ArticleHealth psychology and behavioral medicine2026
Applying behaviour change science to change motivational interaction in physical activity and sports professionals: stepwise development and acceptability pre-test of the MotiStyleSport intervention.
Article in Health psychology and behavioral medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Physical activity (PA) counselling and sports coaching are more effective when professionals use self-determination theory-based need-supportive interaction. Existing interventions generally involve information provision and practical exercise, and show modest, short-term effects. Behaviour change science has rarely been incorporated, despite its potential to support sustainable change. Aims: This study systematically applies behaviour change science to develop an intervention to train professionals in motivational interaction behaviours. Methods: A four-step mixed-methods design included a needs assessment questionnaire ( Results: 1) We selected nine motivational interaction behaviours (e.g. open questions, clarifying expectations) alongside seven determinants (e.g. self-efficacy) and intervention strategies. 2) Habit and control theories informed self-monitoring, action and coping planning, and habit formation/disruption activities. The intervention was delivered via 3) an online platform, slide shows, videos, and homework. 4) Overall acceptability was high after iterative optimisation. Prior to optimisation, self-insight maps had low overall acceptability (M = 2.8). Implementation intentions were rated acceptable (M = 3.6), but qualitative data revealed substantial misunderstandings concerning intervention coherence, perceived effectiveness, and self-efficacy. Conclusion: Quantitative-qualitative divergence in implementation intention data underlines the value of mixed-methods evaluation. Habit theory-based exercises show promise, but feasibility and effectiveness testing are needed before conclusions about behavioural impact.
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.