Better together: The impact of exercising with a romantic partner

Abstract

Many people have goals to increase their physical activity levels through engaging in exercise, but have difficulty establishing and maintaining an exercise routine. Research shows that people are more successful at exercising if they do so together with their romantic partner. In this study, we examined how exercising with a romantic partner may influence the experience of exercise itself, as well as people’s daily experiences. Specifically, we examined how joint exercise influences daily and exercise affect, daily relationship satisfaction, and amount of daily exercise. Young adults who were currently involved in a romantic relationship (N = 95) completed intake questionnaires and 14 daily reports of their exercise behavior, exercise and daily affect, and daily relationship satisfaction. Multilevel models showed that on days when people exercised with their romantic partner, they experienced higher positive affect during exercise, higher daily positive affect, and were more satisfied with their relationship compared to days when they exercised without their partner. No effects were found on daily and exercise negative affect, or amount of exercise. This study illustrates how exercising with a romantic partner may improve people’s experience of both exercising and their daily experiences, and may help provide a reason why people might be more successful at maintaining their exercise routine when they exercise together with their romantic partner.

Keywords

Affect daily diary exercise goal pursuit physical activity relationship satisfaction romantic relationships young adults

Physical activity is important for maintaining health and preventing many chronic illnesses (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2019; Leavitt, 2008). For example, physical activity is associated with increased longevity and decreased risk of cardiovascular disease, Type 2 Diabetes, and many types of cancer (Leavitt, 2008). Although physical activity greatly impacts health and wellness, only one in five people in the United States meet daily physical activity recommendations (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2019). This is not because people lack health goals, as many people have physical activity goals (e.g., exercise), but have difficulty establishing and/or maintaining a regular exercise routine (Fleig et al., 2013; Marcus et al., 2000). Exercise maintenance refers to consistent repeated exercise episodes (Marcus et al., 2000). Prior research has shown that people are better able to sustain their exercise routine if they exercise together with their romantic partner (Wallace et al., 1995). In the current study, we examined how exercising together with a romantic partner may alter people’s exercise and daily experiences that may suggest reasons why people are more successful in their exercise goal pursuits when they exercise with a romantic partner. We also examined whether people spend more time exercising when they exercise with a romantic partner in comparison to exercising without their partner.

Romantic partner influences on exercise

Several important factors that aid in health behavior formation, including exercise, have been identified, such as attitudes, social norms, behavioral intentions, self-efficacy, self-regulation, and past behavior (Glanz et al., 2015). Most theories and research focus on individual predictors of health goal progress, but people pursue their health goals in a social context (Howland et al., 2016; Reed et al., 2013). Close others, especially romantic partners, have a profound influence on goal pursuit success (Fitzsimons et al., 2015; Keller et al., 2020; Knoll et al., 2017; Prestwich et al., 2012). Transactive goal dynamics theory suggests that romantic partners’ goal pursuits should be considered dyadically, as the partners form a system in which some goals are more efficiently pursued and other goals are thwarted (Fitzsimons et al., 2015). In an efficient system, people may need to make less effort but make more progress than if they were pursuing the goal individually (Fitzsimons et al., 2015). For example, people may be able to make more progress toward their exercise goals if they are motivated by their partner through exercising together, compared to having to motivate themselves on their own. In some cases, a partner may make it more difficult to pursue a goal, if, for example, one has to balance exercise time with other demands of the relationship. Thus, transactive goal dynamics theory argues that for people involved in romantic relationships, considering the relationship is a must to fully understand how people are able to make goal progress, or fail to do so.

Existing literature provides evidence for the importance of relationships, including in the domain of health goals. For example, social support (resources provided by a close other that are intended to promote a person’s goal attainment; Heaney & Israel, 2008) for physical activity by a romantic partner is associated with greater levels of physical activity (Berli et al., 2018; Trost et al., 2002), and social control attempts (when close others employ strategies that are intended to motivate one another to engage in specific behaviors; Lewis & Rook, 1999; Tucker & Mueller, 2000) influence partner exercise, depending on the positivity or negativity of the attempt (Berzins et al., 2019; Khan et al., 2012). Furthermore, romantic partners’ health behaviors are often similar and converge over time (Leong et al., 2014), including in the case of exercise behaviors (Darlow & Xu, 2011). The strong influence of romantic partners on health behaviors has recently led to calls to extend traditional health behavior theories to a dyadic context (Howland et al., 2016; Reed et al., 2013).

Although partners often influence one another in a direct manner, other types of influence are less direct and may be less intentional. For example, people are more likely to make positive health behavior changes (e.g., quit smoking, increase physical activity) if their partner does too (Jackson et al., 2015). Additionally, when people exercise with their romantic partner, the romantic partner’s company seems to have beneficial effects on exercise behaviors. For example, exercising with a partner improves exercise performance and persistence (Feltz et al., 2011; Irwin et al., 2012), and people adhere more to exercise routines when they exercise with a romantic partner (Wallace et al., 1995), especially when they also plan their physical activity together (Prestwich et al., 2012). However, just planning—but not participating in—physical activity together does not seem to have beneficial effects (Keller et al., 2020; Knoll et al., 2017), indicating that joint participation seems to be most beneficial. Given the struggles people have in maintaining an exercise routine (Lachman et al., 2018), the finding that people can better maintain their exercise routine when they exercise with their romantic partner is especially important, as it suggests that one way to increase success in establishing and maintaining an exercise routine is through encouraging dyadic exercise. It is currently not well understood why exercising together with a romantic partner allows people to be more successful in maintaining their exercise routine. Thus, we examined how exercising with a romantic partner may alter people’s exercise and overall daily experiences, specifically, time spent exercising, affective experiences during exercise, and daily affective experiences and relationship satisfaction.

