Next Article in Journal
Performance of Generator Translation and Rotation on Stroke Length Drive of the Two-Rod Mechanism in Renewable Energy Power Plant
Previous Article in Journal
Digital Economy and 3E Efficiency Performance: Evidence from EU Countries
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/su15075662
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Social Support and Self-Efficacy as Mediators between Internal Locus of Control and Adolescents’ Physical Activity

by
Yikeranmu Yiming
1,
Bing Shi
1,*,
Abdulelah A. Alghamdi
2,
Sumaira Kayani
3 and
Michele Biasutti
4,*
1
Sports Learning Science Laboratory, Physical Education School, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710121, China
2
Faculty of Education, Umm Al-Qura University, Al Awali 8323, Mecca, Saudi Arabia
3
Department of Psychology, College of Education, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China
4
Department of Philosophy, Sociology, Education and Applied Psychology (FISPPA), University of Padova, 35139 Padova, Italy
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(7), 5662; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075662
Submission received: 21 February 2023 / Revised: 20 March 2023 / Accepted: 22 March 2023 / Published: 23 March 2023
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In China, the physical activity of adolescents is declining nowadays, which may be linked to their health locus of control, social support, and self-efficacy. The current study has investigated the role of health locus of control, social support, and self-efficacy in adolescents’ physical activity. Using convenient sampling, 569 (18–21 years old) adolescents were surveyed. There were 313 (55.01%) females and 256 (44.99%) males. Data were collected through questionnaires on the study variables. The results display that physical activity is directly positively affected by locus of control, self-efficacy, and social support. Both self-efficacy and social support are positively associated with locus of control and physical activity. Further, locus of control also indirectly affects physical activity through self-efficacy and social support. To conclude, we can say that locus of control, self-efficacy, and social support play a significant role in promoting physical activity. The study suggests developing effective future interventions by considering the study variables to increase physical activity.

