Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31606040›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2019

Is sitting invisible? Exploring how people mentally represent sitting.

Benjamin Gardner, Stuart Flint, Amanda L Rebar, Stephen Dewitt, Sahana K Quail, Helen Whall, Lee Smith

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Sedentary behavior and lifespan brain health.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A Social Cognitive Assessment of Workplace Sedentary Behavior among a Sample of University Employees.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Benjamin GardnerDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Guy's Campus, London, SE1 1UL, UK. benjamin.gardner@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1223-5934
Stuart FlintCarnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
Amanda L RebarPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical, and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.
Stephen DewittDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Guy's Campus, London, SE1 1UL, UK.
Sahana K QuailDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Guy's Campus, London, SE1 1UL, UK.
Helen WhallDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, Guy's Campus, London, SE1 1UL, UK.
Lee SmithThe Cambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Department of Life Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGrowing evidence suggests that prolonged uninterrupted sitting can be detrimental to health. Much sedentary behaviour research is reliant on self-reports of sitting time, and sitting-reduction interventions often focus on reducing motivation to sit. These approaches assume that people are consciously aware of their sitting time. Drawing on Action Identification Theory, this paper argues that people rarely identify the act of sitting as 'sitting' per se, and instead view it as an incidental component of more meaningful and purposeful typically-seated activities.

methodsStudies 1 and 2 explored whether people mentioned sitting in written descriptions of actions. Studies 3-5 compared preferences for labelling a typically desk-based activity as 'sitting' versus alternative action identities. Studies 6 and 7 used card-sort tasks to indirectly assess the prioritisation of 'sitting' relative to other action descriptions when identifying similar actions.

resultsParticipants rarely spontaneously mentioned sitting when describing actions (Studies 1-2), and when assigning action labels to a seated activity, tended to offer descriptions based on higher-order goals and consequences of action, rather than sitting or other procedural elements (Studies 3-5). Participants primarily identified similarities in actions based not on sitting, but on activities performed while seated (e.g. reading; Studies 6-7).

conclusion'Sitting' is a less accessible cognitive representation of seated activities than are representations based on the purpose and implications of seated action. Findings suggest that self-report measures should focus on time spent in seated activities, rather than attempting to measure sitting time via direct recall. From an intervention perspective, findings speak to the importance of targeting behaviours that entail sitting, and of raising awareness of sitting as a potential precursor to attempting to reduce sitting time.

Indexed as

AwarenessSitting PositionAdultCognitionFemaleHumansMaleSedentary BehaviorSelf ReportTime FactorsWorkplaceAction identificationCognitionExperimentalOffice workersPsychologySedentary behaviourSittingStanding

Identifiers

PMID31606040
PMCPMC6790031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.