How romantic partners may enhance exercise experiences

Exercising with a romantic partner may have an impact on people’s affective experiences. Research has consistently shown that exercise is associated with an increase in positive affect (Chan et al., 2019; Dunton et al., 2013; Marakia et al., 2005; Reed & Ones, 2006). When people exercise with a romantic partner, they may experience greater increases in positive affect during exercise, enhancing the effects of exercise on their affect. Indeed, when romantic partners are jointly engaging in an activity that allows both of them to make goal progress, they experience higher affective well-being (i.e., high positive and low negative affect) than engaging in activities—with or without their partner—that only meet their own or their partner’s goals (Gere et al., 2011). As exercising with a romantic partner would likely allow both partners to make exercise goal progress, it would be expected to provide similar affective benefits. Such improvements would be important, as affect experienced during exercise is an important predictor of exercise behavior (Ekkekakis & Dafermos, 2012) and explains more variation in exercise behavior than cognitive predictors (Ekkekakis et al., 2013; Kiviniemi et al., 2018). We examined whether exercising with a romantic partner improves affect during exercise over and above exercising without a romantic partner. We predicted that people would experience more positive affect and potentially less negative affect during joint exercise compared to exercise without the romantic partner (Hypothesis 1).

Another way a romantic partner may impact exercise is by increasing exercise duration. Having a partner present during exercise improves exercise performance and persistence (Feltz et al., 2011; Irwin et al., 2012), thus it may also increase exercise duration. Some research indicates that people are more physically active on days when they engage in physical activity with their romantic partner than on days they do not engage in joint physical activity (Berli et al., 2018). Thus, we predicted that on days when people exercise with their romantic partner, they will exercise for longer, compared to days when people exercise without their romantic partner (Hypothesis 2).

Exercising with a romantic partner may also boost positive affect that lasts beyond the exercise episode. Increases in positive affect attained during exercise can last 4–5 hours after the physical activity has ended (Ekkekakis et al., 2011; Ekkekakis & Petruzzello, 1999), and exercise during the day predicts increased positive affect in the evening (Carels et al., 2007; Schöndube et al., 2016). If exercising with a romantic partner boosts positive affect during exercise more than exercising without the partner, people may also experience higher positive affect during the day overall, compared to days when they exercise without their romantic partner. This is also important, as affect experienced after exercising is a strong predictor of exercise behavior (Ekkekakis & Dafermos, 2012), and such improvements in daily affect may make it easier for people to sustain their exercise regimen more successfully. We predicted that on days when people exercise with a romantic partner, they will experience higher positive and lower negative daily affect, compared to days when people exercise without their romantic partner (Hypothesis 3).

Exercising with a romantic partner may have further benefits that enhance people’s relationships. If people experience more positive affect during exercise and throughout the day when they exercise with their romantic partner, that may, in turn, increase relationship satisfaction. When partners engage in activities that are satisfying and stress free (e.g., exercise) they experience greater relationship quality (Girme et al., 2014), and when romantic partners engage in activities together that allow both partners to make goal progress, it boost feelings of closeness toward their partner (Gere et al., 2011). Thus, joint exercise may help increase the quality of the relationship. Given that good relationships are one of the strongest predictors of both subjective well-being (Gere & MacDonald, 2010; Heller et al., 2004) and physical health and mortality (Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010), and relationship quality predicts health outcomes as well as health behaviors (Robles et al., 2014), it is important to investigate factors that may impact aspects of relationship quality such as satisfaction. We predicted that on days when people exercise together with their romantic partner, they will experience higher daily relationship satisfaction compared to days when they exercise without their partner (Hypothesis 4).

Study overview

In this study, we examined days of exercise with a romantic partner and compared them to days when people exercised without their romantic partner (but potentially with people other than their romantic partner). Our hypotheses are:

Hypothesis 1: People would experience more positive and less negative affect during exercise on days they exercise with their romantic partner.

Hypothesis 2: People would exercise longer when exercising with their romantic partner.

Hypothesis 3: People would experience more positive and less negative affect throughout the day on days they exercise with their romantic partner.

Hypothesis 4: People would feel more satisfied with their relationship on days they exercise with their romantic partner.

We tested these predictions in a daily diary study of regular exercisers involved in a romantic relationship, who reported on their daily exercise, relationship satisfaction, and affect (daily and during exercise). We focused on a sample of young adults, as this time period is particularly important for promoting and establishing active lifestyles (Liu et al., 2012), and exercise routines established during this time period are often sustained throughout the lifespan (Nelson et al., 2008). Thus, establishing a regular exercise routine during young adulthood is especially important for long-term health and chronic illness prevention. Young adults already view their romantic partner as a main source of social support at this life stage (Trinke & Bartholomew, 1997), making this population optimal for investigating how romantic partners influence exercise.

Method

Participants and procedures

Participants (N = 165) were recruited through an undergraduate subject pool at a large Midwestern university for a larger study that had as its primary aim examining how exercising with a partner may differ from exercising without a partner (current study), and identifying factors that influence people’s ability to maintain a consistent exercise routine (data were also used to address secondary hypotheses in Berzins et al., 2019). Participants had to be in a romantic relationship, spend time with their romantic partner at least two to three times per week, and have moderate to strong intentions to exercise three times per week for at least 30 minutes. Participants also had to have exercised at least twice per week in the 2 weeks prior to participating but were excluded from the study if they were student athletes, as we were interested in voluntary, leisure time exercise. Participants’ romantic partner also had to agree to complete a brief online survey.

Participants first completed an online survey (including eligibility checks), then completed additional measures and tasks in-lab, after which they completed a nightly 10–15 minute online questionnaire prior to going to bed each day for 2 weeks. After the completion of the daily reports, participants came back into the lab to complete further surveys and tasks. They received class credits for each phase of the study they completed. Romantic partners (n = 88) who completed a short online survey were entered into a drawing for a US$50 gift certificate (in the current study, we did not use data from the partners and from the intake and exit measures, thus, these data will not be described further).

We used data from participants who completed at least one nightly survey on a day when they reported exercising (n = 95). Participants were mostly female (90.5%), White (93.7%), and on average, 20.28 years old (SD = 2.51, range = 18–35). Average relationship length was 1.92 years (SD = 1.50 years, range = 2 weeks–6.33 years). The participants from the larger sample who did not report any exercise days (and thus were not included in our analyses) did not differ from the participants included in our analysis on age and relationship length, but differed on gender, such that males were less likely to report exercising during the study and thus not be included in our analyses.