1. Introduction

Physical activity (PA) has several physical, mental, and psychological health benefits for adolescents [1,2,3]. Evidence from scientific research displays that physically active adolescents are more likely to be physically and mentally sound, less likely to be obese or inactive [4,5,6], and have improved psychological health, self-confidence, and social ability [7]. Despite several benefits, adolescents are found inactive over the globe [8,9], and a large population of youth in low- and middle-income countries are not participating in PA or exhibit sedentary behavior [10,11]. Due to varying social trends—urbanization, modernization, and lifestyle transformations—PA is being reduced among Chinese people. According to the China centre for disease control (CDC), inactivity among 18 or older adolescents in China is prevalent at 83.8% [12,13]. The adolescents are unable to achieve the recommended level of PA is 77.3%, according to National Physical Fitness and Health Surveillance 2010 of China [14]. Hence, it is necessary to probe factors affecting and promoting PA in Chinese adolescents.
Factors affecting PA can be personal or cognitive, social, organizational [15,16], and social–cognitive [15,16,17,18]. Other non-cognitive psychological concepts, such as locus of control, have also been identified as a significant predictor of PA or health behavior among adolescents [19,20]. Locus of control, from a health perspective, is the degree to which people feel they have control over their present and future health which can be expressed as either a high internal or high external locus of control [21]. Those with an internal locus of control consider their life experiences and outcomes to be the results of their deeds [19], and assume that they are in control of their health consequences [21]. On the other hand, individuals with an external locus of control believe that they can do less to influence their health outcome and their health is not under their control [22]. Such individuals are less likely to be involved in healthy behaviors and quickly become victims of stress and depression [22]. In the current study, only the internal locus of control is considered.
Previous research in psychology has reported that internal locus of control is positively associated with adolescents’ PA around the world. Grossman’s [23] model of health supported the evidence that human health can be increased by adopting certain health behaviors. The model further elaborates that individuals can invest time in healthy leisure activities, positively impacting health [23]. This theoretical notion is endorsed by past empirical research from different societies. For example, a recent study from western Andalusia reported that university adolescents who have better average values in the dimensions of locus of control were involved in sufficient PA, compared to those performing insufficient PA with weak health locus of control [24]. Moreover, Marr and Wilcox revealed that PA significantly increased with increased internal health locus of control among college adolescents in the US [20]. In a study from Australia, the authors examined the importance of the internal locus of control for health behavior. They found that physical activity behavior is significantly explained by an individual’s internal locus of control [19]. Moreover, a study from Iran indicated that a better internal health locus of control predicts PA and health behaviors among university students [25]. Individuals with a better internal health locus of control tend to be more physically active. Based on the literature, we perceive that adolescents in China may have a different internal health locus of control affecting their PA participation in another way.
Despite the positive relationship between internal locus of control and PA, literature has suggested investigating possible pathways to explain this association [20,24,25]. Therefore, it is conceived that there may be a mechanism between the internal locus of control and PA participation. A possible factor that appears to be worthy of further examination is social support, which is considered very effective in encouraging adolescents to exercise [15,26,27,28]. A recent survey and intervention study with school adolescents investigating social–ecological factors influencing physical activity determined that social support from family, friends, and teachers significantly influenced adolescents’ PA performance [15]. Further, research has described a direct association between internal locus of control and social support for health behavior [19,20]. Considering the positive association between locus of control, social support, and PA, it is perceived that social support might be a promising mechanism between the two.
Another variable which can be of particular importance for mediation is exercise self-efficacy. In developing the social learning theory, Bandura incorporated the concept of self-efficacy from the idea of locus of control [29], and defined the concept as a person’s confidence in their capacity to achieve in particular circumstances [30]. Research shows a strong positive relationship between self-efficacy and locus of control [20], and is solely dependent on the strength of an individual’s beliefs [31]. Further, self-efficacy is a central element of the social cognitive theory that directly or indirectly influences healthy behaviors, such as PA [32,33]. Empirical research has also reported self-efficacy as a significant correlate of PA participation by adolescents in different cultures [15,34,35]. Hence, it is believed that self-efficacy might explain the relationship between locus of control and PA.
While all earlier studies mentioned above have significantly contributed to our understanding of the relationship between locus of control and health behavior, they frequently relied on samples from western societies such as the US and Australia [19,20]. Moreover, previous research on physical activity and health locus of control has been undertaken with patients with bronchial asthma [36], cardiac disease [37], and pulmonary diseases [38]. However, less research is found on PA and locus of control among university students, especially in China. Furthermore, the earlier study does not correctly examine the mechanisms behind the relationship between locus of control and health in Chinese culture. Therefore, they do not offer any advice about the fundamental mechanics in this particular context. Understanding such a mechanism between the two constructs is a novel contribution that might significantly affect how health policies are created in a specific society.
According to theory and research, social cognitive factors such as self-efficacy and social support are the most significant variables explaining health behaviors [15,17,18]. Hence, the present study intends to determine the direct and indirect effect of internal locus of control on PA among adolescents. The following hypotheses were formulated for the current research:
H1. 
Internal health locus of control would positively affect PA participation.
H2. 
Social support is positively affected by internal health locus of control.
H3. 
Social support has a positive direct effect on physical activity.
H4. 
Self-efficacy is positively predicted by internal health locus of control.
H5. 
Self-efficacy would have a significant positive impact on physical activity.
H6. 
Internal health locus of control would indirectly affect adolescents’ PA through social support for being active.
H7. 
Internal health locus of control would indirectly impact adolescents’ PA through self-efficacy.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

Participants of the study were adolescents from a Chinese university which is located in Xi’an Province. The students enrolled in social sciences were contacted for the survey. Five hundred sixty-nine adolescents aged between 18 and 21 participated in the study. A convenient sampling method was used to recruit participants. Data were conveniently collected from only one university in China. We distributed 700 questionnaires to students in different departments at the Xian Province of China university and received 583 valid responses, representing a response rate of 83.28%. Fourteen responses were removed because of missing values. There were 313 (55.01%) females and 256 (44.99%) males, and all the students participated in the study by signing an informed consent. Data were collected in November 2022.

2.2. Instruments

2.2.1. Measure for Physical Activity

The Global School-based student health survey (GSHS) measured adolescents’ physical activity levels [39]. The tool contains four questions about the physical activity levels of adolescents. The example questions are “During the past seven days, how many days were you physically active for at least 60 min per day?” The responses ranged from “0 days” to “7 days”. Adolescents who were doing at least one hour of PA per day were considered physically active [40], and “During this school year, how many days did you go to a physical education class each week?” The responses ranged from “0 days to “5 or more days”. Adolescents who attended physical education class at least five days a week were classified as “physically active” [40]. The total scores of the four survey questions—the maximum possible score of 24—were added to determine the students’ overall PA behavior. A higher score indicated better PA behavior. The overall PA of adolescents was also divided into the four following quartiles: low (score 0–6), moderately low (score 7–12), moderately high (score 13–18), or high (score 19–24). The scale was previously verified in the Chinese context [40]. The Cronbach alpha of PA in the current study is 0.75.

