world.” Thus, becoming more knowledgeable may lead to lower but more realistic
beliefs about the challenges of maintaining a physically active lifestyle. Ideally, Moving On!
prepares student-athletes to better meet these challenges.
Finally, reported physical activity levels decreased from pre- to post-test and remained
lower one month later. This finding is not surprising given that maintaining the very high level
14
of physical activity required of competitive collegiate athletics is not realistic when one is no
longer in that environment. Indeed, research confirms that former athletes become less active
after competitive sport participation and are no more active than their non-athlete counterparts
(Reifsteck et al., 2013; Sorenson et al., 2015; Stephan et al., 2007). The goal of Moving On! is to
prevent dramatic declines in physical activity at the end of an athletic career, which has
important identity, self-worth, and health-related consequences (Kerr et al., 2014; Simon &
Docherty, 2014; Stephan et al., 2007; Witkowski & Spangenburg, 2008). A longitudinal fullypowered randomized controlled trial is needed to evaluate whether student-athletes who
participate in transitional programming experience less severe declines in their physical activity
after college compared to those who do not.
See Table 6 for means and effect sizes at pre-, post-test, and follow-up
Table 6. Mean Changes from Pre-Test to Post-Test to Follow-Up among DI participants (N=5)
Outcome Variable
Pre-Test
M
PostEffect
Test
Size*
M
Intentions for Future
6.00
6.40
0.38
Self-Efficacy
3.96
3.44
0.53
Physical Activity
69.80
41.00
1.05
*Effect sizes reflect changes from baseline (pre-test)
Description
Follow-Up
M
Effect
Size*
Description
Small/Mod. (+)
Moderate (-)
Large (-)
6.80
3.28
38.20
1.00
0.74
1.31
Large (+)
Mod./Large (-)
Large (-)
Focus Group Interviews. During Moving On! participants learned to redefine physical
activity as something that could be fun, enjoyable, and health-enhancing. They also developed
lifestyle physical activity-related goals and plans for accomplishing those goals. According to
participants’ comments, these lessons and activities resulted in improved self-efficacy and
increased intentions to pursue health-related physical activity during and following their
transition. Participants provided the following explanations for how Moving On! prepared them
to be physically active in the future:
It’s changed my mindset from going, "Oh, I'm gonna have to fit in an hour of
like free weights and running on the track," to "Oh, I could literally do a
Zumba class for 30 minutes, like three times- three to five times a week.
It’s like we were helped to set goals and to try to achieve them in our future
and short term.
Like with setting goals…like you set the long-term and then set the three short
term to reach the one—that was really helpful for me. ‘Cause like I know I
have goals but I’ve never set down and put like what I have to do to get there.
Summary of Findings
Overall, feedback from former student-athletes, athletics department administrators, and
program participants suggest that Moving On! is a valuable and effective program for cultivating
a healthy transition out of collegiate sports. Despite participating in different formats of the
Moving On! program, both DI and DIII participant groups reported having a positive and
productive experience. One DI student-athlete commented, “We enjoyed it! So definitely if you
have it again... that'll be great and fun to look forward to.” Similarly, a DIII student-athlete
15
noted, “Ya’ll covered everything that was possible to cover. I mean how can you make this
easier?” The positive responses by student-athlete participants in both groups are notable given
that the two groups experienced different formats of the Moving On! program. Their shared
praise of the program indicates that Moving On! is modifiable and can be adapted to meet the
needs of individual institutions while still providing valuable resources to student-athlete
participants. Given the success and positive reception of our pilot program, we plan to continue
and expand the program. Incorporating additional complementary material (i.e., a nutritional
component) to the Moving On! program will be a priority in our continued development of
transitional resources for NCAA student-athletes. After further development and optimization of
Moving On!, a formal evaluation with a larger sample of student-athletes is needed to determine
the full impact of the program on student-athlete well-being.
Implications for Campus-Level Programming
Retirement from sports after college is inevitable for most NCAA student-athletes, but
programs do not typically promote physical activity and health behaviors for student-athletes
beyond their collegiate career. The Moving On! program promotes the NCAA Division I
Manual’s Principle 2.2, “The Principle of Student-Athlete Well-Being,” which mandates that:
“Intercollegiate athletics programs shall be conducted in a manner designed to protect and
enhance the physical and educational well-being of student athletes” (p.2). NCAA institutions
can fulfill their commitment to the holistic development of student-athletes by implementing
educational programming and incorporating specific strategies to promote lifelong physical
activity and well-being among student-athletes. Moving On! directly meets this need by
providing student-athletes with education and evidence-based cognitive-behavioral strategies to
promote and maintain physical activity for healthy living. Following the pilot implementation,
evaluation, and revision of this program, a facilitator guide and student-athlete workbook were
developed so that administrators at other NCAA institutions can be trained to facilitate Moving
On! on their campus (see Figure 2). These resources help program participants and leaders
progress through Moving On! content and activities. The development and packaging of the
student-athlete workbook and facilitator guide help ensure the sustainability and wider reach of
the program so that it may be adopted and adapted for use at a range of NCAA member
institutions.