Participants completed 1049 nightly surveys (M = 11.04, SD = 3.43, range = 1–14 days, 35.8% of participants completed all 14 days) out of a potential 1330 surveys, a 78.9% completion rate. Of the total surveys completed, 568 (M = 5.98, SD = 2.76, range = 1–13 days) were completed on days participants reported exercising and thus were included in the current analyses. On average, participants reported exercising without their partner on 4.71 days (SD = 2.79, range = 0–10 days) and reported exercising with their partner on 1.27 days (SD = 1.83, range = 0–9 days). Participants exercised with their romantic partner on average 21.35% of the days (SD = 28.9%, range = 0–100%) when they reported exercising. The exercise activities participants reported engaging in are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Activities reported for days exercised without partner and days exercised with partner.

	Exercised without partner		Exercised with partner		Total
Activity	Number	Percent	Number	Percent	Number	Percent
1. Gym exercise	136	30.4	49	40.5	185	32.6
2. Running	112	25.1	30	24.8	142	25.0
3. Walking	107	23.9	28	23.1	135	23.8
4. Exercise class	54	12.1	3	2.5	57	10.0
5. Cycling	10	2.2	2	1.7	12	2.1
6. Sports	8	1.8	7	5.8	15	2.6
7. Other	20	4.5	2	1.7	22	3.9

Daily measures

Daily exercise

Participants reported on their own and their partner’s daily exercise. First, participants responded to the item “Did you exercise today?” to indicate their own exercise (yes or no). Exercise was defined as an episode of working out at a moderate or vigorous intensity that lasted 30 minutes or more. Second, participants responded to the item “Did your partner exercise today?” to indicate their partner’s exercise (yes, no, don’t know). If participants reported that both they and their partner exercised that day, they were also asked to indicate whether they exercised together (i.e., “Did you and your partner exercise together?”) to which they could respond with one of the following three options: (1) no; (2) yes, at the same time, but a different activity; and (3) yes, at the same time, doing the same activity. Participants were only categorized as exercising together with their partner when they endorsed “yes, at the same time, doing the same activity” to ensure that we were assessing joint activity.

If participants indicated that they exercised on a given day, they also reported on the amount of time they spent exercising. Amount of exercise was assessed with the open-ended item, “How much time did you spend exercising?,” and responses were converted into minutes (M = 59.11 minutes, SD = 43.94, Median = 50 minutes, range = 10–480, ICC = .33). Although an episode of working out was defined as lasting 30 minutes or more, participants provided the amount of time they spent exercising in an open-ended fashion and we included all responses in our analyses.

Affect during exercise

On days when participants reported exercising, positive and negative affect during exercise was assessed using three positive (i.e., happy, good, pleasant) and three negative (i.e., unhappy, bad, unpleasant) affect items adapted from the Hedonic Balance Scale (Schimmack et al., 2002) but modified to ask about exercise specific affect. Items were rated on 7-point scales (1 = almost never to 7 = almost always). Positive affect items were averaged together to make a composite exercise positive affect score for each day (M = 5.19, SD = 1.20, α = .91, ICC = .43), and negative affect items were averaged together to make a composite exercise negative affect score for each day (M = 1.95, SD = 1.04, α = .86, ICC = .37).

Daily affect

Each day, participants answered questions regarding their overall daily affect. The Hedonic Balance Scale (Schimmack et al., 2002) was used and consisted of three positive affect items (i.e., happy, good, pleasant) and three negative affect items (i.e., unhappy, bad, unpleasant), rated on 7-point scales (1 = almost never to 7 = almost always). Positive affect items were averaged together to make a composite positive affect score for each day (M = 5.30, SD = 1.22, α = .93, ICC = .29), and negative affect items were averaged together to make a composite negative affect score for each day (M = 2.31, SD = 1.26, α = .90, ICC = .28).

Relationship satisfaction

Daily relationship satisfaction was assessed with the item, “Today, I was satisfied with my relationship,” which was rated on a 7-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree, M = 6.10, SD = 1.14, ICC = .36).

Results

Analysis strategy

We used multilevel regression analyses to test our predictions, as our data had a nested structure (days nested within persons). We conducted our analyses with a two-level multilevel structure using the software MPlus 7 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2015). Missing data were handled with the Mplus default of full information maximum likelihood, but there were few missing data points. We tested for the presence of random variability in the slopes, but none of the slopes showed significant variability except for exercise time, thus, our final models were run with random intercepts and fixed slopes, except for the model with exercise time where we retained a random slope. Furthermore, to examine if exercise days differed from nonexercise days, we ran bivariate correlations which showed that on days people exercised, they experienced higher positive affect (r = .09, p = .002) and lower negative affect (r = −.10, p = .001), but exercising was unrelated to relationship satisfaction (r = .03, p = .32).

In order to test whether exercising with a romantic partner—compared to exercising without a romantic partner—is associated with daily and exercise affect, exercise duration, and daily relationship satisfaction, we created a dummy variable that coded for whether the particular day was a day of exercise without the partner (i.e., indicating exercising for the self on the given day and also indicating that the partner did not exercise or they didn’t know whether the partner exercised or the partner exercised at a different time when they exercised or the partner exercised at the same time but did a different exercise activity) or with the romantic partner (i.e., indicating exercising for the self and the partner on the given day, and also indicating that they exercised with the partner doing the same activity), which was then used as a predictor of the outcomes of interest in a separate model for each outcome. Given that we were interested in comparing two types of exercise to one another, our analyses only included days when people reported exercising. The dummy variable received a value of “0” for days when people exercised without the partner (the reference group) and received a value of “1” for days when people exercised with the partner (coded as “1”). In each analysis, this dummy variable was the predictor of each outcome of interest, along with the day of the diary (coded days 1–14) to control for the linear time trend. We also conducted additional exploratory analyses to examine if including age, gender, BMI, and relationship length as level-2 control variables altered any of our main findings. Correlations between all variables are presented in Table 2 and all model parameters are reported in the supplementary files.

Table 2.

Zero-order correlations between all variables.

