(过度)使用SMART目标促进体育活动:一个叙述性的回顾和批评。

IF 6.6 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Christian Swann, Patricia C Jackman, Alex Lawrence, Rebecca M Hawkins, Scott G Goddard, Ollie Williamson, Matthew J Schweickle, Stewart A Vella, Simon Rosenbaum, Panteleimon Ekkekakis
{"title":"(过度)使用SMART目标促进体育活动:一个叙述性的回顾和批评。","authors":"Christian Swann,&nbsp;Patricia C Jackman,&nbsp;Alex Lawrence,&nbsp;Rebecca M Hawkins,&nbsp;Scott G Goddard,&nbsp;Ollie Williamson,&nbsp;Matthew J Schweickle,&nbsp;Stewart A Vella,&nbsp;Simon Rosenbaum,&nbsp;Panteleimon Ekkekakis","doi":"10.1080/17437199.2021.2023608","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The SMART acronym (e.g., Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timebound) is a highly prominent strategy for setting physical activity goals. While it is intuitive, and its practical value has been recognised, the scientific underpinnings of the SMART acronym are less clear. Therefore, we aimed to narratively review and critically examine the scientific underpinnings of the SMART acronym and its application in physical activity promotion. Specifically, our review suggests that the SMART acronym: is not based on scientific theory; is not consistent with empirical evidence; does not consider what type of goal is set; is not applied consistently; is lacking detailed guidance; has redundancy in its criteria; is not being used as originally intended; and has a risk of potentially harmful effects. These issues are likely leading to sub-optimal outcomes, confusion, and inconsistency. Recommendations are provided to guide the field towards better practice and, ultimately, more effective goal setting interventions to help individuals become physically active.</p>","PeriodicalId":48034,"journal":{"name":"Health Psychology Review","volume":"17 2","pages":"211-226"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The (over)use of SMART goals for physical activity promotion: A narrative review and critique.\",\"authors\":\"Christian Swann,&nbsp;Patricia C Jackman,&nbsp;Alex Lawrence,&nbsp;Rebecca M Hawkins,&nbsp;Scott G Goddard,&nbsp;Ollie Williamson,&nbsp;Matthew J Schweickle,&nbsp;Stewart A Vella,&nbsp;Simon Rosenbaum,&nbsp;Panteleimon Ekkekakis\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17437199.2021.2023608\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The SMART acronym (e.g., Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timebound) is a highly prominent strategy for setting physical activity goals. While it is intuitive, and its practical value has been recognised, the scientific underpinnings of the SMART acronym are less clear. Therefore, we aimed to narratively review and critically examine the scientific underpinnings of the SMART acronym and its application in physical activity promotion. Specifically, our review suggests that the SMART acronym: is not based on scientific theory; is not consistent with empirical evidence; does not consider what type of goal is set; is not applied consistently; is lacking detailed guidance; has redundancy in its criteria; is not being used as originally intended; and has a risk of potentially harmful effects. These issues are likely leading to sub-optimal outcomes, confusion, and inconsistency. Recommendations are provided to guide the field towards better practice and, ultimately, more effective goal setting interventions to help individuals become physically active.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48034,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"17 2\",\"pages\":\"211-226\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2021.2023608\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2021.2023608","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

摘要

SMART首字母缩略词(例如,具体的,可测量的,可实现的,现实的,有时限的)是制定体育活动目标的一个非常重要的策略。虽然它是直观的,其实用价值已得到认可,但SMART首字母缩略词的科学基础尚不清楚。因此,我们旨在叙述性地回顾和批判性地研究SMART首字母缩略词的科学基础及其在体育活动促进中的应用。具体来说,我们的综述表明,SMART的首字母缩略词:不是基于科学理论;不符合经验证据的;不考虑设定什么样的目标;不一致地应用;缺乏详细的指导;在它的标准中有冗余;未按原计划使用;并且有潜在有害影响的风险。这些问题很可能导致次优结果、混乱和不一致。提出了建议,以指导该领域采取更好的做法,并最终采取更有效的目标设定干预措施,帮助个人进行身体活动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The (over)use of SMART goals for physical activity promotion: A narrative review and critique.

The SMART acronym (e.g., Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timebound) is a highly prominent strategy for setting physical activity goals. While it is intuitive, and its practical value has been recognised, the scientific underpinnings of the SMART acronym are less clear. Therefore, we aimed to narratively review and critically examine the scientific underpinnings of the SMART acronym and its application in physical activity promotion. Specifically, our review suggests that the SMART acronym: is not based on scientific theory; is not consistent with empirical evidence; does not consider what type of goal is set; is not applied consistently; is lacking detailed guidance; has redundancy in its criteria; is not being used as originally intended; and has a risk of potentially harmful effects. These issues are likely leading to sub-optimal outcomes, confusion, and inconsistency. Recommendations are provided to guide the field towards better practice and, ultimately, more effective goal setting interventions to help individuals become physically active.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Psychology Review
Health Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The publication of Health Psychology Review (HPR) marks a significant milestone in the field of health psychology, as it is the first review journal dedicated to this important and rapidly growing discipline. Edited by a highly respected team, HPR provides a critical platform for the review, development of theories, and conceptual advancements in health psychology. This prestigious international forum not only contributes to the progress of health psychology but also fosters its connection with the broader field of psychology and other related academic and professional domains. With its vital insights, HPR is a must-read for those involved in the study, teaching, and practice of health psychology, behavioral medicine, and related areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信