Figure 2. Moving On! Facilitator Guidebook and Student-Athlete Workbook
16
References
American College of Sports Medicine (2013). ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and
prescription (9th Ed.). Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Health: Baltimore,
MD.
Anderson, D.F. & Cychosz, C.M. (1994). Development of an exercise identity scale. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 78, 747-751.
Anderson, D.F., Cychosz, C.M., Franke, W.D. (2001). Preliminary exercise identity scale (EIS)
norms for three adult samples. Journal of Sport Behavior, 24(1), 1-9.
Brewer, B. W., Van Raalte, J. L., & Linder, D. E. (1993). Athletic identity: Hercules’ muscles or
Achilles heel? International Journal of Sport Psychology, 24, 237-254.
Caruso, C.M. & Gill, D.L. (1992). Strengthening physical self-perceptions through exercise.
Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 32(4), 416-427.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum.
Douglas, K., & Carless, D. (2009). Abandoning the performance narrative: Two women’s stories
of transition from professional sport. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21, 213-230.
doi: 10.1080/10413200902795109
Edmunds, J., Ntoumani, N. & Duda, J. (2006). A test of Self-Determination Theory in exercise.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(9), 2240–2265.
Gill, J.M., Caslake, M.J., McAllister, C., Tsofliou, F., Ferrell, W.K., Packard, C.J., & Malkova,
D. (2003). Effects of short-term detraining on postprandial metabolism, endothelial
function, and inflammation in endurance-trained men: dissociation between changes in
triglyceride metabolism and endothelial function. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and
Metabolism, 88(4), 328–335. doi: 10.1210/jc.2003-030226
Godin, G. (2011). The Godin Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire. Health Fitness
Journal of Canada, 4(1), 18-22.
Godin, G., Shephard, R. J. (1997). Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire. Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise, 29, S36-S38.
Godin, G., & Shephard, R. J. (1985). A simple method to assess exercise behavior in the
community. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 10, 141-146.
Houle, J. L. W., Brewer, B. W., & Kluck, A. S. (2010). Developmental trends in athletic
identity: A two-part retrospective study. Journal of Sport Behavior, 33, 146-159.
Kramer, S.H. & Rosenthal, R. (1999). Effect sizes and significant levels in small sample
research. In Hoyle, R. H. (Ed.), Statistical strategies for small sample research (pp. 6074). London: Sage.
Jacobs, D. R., Jr., Ainsworth, B. E., Hartman, T. J., & Leon, A. S. (1993). A simultaneous
evaluation of 10 commonly used physical activity questionnaires. Medicine & Science in
Sport & Exercise, 25, 81-91.
Kendzierski, D. & Morganstein. (2009). Test, revision, and cross-validation of the physical
activity self-definition model. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 31, 484-504.
Kerr, Z.Y., DeFreese, J.D., & Marshall, S.W. (2014). Current physical and mental health of
former collegiate athletes. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine, 2(8),
2325967114544107. doi: 10.1177/2325967114544107
17
Lally, P. S., & Kerr, G. A. (2005). The career planning, athletic identity, and student role
identity of intercollegiate student-athletes. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,
76, 275-285.
Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a
practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863
Lavallee, D., Gordon, S., & Grove, J.R. (1997). Retirement from sport and the loss of athletic
identity. Journal of Personal and Interpersonal Loss, 2, 129-147. doi:
10.1080/10811449708414411
Stambulova, Alfermann, Statler, & Cote, 2009; Taylor & Ogilvie, 1994).
Liu, T.C., Lee S.D., Huang C.Y., Chien K.Y., Lin, C.Y., & Kuo, C.H. (2008). Effects of shortterm detraining on obesity measures and glucose tolerance in elite athletes. Journal of
Sports Sciences, 26(9), 19–25.
Marcus, B.H. & Forsyth, L.H. Motivation people to be physically active. (2nd
Edition).Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Marcus, B. H., Selby, V. C., Niaura, R. S., & Rossi, J. S. (1992) Self-efficacy and the stages of
exercise behavior change. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 63, 60–66.
Markland, D. & Tobin, V. (2004). A modification to the Behavioural Regulation in Exercise
Questionnaire to include an assessment of amotivation. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 26, 191-196.
McLachlan, S., Spray, C., & Hagger, M. S. (2011). The development of a scale measuring
integrated regulation in exercise. British Journal of Health Psychology, 16, 722–743. doi:
10.1348/2044-8287.002009
National Collegiate Athletic Association (2015). The 2015-2016 NCAA Division I Manual.
National Collegiate Athletic Association: Indianapolis, IN.
Reifsteck, E.J. (2014). A modeling approach to identity, motivation, and physical activity
participation in former college athletes (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/Reifsteck_uncg_0154D_11402.pdf
Reifsteck, E. J., Gill, D. L., & Labban, J. D. (2016). “Athletes” and “exercisers”: Understanding
identity, motivation, and physical activity participation in former college athletes. Sport,
Exercise, and Performance Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:
10.1037/spy0000046
Reifsteck, E.J., Gill, D.L., & Brooks, D.L. (2013). The relationship between athletic identity and
physical activity among former college athletes. Athletic Insight, 5(3), 271-284.
Ryan, R.M. & Deci, E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new
directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67. doi:
10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Ryan, R.M., Williams, G.C., Patrick, H., Deci, E.L. (2009). Self-determination theory and
physical activity: The dynamics of motivation in development and wellness. Hellenic
Journal of Psychology, 6, 107-124.
Sarna, S., Sahi, T., & Koskenvuo, M., & Kaprio, J. (1993) Increased life expectancy of world
class male athletes. Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise, 25(2), 237-244.
Simon, J.E. & Docherty, C.L. (2014). Current health-related quality of life is lower in former
Division I collegiate athletes than in non-collegiate athletes. American Journal of Sports
Medicine, 42(2), 423-429. doi: 10.1177/0363546513510393
18
Sorenson, S.C., Romano, R., Azen, S.P., Schroeder, E.T., & Salem, G.J. (2015). Life span
exercise among elite intercollegiate student athletes. Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary
Approach, 7, 80-86. doi: 10.1177/1941738114534813
Springer, J.B., Lamborn, S.D., & Pollard, D.M. (2013). The importance of basic psychological
need satisfaction in developing the physically active self. American Journal of Health
Promotion, 27(5), 284-293. doi: 10.4278/ajhp.110211-QUAL-62
Stephan, Y., Bilard, J., Ninot, G., & Delignieres, D (2003). Bodily transition out of elite sport: A
one‐year study of physical self and global self‐esteem among transitional athletes.
International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1(2), 192-207. doi:
10.1080/1612197X.2003.9671712
Stephan, Y., Torregrosa, M., & Sanchez, X. (2007). The body matters: Psychophysical impact of
retiring from elite sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8, 73-83. doi:
10.1016/j.psychsport.2006.01.006
Strachan, S.M., Fortier, S., Perras, G.M., & Lugg, C. (2012). Understanding variations in identity
strength through identity theory and self-determination theory. International Journal of
Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 1-13. doi: 10.1080/1612197X.2013.749005
Strachan, S.M. & Whaley, D.E. (2013). Identities, schemas, and definitions: How the aspects of
the self influence exercise behavior. In P. Ekkekakis (Ed.) Routledge Handbook of
Physical Activity and Mental Health (pp. 212-223), New York, NY: Routledge
Strachan. S.M., Woodgate, J., Brawley, L.R., & Tse, A. (2005). The relationship of self-efficacy
and self-identity to long-term maintenance of vigorous physical activity. Journal of
Applied Biobehavioral Research, 10(2), 98-112.
Stambulova, N., Alfermann, D., Statler, T., & Cote, J. (2009). ISSP position stand: Career
development and transitions of athletes. International Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 7, 395-412.
Taylor, J., & Ogilvie, B. C. (1994). A conceptual model of adaptation to retirement process
among athletes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 6, 1-20.
Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. & Ntoumanis, N. (2006). The role of self-determined motivation in the
understanding of exercise-related behaviours, cognitions and physical self-evaluations.
Journal of Sports Sciences, 24(4), 393-404. doi: 10.1080/02640410500131670
US Department of Health and Human Services (2008). Physical Activity Guidelines. Retrieved
from: http://www.health.gov/paguidelines/
Vlachopoulos, S.P, Kaperoni, & Moustaka, F.C. (2011). The relationship of self-determination
theory variables to exercise identity. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12, 265-272.
doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.11.006
Wilson, P.M., Rogers, W.T., & Rodgers, W.M., & Wild, T.C. (2006). The Psychological Need
Satisfaction in Exercise Scale. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 28, 231-251.
Witkowski, S., & Spangenburg, E. E. (2008). Reduced physical activity and the retired athlete: a
dangerous combination? British Journal of Sports Medicine, 42, 952-953.
doi:10.1136/bjsm.2008.054353
19