	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.	6.
1. Exercise Positive Affect	1.00
2. Exercise Negative Affect	−.47	1.00
3. Time Spent Exercising	.12	−.04	1.00
4. Daily Positive Affect	.60	−.47	.10	1.00
5. Daily Negative Affect	−.48	.57	−.07	−.73	1.00
6. Relationship Satisfaction	.26	−.18	.07	.42	−.35	1.00

Exercise outcomes

In the first set of analyses, we tested Hypothesis 1—our prediction that exercising with a romantic partner would be associated with higher positive and lower negative affect during exercise. Results showed that exercising with a romantic partner was associated with higher positive affect during exercise (B = .26, SE = .12, p = .023, 95% CI [.04, .49]) than exercising without a partner. The overall model explained 1.6% of exercise positive affect, and including age, gender, relationship length, and BMI as level 2 control variables did not alter our effects, although BMI was a significant predictor of exercise positive affect, such that people with higher BMI experienced less positive affect during exercise (B = −.04, SE = .02, p = .028, 95% CI [−.07, −.004]). There was no effect of exercising with a romantic partner on amount of negative affect experienced during exercise (B = −.13, SE = .13, p = .34, 95% CI [−.39, .13]) and none of the level 2 control variables (age, gender, relationship length, BMI) predicted exercise negative affect or altered the results. These results are partially consistent with our predictions.

In the second analysis, we tested Hypothesis 2—our prediction that people would exercise for longer on days they exercise with their romantic partner. Our results showed that the amount of time people spent exercising did not differ on days when they exercised with their partner from days they exercised without their partner (B = .46, SE = .44, p = .292, 95% CI [−.40, 1.32]). None of the level 2 control variables (age, gender, relationship length, BMI) predicted exercise time or altered the results. These findings were inconsistent with our predictions.

Daily outcomes

In the third set of analyses, we tested Hypothesis 3—our prediction that exercising with a romantic partner would be associated with increased daily positive affect and decreased daily negative affect. Results showed that exercising with a romantic partner was associated with higher daily positive affect (B = .21, SE = .10, p = .031, 95% CI [.02, .41]) than exercising without a romantic partner, and our model explained 1.6% of daily positive affect. Including age, gender, relationship length, and BMI as level 2 control variables did not alter our effects, although BMI was a significant predictor of daily positive affect, such that people with higher BMI experienced less daily positive affect (B = −.04, SE = .01, p = .008, 95% CI [−.07, −.01]). There was no effect of exercising with a romantic partner on amount of daily negative affect (B = −.17, SE = .11, p = .111, 95% CI [−.39, .04]) and none of the level 2 control variables (age, gender, relationship length, BMI) predicted exercise negative affect or altered the results. These results were partially consistent with our predictions.

Finally, we tested Hypothesis 4—our prediction that exercising with a romantic partner would be associated with increased daily relationship satisfaction. Results showed that people were more satisfied with their romantic relationship on days when they exercised with their partner (B = .23, SE = .11, p = .033, 95% CI [.02, .45]) than on days when they exercised without their partner. Our model explained 3.0% of daily relationship satisfaction and none of the level 2 control variables (age, gender, relationship length, BMI) predicted daily relationship satisfaction or altered the results. These results were consistent with our predictions.

Discussion

This study focused on how exercising together with a romantic partner impacts affect experienced during exercise, exercise duration, affect throughout the day, and daily relationship satisfaction. We found that exercising with a romantic partner improves the exercise experience via increasing positive affect but found no effects on negative affect or exercise duration (Hypothesis 1 and 2). When people exercised together with their romantic partner, they also experienced higher daily positive—but not negative—affect (Hypothesis 3) and higher relationship satisfaction (Hypothesis 4), compared to days when people exercised without their romantic partner. These findings provide novel insight into how exercising with a romantic partner can alter the experience of exercise and impact people’s daily experiences and begin to increase our understanding of why people may be better at maintaining exercise routines when they exercise with a romantic partner.

Exercising with a romantic partner was associated with higher positive affect during exercise, which is important because exercise affect is a strong predictor of people’s future exercise behavior (Ekkekakis & Dafermos, 2012). A meta-analysis indicated that emotional judgments about physical activity (i.e., the way physical activity makes people feel) have a stronger influence on whether a person is physically active during leisure time than intentions to be physically active (Rhodes et al., 2009). Given the importance of affect in predicting exercise behavior and exercise maintenance, especially positive affect, identifying predictors of positive affect during exercise may improve interventions intended to help maintain exercise. Our findings suggest that having people exercise together with a romantic partner may be one such factor, although our findings are inconsistent with a study that did not find greater enjoyment during physical activity when people exercised together with a partner (Prestwich et al., 2012). The differences in findings may stem from our focus on exercise, rather than general physical activity throughout the day, and exercise with a romantic partner specifically, rather than any partner. Furthermore, enjoyment and positive affect are not synonymous, as increased positive affect may not necessarily mean higher enjoyment. However, these discrepancies in the findings warrant future research and replication.

It is important to note that the boost in positive affect was a boost above and beyond the positive affect that typically results from exercising, as we compared days people exercised with their romantic partner to days they exercised without their romantic partner. This additional increase in positive affect may improve the experience of exercise and explain why people are better at adhering to an exercise routine when they do it with a romantic partner (Berli et al., 2018; Wallace et al., 1995). Furthermore, the exercise episodes people reported on could have included exercising with people other than the romantic partner, thus, we compared the effects of the romantic partner’s presence versus absence, rather than comparing to exercising alone, indicating that these effects seem specific to the romantic partner. In future research, it would be useful to examine differences between exercising with a romantic partner and exercising with other people or exercising alone. Furthermore, measurement of exercise affect could also be improved in future studies by assessing affect immediately following exercise rather than at the end of the day.