2.2.2. Measure for Internal Health Locus of Control

A subscale of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scale was used to measure the Internal Locus of Control [21]. The tool contains the six items from Form-B of the subscale. The example items are, “If I become sick, I have the power to make myself well again” and “I am directly responsible for my health”. A sum score was calculated, ranging between 6–30. The instrument was translated into Chinese language, validated, and then used for the present study. The Cronbach alpha of the scale in the current study is 0.83. Further, it was validated through construct and predictive validity. Bartlett and sphericity test show significant construct validity of the tool in terms of KMO = 0.87, X2 = 2134.13, and p < 0.001, and a total variance of 53.18%. The predictive validity of the instrument can be seen in Table 1, where the locus of control significantly predicts the PA of adolescents.

2.2.3. Measure for Social Support

A modified scale from the Amherst Health and Activity Study, a student survey, was used to gauge social support [41,42], which has been used and validated in previous studies [43,44]. At first, there were only two factors on the scale: family and friends. Dishman et al. [43] devised the teacher support item using friends’ and family’s support words. It has three questions scored from 1 (never) to 5 (always) on a 5-point scale. It is suggested to ask how frequently kids receive social support from friends, family, and instructors. An example item is, “During a typical week at school, how often do your friends do physical activity or play sports with you?” The scale was already validated in the target setting in various previous studies [45,46]. The instrument was again exposed to the validation process in the current research. The Cronbach alpha of the scale in the present study is 0.76. Further, it was validated through construct and predictive validity. Bartlett and sphericity test show significant construct validity of the tool in terms of KMO = 0.82, X2 = 1965.34., and p < 0.001, and a total variance of 58.75%. The predictive validity of the instrument can be seen in Table 1, where social support significantly predicts PA in adolescents.

2.2.4. Measure for Self-Efficacy

Marcus’ self-efficacy scale was used to measure exercise self-efficacy [47]. The scale contained five items on which the participants described their confidence in doing PA. The items were responded to on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 = not at all confident to 5 = very confident. A total score was calculated, which ranged between 5 and 25. The tool was translated into Chinese using translation and back translation methods and validated in the setting before use. The Cronbach alpha of the scale in the current study is 0.85. Further, it was validated through construct and predictive validity. Bartlett and sphericity test show significant construct validity of the tool in terms of KMO = 0.88, X2 = 2086.23, and p < 0.001, and a total variance of 66.28%. The predictive validity of the instrument can be seen in Table 1, where self-efficacy significantly predicts the PA of adolescents.

2.3. Techniques for Data Analysis

All analyses were performed in SPSS ver. 26. Descriptive statistics were calculated by using mean and standard deviations. Missing values were removed after calculating the basic descriptive table. Outliers were detected by calculating the Mahalanobis distance. Further, the validity of the instruments was measured before use. Construct validity was assessed through Bartlett and sphericity test, and predictive validity was tested through the predictive power of the variables. The reliability of the tools was measured through Cronbach’s alpha. All the basic assumptions were checked. Moreover, bivariate correlations were computed to see the relationship between study variables. A regression could be applied as there were significant associations among all study variables. Hence, regression analysis was used to see if the locus of control, social support, and self-efficacy predict PA. Furthermore, a t-test with equal variance assumed was applied to see gender differences in study variables. Moreover, Hayes PROCESS ver. 3.4.1 [48] is used to develop a multiple mediation model to see the mediating effect of social support and self-efficacy between locus of control and PA. Model 4 is recommended for the mediation analysis in which up to ten mediators could be entered. A 95% confidence interval and 5000 bootstraps were used to obtain a large enough bootstrap sample size. All the significant paths are shown in the analyses.

3. Results

3.1. Regression Analysis

Further, simple linear regression analysis was performed to determine if the locus of control, social support, and self-efficacy predict physical activity (Table 1). After controlling for gender, internal locus of control, social support, and self-efficacy significantly predicted PA of adolescents (p < 0.001), accounting for a 35% variance in PA.

3.2. Basic Analysis

Common method bias (CMB) was examined first. When response variations are attributed to the measurement technique rather than the constructs the measures are supposed to represent, this is known as CMB. Internal locus of control, social support, self-efficacy, and PA were assessed through self-report measures, leading to CMB. Hence, Harman’s one-factor test was applied to check this bias, which is considered a reliable technique [49]. The variance showed that the rate of the first common factor was 29.76% (<40%). Hence, there was no common method bias.
Table 2 provides descriptive statistics and the relationship between self-efficacy, social support, and the locus of control with PA. It shows a positive association between locus of control, self-efficacy, social support, and PA. Further, a t-test was applied to see gender differences in PA. It is found that there is a significant difference in gender for physical activity (t (567) = 3.267, p < 0.05). The previous findings support these results in which males were found to be more physically active than females [45]. Hence, gender was controlled. The correlation pattern exhibits a strong positive association between PA and the independent variables.

