Trial reportApplied psychology. Health and well-being2025
Isolating the role of researcher observation on reactivity to the measurement of physical activity.
Trial report in Applied psychology. Health and well-being, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Isolating the role of researcher observation on reactivity to the measurement of physical activity.Applied psychology. Health and well-being · 2025Trial
- Do adults with cardiovascular disease risk show meaningful reactivity to physical activity measurement? Coordinated analysis across six studies.British journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- Evaluating an Incentive-Based mHealth App for Physical Activity Promotion Using the Obesity-Related Behavioral Intervention Trial Model: Small Cohort Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- No evidence of reactivity in accelerometry-based measurement of physical activity and sleep.British journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- Physical Activity Measurement Reactivity Among Midlife Adults With Elevated Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Protocol for Coordinated Analyses Across Six Studies.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reactivity to physical activity (PA) measurement may result from the introduction of a measurement device, researcher observation, or both. Accessing data from prior to study enrollment afforded the rare opportunity to compare behavior during versus prior to participation. This study introduced researcher observation among adults who owned their own PA monitoring device, to test whether measurement reactivity can also be observed in experienced PA trackers, by comparing their data from before versus after the introduction of observation. In addition, the salience of researcher observation was manipulated to test for potential effects. Participants were 252 adults in the U.S. They completed two electronic surveys 14 days apart, in which they recorded steps per day as collected by their PA monitors over the previous 14 days. At the end of the first survey, they were randomized to view messages, which differed in emphasis on repeating entry of step data (i.e., "low" vs. "high" salience of researcher observation). Daily step counts did not change between 14-day reporting periods, though patterns differed by gender and starting level of PA. Patterns did not differ between experimental conditions. Overall, introducing researcher observation without introducing an unfamiliar measurement device results in no meaningful reactivity with respect to PA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.