Exercising with a romantic partner was not associated with decreased negative affect during exercise. This finding is contrary to our hypothesis, as we expected that romantic partners would blunt the negative affect people experience during exercise. However, our participants were regular exercisers with an established exercise routine, which may account for the low mean levels of negative affect reported during exercise (M = 1.95 on a 7-point scale). It is possible that we may be seeing a floor effect where the presence of partners would have made little impact on already low levels of negative affect. The low negative affect could also be a result of the intensity of exercise, as people report less negative affect when exercising at lower intensities than at higher intensities (Ekkekakis et al., 2004; Sheppard & Parfitt, 2008). It is possible that participants were primarily engaging in low intensity exercise, and that exercising with a romantic partner would only potentially alter the experience of negative affect during joint high intensity exercise. In future work, it will be important to examine the impact of a romantic partner’s presence on negative affect at different exercise intensities to uncover any potential benefits regarding negative affect at higher intensity exercise.

Exercising with a romantic partner also did not influence exercise duration. Exercise maintenance is often discussed in terms of frequency of exercise episodes rather than duration of exercise episodes, but in the current study we focused on exercise duration, given that 14 days is not a long enough time to focus on maintenance. We expected that people would spend more time exercising on days they exercised with their romantic partners, as people are more persistent and exercise for longer durations of time when they exercise with a partner who is outperforming them (Feltz et al., 2011; Irwin et al., 2012). We did not examine people’s performance in this study; thus, we do not know whether partners were matched on athletic performance. Athletic performance might be important if partners only motivate each other to exercise for longer periods of time if one partner is outperforming the other but not when they are matched on performance. Our findings are not in line with previous research indicating romantic partners are physically active for longer durations of time on days they engage in physical activity with their partner compared to days they are physically active without their partner (Berli et al., 2018). However, in the current study, we focused on exercise, rather than overall physical activity throughout the day, which may explain the differences. It is possible that when people exercise, they do so for a pre-determined amount of time that a romantic partner would not influence. However, a romantic partner might instead influence the total time spent exercising during the week, if partners motivate people to exercise more frequently, and overall physical activity during the day. Future research could examine the impact of exercising with a romantic partner on the intensity and frequency of people’s exercise over a longer time period when such questions can be tested.

Similar to our findings regarding positive affect during exercise, we also found that people experienced more positive affect throughout the day on days when they exercised with their romantic partner compared to days they exercised without their romantic partner. People experience increases in daily positive affect following exercise (Chan et al., 2019; Dunton et al., 2013; Marakia et al., 2005; Reed & Ones, 2006) and these increases in positive affect can be long-lasting (Carels et al., 2007; Ekkekakis et al., 2011; Ekkekakis & Petruzzello, 1999; Schöndube et al., 2016). The positive affect resulting from exercise appears to be boosted in our sample by the presence of a romantic partner, such that the positive affect people experience following exercise with their romantic partner is greater than the positive affect people experience from the exercise itself. Although these daily effects were small, there is evidence that small daily effects add up over time to influence long-term outcomes (Wilson et al., 2017). This boost in overall daily positive affect resulting from exercising with a partner, in addition to the boost in positive affect during exercise, may play a crucial role in helping people maintain exercise routines more effectively when they exercise together with a romantic partner. Furthermore, experiencing positive affect while trying to establish a new habit can increase effort and commitment toward the goal (Lally & Gardner, 2013), thus exercising with a romantic partner may provide a high enough positive affect level to help people persist at exercise adoption and maintenance during difficult times.

Consistent with the pattern of results for exercise negative affect, exercising with a romantic partner was also not associated with negative affect people experienced throughout the day. Research suggests that people who exercise regularly experience low levels of negative affect (Chan et al., 2019), and regular exercise may prevent the occurrence of negative moods by buffering stress (Childs & de Wit, 2014) and anxiety (Broman-Fulks & Storey, 2008). The current sample consisted of people who exercised regularly and had an established exercise routine, which may account for the low mean levels of negative affect reported throughout the day (M = 2.31). If established exercisers are already experiencing low negative affect, it may not be necessary, or even possible, for joint exercise with a romantic partner to buffer additional negative affect. In future research, the effects of exercising with a romantic partner could be examined during a time of heightened stress or among people who experience chronic stressors. Times of heightened stress and anxiety are typically times when people need to exercise the most (Chan et al., 2019) but tend to exercise the least (Stetson et al., 1998). Perhaps a partner’s presence may make exercise more likely and more effective during such stressful episodes.

People were more satisfied with their romantic relationship on days they exercised with their romantic partner compared to days they exercised without their partner. These findings suggest that the benefits of exercising with a romantic partner may enhance the romantic relationship itself by increasing relationship satisfaction. This boost in satisfaction may come from the partners being able to do something together that they both find valuable and meeting their health goals. Indeed, when people engage in activities with their romantic partner that they both enjoy it can improve their relationship quality (Girme et al., 2014). Additionally, when romantic partners perform an activity together in which they are both able to make goal progress, they feel closer to each other than in any other type of joint activity (Gere et al., 2011) and when partners are highly synchronous in their physical activity behaviors they feel closer to their partner than when their physical activity behaviors are not well matched with their partner (Pauly et al., 2020). Therefore, partners who exercise together may experience more closeness to each other when they exercise, which then contributes to higher daily relationship satisfaction. Furthermore, partners who have congruent goals that they can pursue together experience higher relationship satisfaction (Gere & Schimmack, 2013), and having shared exercise goals contributes to higher congruence between partners’ goals. In addition to the health benefits of exercising itself, people may gain additional health benefits from exercising with a romantic partner if it improves relationship quality given the association between good-quality relationships and good health outcomes (Robles et al., 2014). Future research could explore other potential benefits to romantic relationships that result from exercising with a romantic partner. For example, people are more physically active on days they receive high levels of social support from their romantic partner (Berli et al., 2018). It is possible that the association between physical activity and social support within the relationship may also impact how people view their partner (e.g., increased physical attraction or sexual desire) which may provide further relationship benefits.