3.3. Mediation Analysis

The Hayes PROCESS ver. 3.4 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was applied to build the multiple mediation model. Hair and his colleagues [50] stated, “the bootstrap samples must be at least larger than the number of valid observations in the original data set but recommended 5000”. Hence, 5000 bootstraps were used to obtain a large enough bootstrap sample size. A mediation model was developed to see if social support and self-efficacy significantly intervened between the locus of control and PA. The results indicate both social support (b = 0.0345; 95% CI = 0.0131, 0.0595) and self-efficacy (b = 0.0714; 95% CI = 0.0369, 0.1064) were significant mediators between locus of control and PA of adolescents (Table 3). Further, it is worth noticing that the direct effect of locus of control of PA was also substantial.
The structural model in Figure 1 also supports bootstraps results, indicating the locus of control’s direct and indirect effect on adolescents’ PA. Internal health locus of control directly impacts PA (c’ = 0.105, p < 0.001), supporting H1. Further, locus of control positively affects social support (a1 = 0.075, p < 0.001); hence, H2 is supported. Social support enhanced adolescents’ PA (b1 = 0.2420, p < 0.001), supporting H3. Further, locus of control has a direct positive effect on adolescents’ self-efficacy (a2 = 0.1641, p < 0.001), indicating that H4 is supported. In turn, self-efficacy increased PA among university adolescents (b2 = 0.2289, p < 0.001), showing that H5 is supported. The positive association between social support and self-efficacy with internal health locus of control and PA shows that the internal health locus of control transfers its effect to PA through social support and self-efficacy, supporting H6 and H7.

4. Discussion

The present study aimed to determine the direct and indirect effect of internal health locus of control on PA behavior among university adolescents. The research provides theoretical confirmation of Grossman’s [23] model of health in the Chinese context. The model states that adopting particular health behavior, such as internal health locus of control, leads to better health.

4.1. Effect of Locus of Control, Social Support, and Self-Efficacy on PA

It was hypothesized that internal locus of control would positively affect PA. Supporting the hypothesis, the results indicate that locus of control positively affects PA. Adolescents who believe they control their health outcomes would be more physically active than those without such a concept. This is associated with a recent study reporting that university adolescents with better average values in the dimensions of locus of control were involved in sufficient PA, compared to those performing insufficient PA with weak health locus of control 24. The result also aligns with Marr and Wilcox’s [20] study in which the authors explored the fact that individuals with an internal locus of control actively participated in sports activities. Another study from Australia supported the notion by elaborating on the significant role of internal locus of control for PA behavior [19]. Moreover, Hossaini and his colleagues also found that better internal health locus of control predicts PA and health behaviors among university students [25]. It implies that adolescents may be trained to develop non-cognitive skills to exhibit or adopt healthy behaviors.
Further, it was predicted that internal locus of control would significantly positively affect social support. Consistent with the previous literature [20], the results demonstrate that the internal health locus of control positively predicted social support. Then, it was perceived that social support would positively impact physical activity. The hypothesis is supported as social support was positively associated with adolescents’ PA, consistent with the previous results from different cultures [15,26,27,28,45]. It is also evident in previous research that parents, peers, and teachers can help adolescents participate in PA in various ways, including by providing equipment and transportation [15,51,52,53]. This implies that the link between social support and PA should be addressed in promoting PA and internal health locus of control.
Moreover, it was hypothesized that internal health locus of control would positively impact adolescents’ self-efficacy. The findings suggest a strong positive association between internal health locus of control and self-efficacy, which aligns with the previous research [20]. Furthermore, it was forecasted that self-efficacy would significantly affect PA. The results of the present study mention a positive relationship between self-efficacy and PA in adolescents; that is, enhancing self-efficacy would lead to an increased PA. This is in accordance with several pieces of past research reporting a significant direct effect of self-efficacy on adolescents’ PA [15,45]. It suggests that adolescents may be trained to enhance their self-efficacy to adopt healthy behavior such as PA.
In addition, it was found that there was a significant difference in the PA of male and female adolescents in the current study. The previous research supports the recent findings, as males are more physically active than females [45]. This suggests that girls need more attention in terms of increasing their PA. Future research could be conducted to develop multiple mediation models for the study variables by considering gender differences.

4.2. Mediation of Social Support

It was hypothesized social support would play a mediating role between internal health locus of control and adolescents’ PA. The results specify that social support is directly affected by locus of control and is positively associated with adolescents’ activity levels; hence, the hypothesis is supported. Internal locus of control transfers its effect to PA through social support. It is consistent with the findings of Marr and Wilcox who suggested a significant mediating impact of social support between locus of control and PA among US adolescents [20]. The finding suggests that adolescents may be provided substantial social support by family, friends, and teachers to be active and show healthy behavior.

4.3. Mediation of Self-Efficacy

It was expected that locus of control would indirectly influence PA through self-efficacy. Supporting the particular hypothesis, the results exhibit that the internal health locus of control is positively associated with self-efficacy, which is directly related to PA; that is, self-efficacy plays a significant mediating role between locus of control and PA. the finding echoes the previous result in which authors have authenticated the essential intermediary role of self-efficacy between locus of control and health behaviors among Australian adolescents [19]. In addition, self-efficacy is believed to be an influential direct and indirect factor in promoting health behavior, such as PA [15,32,33,45,54]. It implies that adolescents must enhance their self-efficacy to achieve locus of control and promote healthy behavior.

5. Research Implications

It is implied that the internal health locus of control enhances physical activity by increasing social support and self-efficacy. The results are associated with Grossman’s (2017) model of health [23], which suggests that adopting a behavior such as internal health locus of control leads to better health. Practically internal health locus of control enhances social support and self-efficacy, leading to increased PA. These findings imply that the PA of students’ non-cognitive behaviors should be encouraged to promote health behaviors and future intervention initiatives. The research results recommend developing teachers professionally to increase social support and enhance adolescents’ self-efficacy. Future interventions should consider social cognitive factors for improving non-cognitive and health behaviors.

6. Strengths, Limitations and Future Research Directions

The current study has several strengths, such as developing multiple mediation models for the internal health locus of control and adolescents’ PA and conducting research on study variables with university students. Moreover, the study provides a base for conducting intervention studies based on cognitive and non-cognitive factors in the future. As the study shows strong associations among internal health locus of control, self-efficacy, social support, and physical activity, a chain-mediating effect through the potential link between social support and self-efficacy is suggested. Apart from several strengths, the study has a few limitations. The study results are based on self-report measures, which may provide biased perceptions of the target population. Hence, undertaking research by using objective measures may give different results. Further, the study data were collected from only one university in China with a small sample size, which may affect the generalizability of the results. As China is one of the largest countries in the world with a diverse population, participants from other areas might perceive study variables differently. Further, the sample was taken conveniently, which might be prone to research bias. Future studies may be conducted with larger samples from other parts of the country, with equal probability, to avoid selection bias.

7. Conclusions

The current study aimed to determine the direct and indirect effects of internal health locus of control on adolescents’ physical activity. The internal locus of control for health, social support, and self-efficacy are found to be the essential positive determinants of PA in adolescents. Internal locus of control has a significant direct impact on adolescents’ PA. Moreover, self-efficacy and social support significantly mediated internal locus of control and PA. Therefore, internal locus of control may impact adolescents’ PA both directly and indirectly through social support and self-efficacy. Future PA intervention programs for adolescents should ideally incorporate techniques to boost internal locus of control, social support, and self-efficacy.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: B.S. and Y.Y.; Methodology: Y.Y.; Software: Y.Y.; Validation: B.S.; Formal Analysis: Y.Y. and B.S.; Investigation: Y.Y. and B.S. Resources: B.S. and M.B.; Data Curation: Y.Y. and S.K.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation: Y.Y.; Supervision: B.S.; Project Administration: B.S. Writing—Review and Editing: A.A.A. Critical rewriting & Editing: M.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Shanxi Normal University, China (202216009, 24 May 2022).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to ethical concerns.

Acknowledgments

We thank all the members of the Sports Learning Science Laboratory. We also thank the schools and students for participating in the research investigation.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Antonini Philippe, R.; Schwab, L.; Biasutti, M. Effects of physical activity and mindfulness on resilience and depression during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 700742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Habe, K.; Biasutti, M.; Kajtna, T. Wellbeing and flow in sports and music students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Think. Ski. Creat. 2021, 100798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Antonini Philippe, R.; Biasutti, M.; van der Schyff, D.; Schiavio, A. Challenges and understandings of creative practice in professional sport training. PLoS ONE 2023, 18, e0279702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Kayani, S.; Kiyani, T.; Kayani, S.; Morris, T.; Biasutti, M.; Wang, J. Physical Activity and Anxiety of Chinese University Students: Mediation of Self-System. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kayani, S.; Wang, J.; Kayani, S.; Kiyani, T.; Qiao, Z.; Zou, X.; Imran, M. Self-system mediates the effect of Physical Activity on Students’ Anxiety: A study from Canada. Asia Pac. Educ. Res. 2020, 30, 443–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kayani, S.; Wang, J.; Biasutti, M.; Zagalaz Sánchez, M.L.; Kiyani, T.; Kayani, S. Mechanism between Physical Activity and Academic Anxiety: Evidence from Pakistan. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sheng, J.; Gao, S.; Tang, G. The influence of exercise on the mental health of middle school students: Intermediary effect of self-efficacy. China Sport Sci. Technol. 2016, 5, 98–103. [Google Scholar]
  8. Hallal, P.C.; Andersen, L.B.; Bull, F.C.; Guthold, R.; Haskell, W.; Ekelund, U.; Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group. Global physical activity levels: Surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. Lancet 2012, 380, 247–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Inchley, J.; Currie, D.; Jewell, J.; Breda, J.; Barnekow, V. Adolescent Obesity and Related Behaviours; World Health Organisation, Regional Office for Europe: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  10. Aubert, S.; Barnes, J.D.; Abdeta, C.; Abi Nader, P.; Adeniyi, A.F.; Aguilar-Farias, N.; Tenesaca, D.S.A.; Bhawra, J.; Brazo-Sayavera, J.; Cardon, G. Global matrix 3.0 physical activity report card grades for children and youth: Results and analysis from 49 countries. J. Phys. Act. Health 2018, 15 (Suppl. S2), S251–S273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Vancampfort, D.; Van Damme, T.; Firth, J.; Smith, L.; Stubbs, B.; Rosenbaum, S.; Koyanagi, A. Correlates of physical activity among 142, 118 adolescents aged 12–15 years from 48 low-and middle-income countries. Prev. Med. 2019, 127, 105819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. China CDC. The Report of 2010 Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance of PRC. 2011. Available online: http://www.chinacdc.cn/zxdt/201109/t20110906_52141.htm (accessed on 24 May 2022).
  13. Lu, C.; Stolk, R.P.; Sauer, P.J.; Sijtsma, A.; Wiersma, R.; Huang, G.; Corpeleijn, E. Factors of physical activity among Chinese children and adolescents: A systematic review. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2017, 14, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Ng, S.W.; Popkin, B.M. Time use and physical activity: A shift away from movement across the globe. Obes. Rev. 2012, 13, 659–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Kiyani, T.; Kayani, S.; Kayani, S.; Batool, I.; Qi, S.; Biasutti, M. Individual, Interpersonal, and Organizational Factors Affecting Physical Activity of School Adolescents in Pakistan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 7011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Kiyani, T.; Kayani, S.; Kayani, S.; Qi, S.; Biasutti, M. A School-Based Multilevel Intervention to Increase Physical Activity of Adolescents in Pakistan: From a Social-Ecological Perspective. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Beauchamp, M.R.; Crawford, K.L.; Jackson, B. Social cognitive theory and physical activity: Mechanisms of behavior change, critique, and legacy. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 2019, 42, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Rhodes, R.E.; McEwan, D.; Rebar, A.L. Theories of physical activity behaviour change: A history and synthesis of approaches. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 2019, 42, 100–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kesavayuth, D.; Poyago-Theotoky, J.; Zikos, V. Locus of control, health and healthcare utilization. Econ. Model. 2020, 86, 227–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Marr, J.; Wilcox, S. Self-efficacy and social support mediate the relationship between internal health locus of control and health behaviors in college students. Am. J. Health Educ. 2015, 46, 122–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wallston, K.A.; Strudler Wallston, B.; DeVellis, R. Development of the multidimensional health locus of control (MHLC) scales. Health Educ. Monogr. 1978, 6, 160–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Abouserie, R. Sources and levels of stress in relation to locus of control and self esteem in university students. Educ. Psychol. 1994, 14, 323–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Grossman, M. On the Concept of Health Capital and the Demand for Health. In Determinants of Health; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 6–41. [Google Scholar]
  24. San Román-Mata, S.; Puertas-Molero, P.; Ubago-Jiménez, J.L.; González-Valero, G. Benefits of physical activity and its associations with resilience, emotional intelligence, and psychological distress in university students from southern Spain. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hossaini, F.A.; Sharifi, N.; Dowlatkhah, H.R. Compare health promoting behaviors and health locus of control in medical and non-medical students in 2017. Pars. J. Med. Sci. 2022, 16, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Abdelghaffar, E.-A.; Siham, B. Perspectives of adolescents, parents, and teachers on barriers and facilitators of physical activity among school-age adolescents: A qualitative analysis. Environ. Health Prev. Med. 2019, 24, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Haidar, A.; Ranjit, N.; Archer, N.; Hoelscher, D.M. Parental and peer social support is associated with healthier physical activity behaviors in adolescents: A cross-sectional analysis of Texas School Physical Activity and Nutrition (TX SPAN) data. BMC Public Health 2019, 19, 640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Wang, X.; Conway, T.L.; Cain, K.L.; Frank, L.D.; Saelens, B.E.; Geremia, C.; Kerr, J.; Glanz, K.; Carlson, J.A.; Sallis, J.F. Interactions of psychosocial factors with built environments in explaining adolescents’ active transportation. Prev. Med. 2017, 100, 76–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Pshchological Rev. 1983, 84, 191–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bandura, A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  31. Wiedenfeld, S.A.; O’Leary, A.; Bandura, A.; Brown, S.; Levine, S.; Raska, K. Impact of perceived self-efficacy in coping with stressors on components of the immune system. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1990, 59, 1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Bandura, A. Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Educ. Behav. 2004, 31, 143–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control; W.H. Freeman and Company: New York, NY, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  34. Hamilton, K.; Warner, L.M.; Schwarzer, R. The role of self-efficacy and friend support on adolescent vigorous physical activity. Health Educ. Behav. 2017, 44, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Lewis, B.A.; Williams, D.M.; Frayeh, A.; Marcus, B.H. Self-efficacy versus perceived enjoyment as predictors of physical activity behaviour. Psychol. Health 2016, 31, 456–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Qalawa, S.A.A. Health locus of control related daily living activities during COVID 19 pandemic as an indicator of Bronchial Asthma. World J. Adv. Res. Rev. 2022, 13, 31–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Mercer, D.A.; Ditto, B.; Lavoie, K.L.; Campbell, T.; Arsenault, A.; Bacon, S.L. Health locus of control is associated with physical activity and other health behaviors in cardiac patients. J. Cardiopulm. Rehabil. Prev. 2018, 38, 394–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Egoshi, S.; Hayashi, S.; Horie, J.; Shiranita, S.; Watanabe, H.; Kawaura, F.; Takahashi, K.; Asami, T.; Sueoka-Aragane, N. Effect of health locus of control on physical activity in stable patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases. J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 2021, 33, 480–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. WHO. Pakistan-Global School-Based Student Health Survey 2009. 2019. Available online: https://extranet.who.int/ncdsmicrodata/index.php/catalog/203 (accessed on 24 May 2022).
  40. Xu, G.; Sun, N.; Li, L.; Qi, W.; Li, C.; Zhou, M.; Han, L. Physical behaviors of 12–15 year-old adolescents in 54 low-and middle-income countries: Results from the Global School-based Student Health Survey. J. Glob. Health 2020, 10, 010423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Sallis, J.F. Age-related decline in physical activity: A synthesis of human and animal studies. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 2000, 32, 1598–1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sallis, J.F.; Taylor, W.C.; Dowda, M.; Freedson, P.S.; Pate, R.R. Correlates of vigorous physical activity for children in grades 1 through 12: Comparing parent-reported and objectively measured physical activity. Pediatr. Exerc. Sci. 2002, 14, 30–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Dishman, R.K.; Hales, D.P.; Sallis, J.F.; Saunders, R.; Dunn, A.L.; Bedimo-Rung, A.L.; Ring, K.B. Validity of social-cognitive measures for physical activity in middle-school girls. J. Pediatr. Psychol. 2010, 35, 72–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Eather, N.; Morgan, P.J.; Lubans, D.R. Social support from teachers mediates physical activity behavior change in children participating in the Fit-4-Fun intervention. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2013, 10, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Ren, Z.; Hu, L.; Yu, J.J.; Yu, Q.; Chen, S.; Ma, Y.; Zou, L. The Influence of Social Support on Physical Activity in Chinese Adolescents: The Mediating Role of Exercise Self-Efficacy. Children 2020, 7, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Ren, Y.; Ji, B. Correlation between perceived social support and loneliness among Chinese adolescents: Mediating effects of psychological capital. Psychiatr. Danub. 2019, 31, 421–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Marcus, B.H.; Selby, V.C.; Niaura, R.S.; Rossi, J.S. Self-efficacy and the stages of exercise behavior change. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 1992, 63, 60–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Hayes, A.F. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach; Guilford Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  49. Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.-Y.; Podsakoff, N.P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 879–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.; Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  51. Celis-Morales, C.A.; Salas, C.; Petermann-Rocha, F.; Martínez-López, E. Parental support for physical activity in schoolchildren and its influence on nutritional status and fitness. Rev. Chil. Pediatr. 2018, 89, 732–740. [Google Scholar]
  52. Shen, B.; Centeio, E.; Garn, A.; Martin, J.; Kulik, N.; Somers, C.; McCaughtry, N. Parental social support, perceived competence and enjoyment in school physical activity. J. Sport Health Sci. 2018, 7, 346–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Tesler, R.; Kolobov, T.; Ng, K.W.; Shapiro, E.; Walsh, S.D.; Shuval, K.; Harel-Fisch, Y. Ethnic disparities in physical activity among adolescents in Israel. Am. J. Health Behav. 2019, 43, 337–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Wang, Y.; Hager, E.R.; Magder, L.S.; Arbaiza, R.; Wilkes, S.; Black, M.M. A dyadic analysis on source discrepancy and a mediation analysis via self-efficacy in the parental support and physical activity relationship among black girls. Child. Obes. 2019, 15, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 05662 g001 550
Figure 1. Multiple mediation model.
Figure 1. Multiple mediation model.
Sustainability 15 05662 g001
Table
Table 1. Internal locus of control, social support, and self-efficacy predicting PA.
Table 1. Internal locus of control, social support, and self-efficacy predicting PA.
VariablesUnstandardized EffectStandard ErrorStandardized Effectt-Valuep-ValueFR2
Gender0.270.160.051.630.105
LOC0.110.020.205.560.000
SS0.240.040.236.430.00075.740.35
SE0.230.020.4011.200.000
Table
Table 2. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations.
Variable (n = 569)MeanStd. DeviationLocus of ControlSocial SupportSelf-EfficacyPhysical Activity
LOC17.604.4910.147 **0.179 **0.307 **
SS9.382.29 10.262 **0.369 **
SE14.694.12 10.497 **
PA11.632.36 1
LOC = locus of control; SS = social support; PA = physical activity; ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table
Table 3. Mediation of social support and self-efficacy between internal locus of control and physical activity.
Table 3. Mediation of social support and self-efficacy between internal locus of control and physical activity.
PathBetaBoot-LLCIBoot-ULCISEtp-Value
c = (a1b1 + a2b2 + c’)0.16160.12030.20290.02107.68690.0000
c’0.10590.06990.14180.01835.78910.0000
IV-M1 (a1)0.07510.03350.11660.02123.54630.0004
IV-M2 (a2)0.16410.08970.23850.03794.33110.0000
M1-DV (b1)0.24200.17020.31390.03666.61570.0000
M2-DV (b2)0.22890.18870.26900.020411.20000.0000
(a1b1 + a2b2)0.10600.06250.14990.0225--
IV-M1-DV(a1b1)0.03450.01310.05950.0118--
IV-M2-DV(a2b2)0.07140.03690.10640.0176--
Note = Indirect effects and 95% confidence interval with 5000 bootstraps, predicting physical activity (n = 569); SE = standard error; IV = Independent variable (internal locus of control); DV = dependent variable (physical activity); M1andM2 = parallel mediators (social support and self-efficacy); a1, a2 are regression coefficients for the effect of IV on M1 and M2, respectively; while b1, b2 are the regression coefficients for the effect of M1 and M2 on DV, respectively. c’ = direct effect of IV on DV; a1b1 = mediating effect of M1; a2b2 = mediating effect of M2; c = total effect; Boot-LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; Boot-ULCI = upper limit confidence interval.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yiming, Y.; Shi, B.; Alghamdi, A.A.; Kayani, S.; Biasutti, M. Social Support and Self-Efficacy as Mediators between Internal Locus of Control and Adolescents’ Physical Activity. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5662. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075662

AMA Style

Yiming Y, Shi B, Alghamdi AA, Kayani S, Biasutti M. Social Support and Self-Efficacy as Mediators between Internal Locus of Control and Adolescents’ Physical Activity. Sustainability. 2023; 15(7):5662. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075662

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yiming, Yikeranmu, Bing Shi, Abdulelah A. Alghamdi, Sumaira Kayani, and Michele Biasutti. 2023. "Social Support and Self-Efficacy as Mediators between Internal Locus of Control and Adolescents’ Physical Activity" Sustainability 15, no. 7: 5662. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075662

APA Style

Yiming, Y., Shi, B., Alghamdi, A. A., Kayani, S., & Biasutti, M. (2023). Social Support and Self-Efficacy as Mediators between Internal Locus of Control and Adolescents’ Physical Activity. Sustainability, 15(7), 5662. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075662

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop