Abstract
The low rates of regular exercise and overall physical activity (PA) in the general population represent a significant public health challenge. Previous research suggests that, for many people, exercise leads to a negative affective response and, in turn, reduced likelihood of future exercise. The purpose of this paper is to examine this exercise–affect–adherence relationship from an evolutionary perspective. Specifically, we argue that low rates of physical exercise in the general population are a function of the evolved human tendency to avoid unnecessary physical exertion. This innate tendency evolved because it allowed our evolutionary ancestors to conserve energy for physical activities that had immediate adaptive utility such as pursuing prey, escaping predators, and engaging in social and reproductive behaviors. The commonly observed negative affective response to exercise is an evolved proximate psychological mechanism through which humans avoid unnecessary energy expenditure. The fact that the human tendencies toward negative affective response to and avoidance of unnecessary physical activities are innate does not mean that they are unchangeable. Indeed, it is only because of human-engineered changes in our environmental conditions (i.e., it is no longer necessary for us to work for our food) that our predisposition to avoid unnecessary physical exertion has become a liability. Thus, it is well within our capabilities to reengineer our environments to once again make PA necessary or, at least, to serve an immediate functional purpose. We propose a two-pronged approach to PA promotion based on this evolutionary functional perspective: first, to promote exercise and other physical activities that are perceived to have an immediate purpose, and second, to instill greater perceived purpose for a wider range of physical activities. We posit that these strategies are more likely to result in more positive (or less negative) affective responses to exercise, better adherence to exercise programs, and higher rates of overall PA.
Highlights
Regular physical activity (PA) improves physical health (Haskell et al, 2007; Donnelly et al, 2009) and mental health (Schuch et al, 2011), and prolongs life span (Reimers et al, 2012)
We have far argued that the ultimate cause of the low rates of physical exercise is the human tendency to conserve energy; and the proximate cause of the low rates of physical exercise is the human tendency to respond to physical exercise with negative affect
Just as an evolutionary approach was used to address the broader question of why many people avoid physical exercise, such an approach can be used to understand affective response to different types of exercise. To take this evolutionary approach it is necessary to consider what might be the functional significance of positive versus negative affective responses to different types of exercise, as well as the characteristics of different physical activities that would have made them adaptive to engage in during human evolutionary development. Taking such an evolutionary perspective, we argue that the two factors that are most relevant to affective response to exercise are the intensity of the exercise and its perceived utility (Figure 2)
Summary
Regular physical activity (PA) improves physical health (Haskell et al, 2007; Donnelly et al, 2009) and mental health (Schuch et al, 2011), and prolongs life span (Reimers et al, 2012). We will argue that the negative affective response to exercise is a manifestation of an evolved tendency to avoid energy expenditure that served no immediate adaptive function. In modern environments, this evolved psychological mechanism has led to difficulty with exercise adherence and overall low rates of PA. We consider the characteristics of exercise—its intensity and lack of perceived utility—that contribute to a negative affective response to exercise among many individuals In this context we discuss the concept of perceived utility of PA as a cognitive mechanism that evolved to signal when PA had an immediate adaptive payoff, such as when chasing prey, fleeing from predators, or engaging in social play. We discuss the implications of this model for designing exercise promotion interventions
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