Our findings showed that exercising with a romantic partner is associated with higher daily and exercise positive affect and higher daily relationship satisfaction. These findings highlight potential reasons why people may be more successful at maintaining an exercise routine when they exercise with their partner. However, it will be up to future research to further explore potential mechanisms through which the partner’s presence provides these affective and relational benefits. For example, it is possible that a partner’s presence during exercise is seen by exercisers as provision of social support, increasing their perceived availability of resources in maintaining their exercise routine, through supportive interactions with their partner and seeing their partner as supportive of their exercise goal (Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010). People are more physically active when their romantic partner provides them with social support for the activity (Berli et al., 2018; Keller et al., 2020; Trost et al., 2002), however, one study found that about half of the effects of social support were explained by the partner’s presence during physical activity (Berli et al., 2018), indicating that the partner’s presence provides benefits above and beyond the provision of social support. Nevertheless, perceived social support is well known to contribute to relationship satisfaction (Overall et al., 2010), thus, the relational benefits of joint exercise may at least in part be through perceiving the partner as supportive.

In addition to social support, people may exercise together with their partner as a social control strategy, in an effort to try to increase their partner’s exercise. Social control refers to the direct and indirect attempts to control a close other (Craddock et al., 2015), and joint exercise could involve several positive social control attempts, such as providing encouragement, or making it easier for the partner to engage in exercise by going together and planning events that take exercise time into account. Existing research shows that such positive social control attempts are associated with greater exercise as well as positive relationships outcomes (Berzins et al., 2019; Craddock et al., 2015; Khan et al., 2012). However, if a partner uses negative social control attempts to try to get their partner to exercise together with them, such as pressuring them or making them feel guilty, such attempts could backfire and instead result in less exercise (Berzins et al., 2019; Craddock et al., 2015; Khan et al., 2012). In future research, it will be important to investigate joint exercise in more detail to get a better sense of how people gain the affective and relational benefits from joint exercise. For example, in future research, it will be important to examine how social support and the different forms of social control play into joint exercise, and perhaps change or eliminate the potential benefits. It will also be important to investigate who the couples are who choose to exercise together, and when they decide to exercise together. Having a better understanding of joint exercise will be important in promoting the development of effective programs that facilitate exercise maintenance, as telling people to just exercise together may not always end up being beneficial (e.g., Knoll et al., 2017).

Strengths and limitations

One limitation of the present study is that the participants were mostly young, White females, thus, the characteristics of the sample may impact the generalizability and implications of the findings. For example, there is evidence that relationship processes such as social control have a stronger effect on health behaviors for males than females (Lewis & Butterfield, 2007), thus it is also possible that men may derive more benefits from joint exercise than women. Furthermore, there are differences in exercise behavior and exercise-related attitudes by ethnicity in college students such that White students report engaging in more exercise and their intentions to exercise are influenced more by instrumental attitudes regarding exercise (e.g., exercise is harmful vs beneficial) whereas Black students report engaging in less exercise and their intentions to exercise are influenced more by affective attitudes (e.g., exercise is enjoyable vs unenjoyable) (Blanchard et al., 2008). Thus, it is possible that the affective benefits of joint exercise with a partner may boost Black individuals’ ability to maintain exercise more. In future work, it will be important to test the effects of joint exercise with a partner in a more ethnically diverse and representative sample.

Due to the importance of young adulthood in establishing exercise routines (Liu et al., 2012), we focused on young adults to examine the impact of romantic partners on exercise and daily experiences. Exercise routines established during this time period are critical because the habits established as young adults are often sustained throughout the lifespan (Nelson et al., 2008), so it is important to understand how regular exercise can be facilitated during this time period to set people up for success in establishing and maintaining exercise routines as a lifestyle. During this time period, young adults already view their romantic partners as a strong source of social support (Trinke & Bartholomew, 1997), providing the basis for the development of long-term relationships that influence the goals they pursue (Cappuzzello & Gere, 2018). However, it will also be important to examine these processes in future research with older populations in more established relationships to see if the findings hold true throughout other life stages as well.

To our knowledge, this is the first study that explores the experiential impact of exercising with a romantic partner. We found that exercising with a romantic partner is associated with higher positive affect during exercise and throughout the day. Our study also highlights one way that exercising with a romantic partner may benefit the relationship itself, by boosting daily relationship satisfaction. We believe that the boost in positive affect that people experience during and after exercising with their romantic partner, and the benefits to relationship satisfaction begin to shed light on some of the reasons why people seem to be better able to maintain exercise when they do it with a significant other.

Supplemental material

Supplemental Material, sj-pdf-1-spr-10.1177_02654075211012086 - Better together: The impact of exercising with a romantic partner

Supplemental Material, sj-pdf-1-spr-10.1177_02654075211012086 for Better together: The impact of exercising with a romantic partner by Kyrsten Sackett-Fox, Judith Gere and John Updegraff in Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

Footnotes

Authors’ note

This research was presented in poster format at the 2020 annual convention of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, New Orleans, LA.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by startup funds provided to Judith Gere by Kent State University.

ORCID iD

Kyrsten Sackett-Fox

Open research statement

As part of IARR’s encouragement of open research practices, the authors have provided the following information: This research was not pre-registered. The data used in the research are available. The data can be obtained by emailing . The materials used in the research are available. The materials can be obtained by emailing https://ksacket4@kent.edu.

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Berli

Bolger

Shrout

P. E.

Stadler

Scholz

(2018). Interpersonal processes of couples’ daily support for goal pursuit: The example of physical activity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(3), 332–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217739264

Berzins

T. L.

Gere

Kelly

S. M.

Updegraff

J. A.

(2019). Associations between social control, motivation, and exercise: How romantic partners influence exercise during young adulthood. Journal of Health Psychology, 24(10), 1425–1435. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105317727840

Blanchard

Fisher

Sparling

Nehl

Rhodes

Courneya

Baker

(2008). Understanding physical activity behavior in African American and Caucasian college students: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of American College Health, 56(4), 341–346. https://doi.org/10.3200/JACH.56.44.341-346

Broman-Fulks

J. J.

Storey

K. M.

(2008). Evaluation of a brief aerobic exercise intervention for high anxiety sensitivity. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 21(2), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615800701762675

Cappuzzello

A. C.

Gere

(2018). Can you make my goals easier to achieve? Effects of partner instrumentality on goal pursuit and relationship satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 25(2), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12238

Carels

Coit

Young

Berger

. (2007). Exercise makes you feel good, but does feeling good make you exercise?: an examination of obese dieters. J Sport Exerc Psychol, 29(6), 706–722. doi: 10.1123/jsep.29.6.706. PMID: 18089900.

