Investigating the day-level associations between affective variability and physical activity using ecological momentary assessment.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Understanding affect as a determinant of physical activity has gained increased attention in health behavior research. Fluctuations in affect intensity from moment-to-moment (i.e., affective variability) may interfere with cognitive and regulatory processes, making it difficult to engage in goal-directed behaviors such as physical activity. Preliminary evidence indicates that those with greater trait-level affective variability engage in lower levels of habitual physical activity. However, the extent to which daily fluctuations in affect variability are associated with same-day physical activity levels is unknown. This study used ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to investigate day-level associations between affective variability (i.e., within-subject variance) and physical activity. METHODS: Young adults (N = 231, M = 23.58 ± 3.02 years) provided three months of smartphone-based EMA and smartwatch-based activity data. Every two weeks, participants completed a 4-day EMA measurement burst (M = 5.17 ± 1.28 bursts per participant). Bursts consisted of hourly randomly-prompted EMA surveys assessing momentary positive-activated (happy, energetic), positive-deactivated (relaxed), negative-activated (tense, stressed), and negative-deactivated (sad, fatigued) affect. Participants continuously wore a smartwatch to measure physical activity across the three months. Mixed-effects location scale modeling examined the day-level associations of affective variability (i.e., positive-activated, positive-deactivated, negative-activated, and negative-deactivated) and physical activity, controlling for covariates such as mean levels of affect, between-subject effects of physical activity, time of day, day of week, day in study, and smartwatch wear time. RESULTS: There were 41,546 completed EMA surveys (M = 182.22 ± 69.82 per participant) included in the analyses. Above and beyond mean levels of affect, greater day-level variability in positive-activated affect was associated with greater physical activity on that same day compared to other days (τ = 0.01, p < .001), whereas greater day-level variability in negative-deactivated affect was associated with less physical activity on that same day compared to other days (τ = -0.01, p < .001). Day-level variability in positive-deactivated affect or negative-activated affect were not associated with day-level physical activity (ps > .05) CONCLUSIONS: Individuals were less active on days with greater variability in feeling sad and fatigued but more active on days with greater variability in feeling happy and energetic. Understanding the dynamic relationships of affective variability with day-level physical activity can strengthen physical activity interventions by considering how these processes differ within individuals and unfold within the context of daily life. Future research should examine causal pathways between affective variability and physical activity across the day.