Group structure and entitativity in group fitness: considering groupness at within- and between-group levels

Group-based exercise for Parkinson's: a qualitative study of participants and partners' perceptions of an exercise class delivered through a community-university collaboration

BACKGROUND

Community-based exercise programmes (CBEPs) offer a practical and viable approach to providing people with Parkinson's disease (PwP) the opportunity to exercise as an ancillary therapeutic benefit to pharmacological management. This study explores the perceptions of exercising participants (PwP) and non-participating partners involved in an exercise class delivered through a community-university partnership.

METHODS

Two separate focus group discussions were conducted: one with class participants (PwP: n = 7, H&Y scale I to III), and the other with non-participating partners of PwP (n = 4).

RESULTS

Thematic analysis of the data identified that a range of physical, psychological and social factors were perceived to influence engagement: (1) actively taking control, (2) exercise is medicine for the mind and body, and (3) a community working together to promote exercise for parkinson's. Participants and partners felt that the support from the group, including the instructors and student volunteers, empowered and supported PwP to proactively self-manage their health, enjoy exercise in an inclusive group setting, and develop strong social connections with others in the local Parkinson's community. Support to exercise from healthcare professionals was identified as both an enabler and barrier to participation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study underscores the significance of a community-university partnership as a complementary therapeutic approach for PwP. It also provides critical reflections on its sustainability, including implications for how exercise is considered as medicine for PwP. Additionally, it offers practical recommendations to galvanise community participation and provide inclusive and viable exercise opportunities for PwP.

What explains the well-being benefits of physical activity? A mixed-methods analysis of the roles of participation frequency and social identification

OBJECTIVE

Physical activity in a social setting is said to be associated with well-being because it provides opportunities for participants to form social relationships. However, there are inconsistent findings regarding the well-being benefits of participating in physical activity with others. To address this inconclusive evidence, we draw on the social identity approach to health and well-being to examine whether (a) the frequency of physical activity participation in a social setting and (b) the degree of social identification associated with it, have different relationships with participants' well-being.

METHODS

We implemented a two-phase, mixed-methods design with members of women's only fitness clubs in Japan. In Study 1, we collected survey responses about social identification, life satisfaction, and eudaimonic well-being from 1118 members. The survey data were combined with respondents' objective participation data from a membership database. In Study 2, we interviewed a sample of club members to understand how the nature of social relationships differed depending on the degree of their social identification.

RESULTS

Study 1 found that social identification with a fitness club, but not the frequency of attending the club for physical activity, was positively associated with members' well-being. Study 2 revealed that members with high social identification experienced more affective relationships with other members than those with medium or low identification.

CONCLUSIONS

Our research provides quantitative and qualitative evidence supporting the association between social identification and the well-being benefits of physical activity in a social setting. It confirms the predictions of the social identity approach to health and well-being, demonstrating that people enjoy well-being benefits from physical activity participation when it is internalized as a meaningful definition of self.

A comparison of physiological intensity and psychological perceptions during three different group exercise formats

Introduction

Past research highlighted that group fitness is an ideal format to meet exercise prescription guidelines. To add, a group enhances exertion, enjoyment, and satisfaction. In the last five years, streaming (live classes on screen with other participants visible) and on demand (pre-recorded classes on screen without other participants visible) formats have grown in popularity. Our goal is to compare the physiological intensity and psychological perceptions of live group, live streaming, and non-live on demand classes. We hypothesize that live classes will have the greatest cardiovascular intensity, enjoyment, and satisfaction followed by streaming and finally on demand.

Methods

Fifty-four adults between 18–63 years, who regularly participate in group fitness classes, recorded their heart rate with a chest transmitter during a mixed-martial arts cardiovascular class on consecutive weeks in random order. We calculated the mean, identified the max, and extracted the top 300 values (5 min) for comparison between conditions.

Results

Following each class, the participants completed an online survey to evaluate their rate of perceived exertion, enjoyment, and satisfaction. Confirming our hypothesis, mean class heart rate and mean heart rate for the five minutes at the highest intensity were 9% greater during the live group format compared to both live streaming and non-live on demand (all values, p < 0.01). However, there was no difference in any heart rate variables between the streaming and on demand formats. Also, rate of perceived exertion, enjoyment, and satisfaction were all significantly greater during the live session compared to the home collections (all values, p < 0.05).

Discussion

Streaming and on demand group fitness formats are viable options for meeting exercise prescription guidelines. But physiological intensity and psychological perceptions were greater during the live class format.

Development and Pilot Testing of the Disability Awareness Training and Education Program Among Community-Based Group Fitness Instructors

Lack of disability awareness of fitness professionals is a well-established barrier to exercise participation among people with disabilities that is likely related to the lack of disability awareness training for group fitness instructors. The purposes of this study were to develop, implement, and evaluate a disability awareness training for group fitness instructors. A 90-min video training and resource manual were developed. We recruited 10 group fitness instructors from one recreation center to participate. Participants completed baseline, posttraining, and 2-month follow-up testing on survey-based outcomes including disability attitudes, confidence in exercise adaptations, and training satisfaction. Participants' confidence to adapt fitness classes was significantly improved; however, disability attitudes were high in the pretest and not significantly different posttraining. Semistructured interviews were conducted posttraining and revealed three themes: Formal disability training is needed, Managing inclusive class dynamics, and Training suggestions and satisfaction. This training demonstrated a feasible intervention for increasing disability awareness among community-based group fitness instructors.

How Are We Similar? Group Level Entitativity in Work and Social Groups

Entitativity is essential for individuals to experience a grouping of people as a “group.” However, entitativity is primarily studied at the individual level. If it is truly a fundamental component of group outcomes and processes, it should be considered a group-level construct. We establish that group members can share entitativity perceptions. We propose that entitativity develops in work and social groups through different self-categorization processes. Social groups can take advantage of top-down processes to establish similarity of goals and characteristics. Workgroups use both top-down and bottom-up processes with differing effects on these two forms of similarity. We propose that shared entitativity affects individual level attitudes and behavior. Results support our theoretical model. Shared entitativity explains between 2% and 11% of outcome variance in workgroups and 3% to 14% of the outcome variance in social groups. Shared similarity relates to shared entitativity differently for social and workgroups. Shared entitativity is theoretically and practically important for successful groups.

The entitativity underlying meetings: Meetings as key in the lifecycle of effective workgroups

As more employees work in different locations, meetings become the primary opportunity for workgroup interactions. We explore how workgroup entitativity develops within successful meetings and grounds positive employee and group outcomes between meetings. Social identity theory and self-categorization processes explain how entitativity develops during meetings and activates workgroup identification between meetings. Further, construal level theory, which establishes that physical and psychological distance are positively related, affects entitativity and social identity for dispersed and hybrid workgroups. We propose that entitativity develops in meetings through interactions, co-presence, leader behavior, and meeting size. Between meetings, the frequency of self-categorization into a workgroup identity maintains and even increases workgroup entitativity. Further, task interdependence, informal interactions, and time between meetings affects frequency of self-categorization and, thus, employees’ workgroup entitativity between meetings. We conclude that meetings serve as the primary formal occasion in which workgroup entitativity can be maintained or repaired for optimal workgroup performance. Plain Language Summary Successful meetings lead to productive workgroups but we do not know why or now. We suggest that entitativity (a person's perception of a “group”) develops during successful meetings and explains productive workgroups. Specifically, when people start to work, they can either think of their group or themselves. If they think about their group, a process follows such that the employee comes under the influence of all of the positive characteristics of their group. Because successful meetings influence how people think about their group, entitativity explains successful groups.