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2019, April 15). Chronic diseases in America. https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/resources/infographic/chronic-diseases.htm

Chan

J. S. Y.

Liu

Liang

Deng

Yan

J. H.

(2019). Special issue—therapeutic benefits of physical activity for mood: A systematic review on the effects of exercise intensity, duration, and modality. The Journal of Psychology, 153(1), 102–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2018.1470487

Childs

de Wit

(2014). Regular exercise is associated with emotional resilience to acute stress in healthy adults. Frontiers in physiology, 5, 161

10.

Craddock

vanDellen

M. R.

Novak

S. A.

Ranby

K. W.

(2015). Influence in relationships: A meta-analysis on health-related social control. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 37(2), 118–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2015.1011271

11.

Darlow

S. D.

(2011). The influence of close others’ exercise habits and perceived social support on exercise. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(5), 575–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.04.004

12.

Dunton

G. F.

Huh

Leventhal

A. M.

Riggs

Hedeker

Spruijt-Metz

Pentz

M. A.

(2013). Momentary assessment of affect, physical feeling states, and physical activity in children. Health Psychology, 33(3), 255. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032640

13.

Ekkekakis

Dafermos

(2012). Exercise is a many-splendored thing, but for some it does not feel so splendid: Staging a resurgence of hedonistic ideas in the quest to understand exercise behavior. In Acevedo

E. O.

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of exercise psychology (pp. 295–333). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195394313.013.0016

14.

Ekkekakis

Hall

E. E.

Petruzzello

S. J.

(2004). Practical markers of the transition from aerobic to anaerobic metabolism during exercise: Rationale and a case for affect-based exercise prescription. Preventive Medicine, 38(2), 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.09.038

15.

Ekkekakis

Hargreaves

E. A.

Parfitt

(2013). Invited guest editorial: Envisioning the next fifty years of research on the exercise–affect relationship. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14(5), 751–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2013.04.007

16.

Ekkekakis

Parfitt

Petruzzello

S. J.

(2011). The pleasure and displeasure people feel when they exercise at different intensities. Sports Medicine, 41(8), 641–671. https://doi.org/10.2165/11590680-000000000-00000

17.

Ekkekakis

Petruzzello

S. J.

(1999). Acute aerobic exercise and affect. Sports Medicine, 28(5), 337–347. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-199928050-00005

18.

Feltz

D. L.

Kerr

N. L.

Irwin

B. C.

(2011). Buddy up: The Köhler effect applied to health games. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 33(4), 506–526.

19.

Fitzsimons

G. M.

Finkel

E. J.

vanDellen

M. R.

(2015). Transactive goal dynamics. Psychological Review, 122(4), 648–673. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039654

20.

Fleig

Pomp

Schwarzer

Lippke

(2013). Promoting exercise maintenance: How interventions with booster sessions improve long-term rehabilitation outcomes. Rehabilitation Psychology, 58(4), 323. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033885

21.

Gere

MacDonald

(2010). An update of the empirical case for the need to belong. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 66(1), 93–115.

22.

Gere

Schimmack

(2013). When romantic partners’ goals conflict: Effects on relationship quality and subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(1), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-011-9314-2

23.

Gere

Schimmack

Pinkus

R. T.

Lockwood

(2011). The effects of romantic partners’ goal congruence on affective well-being. Journal of Research in Personality, 45(6), 549–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2011.06.010

24.

Girme

Y. U.

Overall

N. C.

Faingataa

(2014). “Date nights” take two: The maintenance function of shared relationship activities. Personal Relationships, 21(1), 125–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12020

25.

Glanz

Rimer

B. K.

Viswanath

(2015). Health behavior: Theory, research, and practice. John Wiley & Sons.

26.

Heaney

C. A.

Israel

B. A.

(2008). Social networks and social support. In Glanz

(Ed.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (4th ed., pp. 189–210). Jossey-Bass.

27.

Heller

Watson

Ilies

(2004). The role of person versus situation in life satisfaction: A critical examination. Psychological Bulletin, 130(4), 574–600. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.4.574

28.

Holt-Lunstad

Smith

T. B.

Layton

J. B.

(2010). Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta-analytic review. PLoS Medicine, 7(7), 20.

29.

Howland

Farrell

A. K.

Simpson

J. A.

Rothman

A. J.

Burns

R. J.

Fillo

Wlaschin

(2016). Relational effects on physical activity: A dyadic approach to the theory of planned behavior. Health Psychology, 35(7), 733–741. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000334

30.

Irwin

B. C.

Scorniaenchi

Kerr

N. L.

Eisenmann

J. C.

Feltz

D. L.

(2012). Aerobic exercise is promoted when individual performance affects the group: A test of the Kohler motivation gain effect. Annals of Behavioral Medicine: A Publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 44(2), 151–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-012-9367-4

31.

Jackson

S. E.

Steptoe

Wardle

(2015). The influence of partner’s behavior on health behavior change: The English longitudinal study of ageing. JAMA Internal Medicine, 175(3), 385–392. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.7554

32.

Keller

Hohl

D. H.

Hosoya

Heuse

Scholz

Luszczynska

Knoll

(2020). Long-term effects of a dyadic planning intervention with couples motivated to increase physical activity. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 49, 101710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101710

33.

Khan

C. M.

Stephens

M. A. P.

Franks

M. M.

Rook

K. S.

Salem

J. K.

(2012). Influences of spousal support and control on diabetes management through physical activity. Health Psychology, 32(7), 739. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028609

34.

Kiviniemi

M. T.

Ellis

E. M.

Hall

M. G.

Moss

J. L.

Lillie

S. E.

Brewer

N. T.

Klein

W. M. P.

(2018). Mediation, moderation, and context: Understanding complex relations among cognition, affect, and health behaviour. Psychology & Health, 33(1), 98–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2017.1324973

35.

Knoll

Hohl

D. H.

Keller

Schuez

Luszczynska

Burkert

(2017). Effects of dyadic planning on physical activity in couples: A randomized controlled trial. Health Psychology, 36(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000423

36.

Lachman

M. E.

Lipsitz

Lubben

Castaneda-Sceppa

Jette

A. M.

(2018). When adults don’t exercise: Behavioral strategies to increase physical activity in sedentary middle-aged and older adults. Innovation in Aging, 2(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igy007

37.

Lally

Gardner

(2013). Promoting habit formation. Health Psychology Review, 7(Suppl 1), S137–S158. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2011.603640

38.

Leavitt

M. O.

(2008). 2008 Physical activity guidelines for Americans. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, p. 76.

39.

Leong

Rahme

Dasgupta

(2014). Spousal diabetes as a diabetes risk factor: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Medicine, 12(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-12-12

40.

Lewis

M. A.

Butterfield

R. M.

(2007). Social control in marital relationships: Effect of one’s partner on health behaviors1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(2), 298–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2007.00161.x

41.

Lewis

M. A.

Rook

K. S.

(1999). Social control in personal relationships: Impact on health behaviors and psychological distress. Health Psychology, 18(1), 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.18.1.63

42.

Liu

Daviglus

M. L.

Loria

C. M.

Colangelo

L. A.

Spring

Moller

A. C.

Lloyd-Jones

D. M.

(2012). Healthy lifestyle through young adulthood and the presence of low cardiovascular disease risk profile in middle age: The Coronary Artery Risk Development in (Young) Adults (CARDIA) study. Circulation, 125(8), 996–1004. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.060681

43.

Marakia

Tsofliou

Pitsiladis

Y. P.

Malkova

Mutrie

Higgins

(2005). Acute effects of a single exercise class on appetite, energy intake and mood. Is there a time of day effect? Appetite, 45(3), 272–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2005.07.005

44.

Marcus

B. H.

Forsyth

L. H.

Stone

E. J.

Dubbert

P. M.

McKenzie

T. L.

Dunn

A. L.

Blair

S. N.

(2000). Physical activity behavior change: Issues in adoption and maintenance. Health Psychology, 19(1, Suppl), 32. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.19.Suppl1.32

45.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(1998). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). https://www.statmodel.com/download/usersguide/MplusUserGuideVer_7.pdf

46.

Nelson

M. C.

Story

Larson

N. I.

Neumark-Sztainer

Lytle

L. A.

(2008). emerging adulthood and college-aged youth: An overlooked age for weight-related behavior change. Obesity, 16(10), 2205–2211. https://doi.org/10.1038/oby.2008.365

47.

Overall

N. C.

Fletcher

G. J. O.

Simpson

J. A.

(2010). Helping each other grow: Romantic partner support, self-improvement, and relationship quality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(11), 1496–1513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210383045

48.

Pauly

Keller

Knoll

Michalowski

V. I.

Hohl

D. H.

Ashe

M. C.

Gerstorf

Madden

K. M.

Hoppmann

C. A.

(2020). Moving in sync: Hourly physical activity and sedentary behavior are synchronized in couples. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 54(1), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kaz019

49.

Prestwich

Conner

M. T.

Lawton

R. J.

Ward

J. K.

Ayres

McEachan

R. R. C.

(2012). Randomized controlled trial of collaborative implementation intentions targeting working adults’ physical activity. Health Psychology, 31(4), 486–495. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027672

50.

Reed

Ones

D. S.

(2006). The effect of acute aerobic exercise on positive activated affect: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7(5), 477–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2005.11.003

51.

Reed

R. G.

Butler

E. A.

Kenny

D. A.

(2013). Dyadic models for the study of health: Dyadic models for the study of health. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(4), 228–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12022

52.

Rhodes

R. E.

Fiala

Conner

(2009). A review and meta-analysis of affective judgments and physical activity in adult populations. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 38(3), 180–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-009-9147-y

53.

Robles

T. F.

Slatcher

R. B.

Trombello

J. M.

McGinn

M. M.

(2014). Marital quality and health: a meta-analytic review. Psychological bulletin, 140(1), 140–187. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031859 Schöndube, A., Kanning, M., & Fuchs, R. (2016). The bidirectional effect between momentary affective states and exercise duration on a day level. Frontiers in psychology, 7, 1414.

54.

Schimmack

Diener

Oishi

(2002). Life-satisfaction is a momentary judgment and a stable personality characteristic: The use of chronically accessible and stable sources. Journal of Personality, 70(3), 345–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.05008

55.

Schöndube

Kanning

Fuchs

(2016). The bidirectional effect between momentary affective states and exercise duration on a day level. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01414

56.

Sheppard

K. E.

Parfitt

(2008). Acute affective responses to prescribed and self-selected exercise intensities in young adolescent boys and girls. Pediatric Exercise Science, 20(2), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1123/pes.20.2.129

57.

Stetson

B. A.

Rahn

J. M.

Dubbert

P. M.

Wilner

B. I.

Mercury

M. G.

(1998). Prospective evaluation of the effects of stress on exercise adherence in community-residing women. Health Psychology, 16(6), 515. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.16.6.515

58.

Trinke

S. J.

Bartholomew

(1997). Hierarchies of attachment relationships in young adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14(5), 603–625. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407597145002

59.

Trost

S. G.

Owen

Bauman

A. E.

Sallis

J. F.

Brown

(2002). Correlates of adults’ participation in physical activity: Review and update. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 34(12), 1996–2001. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005768-200212000-00020

60.

Tucker

J. S.

Mueller

J. S.

(2000). Spouses’ social control of health behaviors: Use and effectiveness of specific strategies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(9), 1120–1130. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672002611008

61.

Wallace

J. P.

Raglin

J. S.

Jastremski

C. A.

(1995). Twelve month adherence of adults who joined a fitness program with a spouse vs without a spouse. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 35(3), 206–213.

62.

Wilson

S. J.

Martire

L. M.

Sliwinski

M. J.

(2017). Daily spousal responsiveness predicts longer-term trajectories of patients’ physical function. Psychological Science, 28(6), 786–797. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617697444

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB