| The United States population suffers from poor health, largely as a consequence of physical inactivity. Only a small minority of Americans meet or exceed the daily physical activity guidelines prescribed by the American College of Sports Medicine. One of the most frequently cited barriers to engaging in physical activity is lack of an exercise partner, and the ergogenic benefits of social factors in exercise have been well-documented. Despite the widely-recognized value of an exercise partner among health scientists and the lay public, there has been no research to date examining the nature of exercise relationships (i.e., the relationships between exercise partners). This dissertation presents two studies exploring the nature of exercise relationships---the first characterizes exercise relationships on a variety of relationship and exercise factors and the second examines antecedents and consequences of psychological commitment to an exercise relationship. Both studies employed an anonymous web survey.;The first study was the first inquiry into exercise relationships. Based on theories of interpersonal communication and relationship development, the first study examined the exercise relationships of undergraduates at a large Midwest university and focused on relationship quality (i.e., interpersonal closeness & communication). Exercise relationships typically began outside of an exercise context, emerging from pre-existing relationships (77.0%). Exercise relationships were characterized by a high degree of interpersonal closeness, reporting closeness values significantly higher than the scale midpoint, (M = 5.07, SD = 1.56), t(381) = 13.44, p < .001. Participants reported talking about a greater number of topics outside workouts (M = 6.53, SD = 2.50) than in typical workouts (M = 4.21, SD = 2.69), t(382) = 14.82, p < .001. In addition to conversation, participants reported agreement higher than scale midpoint for reciprocal exercise encouragement (M = 4.04, SD = 0.81), t(382) = 25.10, p < .001, in typical workouts. Lastly, participants reported values higher than scale midpoint on mutual goal facilitation (M = 3.76, SD = 0.79), t(382) = 18.83, p < .001, suggesting that exercise relationships are characterized by closeness, high communication breadth, and cooperation rather than competition.;The second study examined antecedents and consequences of psychological commitment to an exercise relationship. Support was found for a model of commitment in exercise relationships, where psychological commitment was predicted by satisfaction with the exercise relationship, attractiveness of alternatives to the exercise relationship, and investment in the exercise relationship, and the predictors accounted for nearly half of the variance in psychological commitment, F(3, 518) = 146.80, p < .001, R2 = .46. Path analyses revealed that psychological commitment predicted behavioral commitment to the exercise relationship, which in turn predicted total individual physical activity. |
