. 2012 Jun 22;9:78. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-78

Table 1.

Description of reviewed studies

Reference	Design	Sample			Measures	Significant Predictors		Outcomes	Analysis/Observations
		Size (%F)	Features	Location
*I. Exercise self-regulations and related measures*
ThØgersen-Ntoumani & Ntoumanis, 2006 [52]	Cross-sectional	375 (51)	Exercisers (Mean 38.7 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ) + amotivation (AMS)	MV: IM (+) ^a, ID (+) ^a,b, INTR (+) ^a; EXT (−) ^a,b, AMOT (−) ^a		Exercise stages of change ^a; Exercise relapses (fewer) ^b	Multivariate logistic regressions, adjusting for sex and age; Manovas
Rose et al., 2005 [56]	Cross-sectional	184 (55)	Healthy adults (17–60 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: IM (+) ^a, ID (+) , INTR (+) EXT (−)		Exercise stages of change	Discriminant function analysis (IM was redundant); Manovas ^a
Ingledew et al., 2009 [79]	Cross-sectional	251 (52)	University Students (Mean 19.5 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: IM (+),ID (+),INTR (n.s) EXT (n.s)		Self-reported exercise (measure analogous to LTEQ)	Partial Least Squares Analysis (PLS); Mediation analysis
Edmunds et al., 2006 [44]	Cross-sectional	369 (52)	Healthy individuals (Mean 31.9 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: IM (n.s.), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (−)		Self-reported exercise (total and strenuous PA; LTEQ)	Multiple regressions; Mediation analysis. No associations with mild/moderately intense PA.
Edmunds et al., 2006 [44]	Cross-sectional	369 (52)	Healthy individuals (Mean 31.9 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (total and strenuous PA; LTEQ)
Wilson et al., 2006 [85]	Cross-sectional	139 (64)	Undergraduate students (Mean 19.5 yr)	Canada	Exercise extrinsic self-regulations (BREQ) and Integrated Regulation scale (INTEG)	MV: INTEG (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Wilson et al., 2006 [85]	Cross-sectional	139 (64)	Undergraduate students (Mean 19.5 yr)	Canada		BIV: INTEG (+), ID (n.s.), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
McDonough et al., 2007 [50]	Cross-sectional	558 (72)			Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; SEM; Mediation analysis. Only RAI was tested in multivariate analysis.
McDonough et al., 2007 [50]	Cross-sectional	558 (72)			Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	BIV: RAI (+), IM (n.s.), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)
Daley & Duda, 2006 [55]	Cross-sectional	409 (61)	Undergraduate students (19.9 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: IM (+), ID (++), INTR (+); EXT (− M); AMOT (− F)		Exercise stages of change; Physical activity status (from inactive to active)	Discriminant function analysis
Wilson et al., 2004 [45]	Cross-sectional	276 (64)	Undergraduate students (20.5 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: IM (n.s.); ID (+), INTR (+ F; - M), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regressions analysis
Wilson et al., 2004 [45]	Cross-sectional	276 (64)	Undergraduate students (20.5 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: IM (+); ID (+), INTR (+ F), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regressions analysis
Markland, 2009 [9]	Cross-sectional	102 F	Healthy individuals (Mean 29.2 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: IM (+), ID (+), AMOT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression/mediation (Preacher & Hayes): INTR and EXT not analyzed.
Markland, 2009 [9]	Cross-sectional	102 F	Healthy individuals (Mean 29.2 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (−)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)
Ingledew & Markland, 2008 [46]	Cross-sectional	252 (48)	Office workers (Mean 40 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: IM (n.s.), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (−)		Self-reported exercise (measure analogous to LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; SEM
Ingledew & Markland, 2008 [46]	Cross-sectional	252 (48)	Office workers (Mean 40 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (−)		Self-reported exercise (measure analogous to LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; SEM
Peddle et al., 2008 [43]	Cross-sectional	413 (46)	Colorectal cancer survivors (Mean 60 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: IM (n.s.), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Path analysis
Peddle et al., 2008 [43]	Cross-sectional	413 (46)	Colorectal cancer survivors (Mean 60 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (−)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Path analysis
Landry & Solmon, 2004 [86]	Cross-sectional	105 F	African-American (Mean 56 yr)	USA	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (−), EXT (n.s.)		Exercise stages of change; exercise categories	Anovas; Discriminant function analysis
Landry & Solmon, 2004 [86]	Cross-sectional	105 F	African-American (Mean 56 yr)	USA		BIV: RAI (+); IM (+), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.)		Exercise stages of change; exercise categories	Anovas; Discriminant function analysis
Milne et al., 2008 [87]	Cross-sectional	558 F	Breast cancer survivors (Mean 59 yr)	Australia	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ); exercise categories (meeting vs. not meeting guidelines)	Anovas; Hierarchical regression analysis
Milne et al., 2008 [87]	Cross-sectional	558 F	Breast cancer survivors (Mean 59 yr)	Australia	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (−), AMOT (−)			Anovas; Hierarchical regression analysis
Mullan & Markland, 1997 [57]	Cross-sectional	314 (49.7)	Healthy individuals (Mean 35–40 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.)		Exercise stages of change	Anova (RAI was analyzed); Discriminant function analysis;
Mullan & Markland, 1997 [57]	Cross-sectional	314 (49.7)	Healthy individuals (Mean 35–40 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	BIV: RAI (+)		Exercise stages of change	Anova (RAI was analyzed); Discriminant function analysis;
Lewis & Sutton, 2011 [48]	Cross-sectional	100 (50)	95% undergraduates, members of a university gym; age not specified	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: IM (+); ID (n.s.), INTR (n.s.), EXT (−), AMOT (n.s.)		Exercise frequency	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Lewis & Sutton, 2011 [48]	Cross-sectional	100 (50)		UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: IM (+); ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (−), AMOT (−)		Exercise frequency	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Markland & Tobin, 2010 [88]	Cross-sectional	133 F	Exercise referral scheme clients (Mean 54.5 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
Wilson et al., 2002 [49]	Cross-sectional	500 (81)	Aerobic exercisers (Mean 34 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (−)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations. Differences between PA intensities.
Sebire et al., 2009 [19]	Cross-sectional	410 (71)	Exercisers (Mean 41.4 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Hierarchical regression analysis
Sebire et al., 2009 [19]	Cross-sectional	410 (71)	Exercisers (Mean 41.4 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	BIV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Hierarchical regression analysis
Brickell & Chatzisarantis, 2007 [42]	Cross-sectional	252 (61)	College students (Mean 23.2 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: IM (n.s.), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Multiple regression analysis
Brickell & Chatzisarantis, 2007 [42]	Cross-sectional	252 (61)	College students (Mean 23.2 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Multiple regression analysis
Edmunds et al., 2006 [51]	Cross-sectional	339 (53)	Symptomatic vs asymptomatic for exercise dependence (Mean 32.1 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ) and Integrated Regulation scale (INTEG)	MV: Symptomatic: INTR (+ tendency); Asymptomatic: ID (+). Remaining variables not significant.		Self-reported exercise (total and strenuous PA; LTEQ)	Multiple regressions. No associations with moderately intense PA.
Moreno et al., 2007 [89]	Cross-sectional	561 (53)	Healthy adults (Mean 31.8 yr)	Spain	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: IM (n.s.), ID (−), INTR (n.s.), EXT (−), AMOT (−)		Exercise duration (0-45 min vs. 45-60 min vs. > 60 min)	Manovas
Hall et al., 2010 [90]	Cross-sectional	470 (54)	Adults (Mean 44.9 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2); Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (−)		Exercise status (active vs. inactive)	Anovas
Standage et al., 2008 [91]	Cross-sectional	52 (50)	University students (Mean 22 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations; Autonomous and controlled motivations (BREQ)	MV: AutMot (+), CtMot (n.s.) BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s), AutMot (+), CtMot (n.s.)		Accelerometry	Bivariate correlations; Sequential regression analysis
Duncan et al., 2010 [41]	Cross-sectional	1079 (57)	Regular exercisers (Mean 24.2 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2) + Integrated reg. scale	MV: IM (n.s.), INTEG (+), ID (+)*, INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s), AMOT (n.s)		* PA frequency; PA intensity; PA duration (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Duncan et al., 2010 [41]	Cross-sectional	1079 (57)	Regular exercisers (Mean 24.2 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2) + Integrated reg. scale	BIV: IM (+), INTEG (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (− F)*, AMOT (−)		* PA frequency; PA intensity; PA duration (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Sorensen et al. 2006 [54]	cross-sectional	109 (59)	Psychiatric patients (Mean age group 31–49 yr)	Norway	Exercise regulations (based on BREQ)	MV: IM (+), ID (n.s.), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise level	Bivariate correlations; Logistic regressions
Sorensen et al. 2006 [54]	cross-sectional	109 (59)	Psychiatric patients (Mean age group 31–49 yr)	Norway	Exercise regulations (based on BREQ)	BIV: IM (+), ID (n.s.), INTR (n.s.), EXT (−)		Self-reported exercise level	Bivariate correlations; Logistic regressions
Puente & Anshel, 2010 [77]	Cross-sectional	238 (57)	College students (Mean 20.4 yr)	USA	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E)	MV: RAI (+)		Exercise frequency	Bivariate correlations; SEM
Puente & Anshel, 2010 [77]	Cross-sectional	238 (57)	College students (Mean 20.4 yr)	USA	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E)	BIV: RAI (+)		Exercise frequency	Bivariate correlations; SEM
Halvary et al., 2009 [76]	Cross-sectional	190 (44)	Healthy adults (Mean 21.8 yr)	Norway	Autonomous motivation (SRQ)	MV: AutMot (+)		Exercise frequency and duration	Bivariate correlations; SEM; Mediation analysis
Halvary et al., 2009 [76]	Cross-sectional	190 (44)	Healthy adults (Mean 21.8 yr)	Norway	Autonomous motivation (SRQ)	BIV: AutMot (+)		Exercise frequency and duration	Bivariate correlations; SEM; Mediation analysis
Wilson et al., 2006 [29]	Cross-sectional	220; 220 (56)	Cancer survivors (Mean 60–64 yr) vs non-cancer (Mean 50 yr)	Canada	Autonomous and controlled motivation (TSRQ-PA)	MV: AutMot (+), CtMot (−) in both samples		Self-reported exercise (min/wk of MVPA)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Wilson et al., 2006 [29]	Cross-sectional	220; 220 (56)	Cancer survivors (Mean 60–64 yr) vs non-cancer (Mean 50 yr)	Canada	Autonomous and controlled motivation (TSRQ-PA)	BIV: AutMot (+), CtMot (n.s.) in both samples		Self-reported exercise (min/wk of MVPA)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Hurkmans et al., 2010 [92]	Cross-sectional	271 (66)	Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (Mean 62 yr)	Netherlands	Exercise self-regulations (TSRQ-PA). Adated RAI.	MV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (SQUASH)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Hurkmans et al., 2010 [92]	Cross-sectional	271 (66)	Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (Mean 62 yr)	Netherlands	Exercise self-regulations (TSRQ-PA). Adated RAI.	BIV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (SQUASH)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Lutz et al., 2008 [93]	Cross-sectional	535 (60)	University students (Mean 20 yr)	USA	Exercise self-regulations (EMS). Adapted RAI.	MV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlation; Preacher & Hayes mediation analysis
Lutz et al., 2008 [93]	Cross-sectional	535 (60)	University students (Mean 20 yr)	USA	Exercise self-regulations (EMS). Adapted RAI.	BIV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlation; Preacher & Hayes mediation analysis
Wininger, 2007 [28]	Cross-sectional	143; 58 (76)	Undergraduates (Mean 21–22 yr)	USA	Exercise self-regulations (EMS)	MV *: IM (+), INTEG (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (−)		* Exercise stages of change; ** Distance walked on treadmill	Bivariate correlations; Manovas
Wininger, 2007 [28]	Cross-sectional	143; 58 (76)	Undergraduates (Mean 21–22 yr)	USA	Exercise self-regulations (EMS)	BIV **: IM experience sensations (+), INTEG (n.s.), ID (n.s.), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (−)			Bivariate correlations; Manovas
Craike, M., 2008 [47]	Cross-sectional	248 (53)	Healthy adults (Mean 48 yr)	Australia	Exercise self-regulations (based on BREQ and EMS)	MV: IM (+), ID (n.s.), INTR (n.s.), EXT (−)		Self-reported LTPA	SEM
Tsorbatzoudis et al., 2006 [94]	Cross-sectional	257 (55)	Healthy adults (Mean 31 yr)	Greece	Exercise self-regulations (SMS)	MV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (−), AMOT (−)		Exercise frequency (from the least to the most frequent)	Multivariate analysis of variance; multiple regressions
Chatzisarantis & Biddle, 1998 [95]	Cross-sectional	102 (50)	University employees (Mean 40 yr)	UK	Behavioral regulations for PA (SMS adaptation)	MV: Autonomous group (vs controlled) based on RAI scores (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	SEM
Matsumoto & Takenaka, 2004 [96]	Cross-sectional	486 (53)	Healthy individuals (Mean 45 yr)	Japan	Exercise self-regulations (SDMS); profiles of self-determination	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.) AMOT (−); Self-determined profile (+)		Exercise stages of change	Bivariate correlations and cluster analysis
McNeill et al., 2006 [97]	Cross-sectional	910 (80)	Healthy individuals (Mean 33 yr)	USA	Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations (MPA)	MV: Intrinsic motivation (+); Extrinsic motivation for social pressure		Self-reported exercise (minutes of walking, and MVPA)	SEM. Indirectly through self-efficacy.
Russell & Bray, 2009 [98]	Cross-sectional and prospective (6 + 6wk)	68 (13)	Cardiac rehabilitation outpatients (Mean 64.9 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (7Day-PAR)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Russell & Bray, 2009 [98]	Cross-sectional and prospective (6 + 6wk)	68 (13)	Cardiac rehabilitation outpatients (Mean 64.9 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (7Day-PAR)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Russell & Bray, 2010 [99]	Cross-sectional and Observational (14wk)	53 M	Exercise cardiac rehabilitation patients (Mean 62.8 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E)	MV: AutMot (+)		Exercise frequency; duration (+); volume (+) – 7Day-PAR	Bivariate correlations; Hierarchical regression analysis
Russell & Bray, 2010 [99]	Cross-sectional and Observational (14wk)	53 M	Exercise cardiac rehabilitation patients (Mean 62.8 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E)	BIV: AutMot (+), CtMot (n.s.)		Exercise frequency; duration (+); volume (+) – 7Day-PAR	Bivariate correlations; Hierarchical regression analysis
Fortier et al., 2009 [100]	Prospective (6mo)	149 F	Healthy adults (Mean 51.8 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (TSRQ-adapted)	MV: AutMot (n.s.)		Duration, Frequency, and Energy Expenditure (CHAMPS)	Bivariate correlations; Mediation/regression analysis
Fortier et al., 2009 [100]	Prospective (6mo)	149 F	Healthy adults (Mean 51.8 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (TSRQ-adapted)	BIV: AutMot (n.s.), CtMot (n.s.)		Duration, Frequency, and Energy Expenditure (CHAMPS)	Bivariate correlations; Mediation/regression analysis
Rodgers et al., 2010 [31]	Prospective	1572 (60)	Initiate vs. long-term exercisers (Mean 22–51 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (−) overtime for initiates, but < to regular exercisers		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ); Initiate vs. long-term exercisers	Manovas. Total N from 6 samples: initiates (60, 134, 38, 84), regular exercisers (202, 1054)
Barbeau et al., 2009 [101]	Prospective (1mo)	118 (65)	Healthy adults (Mean 19 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	MV: AutMot (+), CtMot (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Path analysis
Barbeau et al., 2009 [101]	Prospective (1mo)	118 (65)	Healthy adults (Mean 19 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: AutMot (+), CtMot (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Path analysis
Hagger et al., 2006 [35]	Prospective (4wk)	261 (64)	University students (Mean 24.9 yr)	UK	Relative autonomy index (based on PLOC scale)	BIV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (frequency)	Bivariate correlations; SEM
Hagger et al., 2006 [34]	Prospective (4 wk)	261 (64)	Exercise sample of university students (Mean 24.9 yr)	UK	Relative autonomy index (based on PLOC Scale)	BIV: RAI (+)		Self-reported exercise (frequency)	Bivariate correlations
Kwan et al., 2011[53]	Prospective (4 wk)	104 (58)	Undergraduate students; active (Mean 18.2 yr)	USA	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: IM (+), ID (n.s.), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.), AMOT (n.s.), RAI (n.s)		Self-reported exercise (online diary)	Bivariate correlations
Edmunds et al., 2007 [38]	Prospective (uncontrolled intervention) (3mo)	49 (84)	Overweight/Obese patients (Mean BMI: 38.8; Mean 45 yr) on an exercise scheme	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2); Integrated regulation subscale (EMS)	MV: IM (n.s.), INTEG (+), ID (−), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ);	Bivariate correlations; Multilevel regression analysis.* ID and INTR multivariate outcomes resulted from net suppression; thus, not considered by the authors.
				UK		BIV: ID (+), INTR (−)
Wilson et al., 2003 [58]	Experimental (12wk)	53 (83)	Adults (Mean 41.8 yr; BMI: 19.9 ± 3.0 kg/m²)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: IM (+), ID (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis. IM and ID increased from pre- to post-exercise program
Wilson et al., 2003 [58]	Experimental (12wk)	53 (83)	Adults (Mean 41.8 yr; BMI: 19.9 ± 3.0 kg/m²)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)
Sweet et al., 2009 [102]	Experimental (12mo)	234 (38)	Inactive with type 2 diabetes (Mean 53 yr) on an exercise program	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	MV: AutMot (+)		Amount of PA (kcal/month)	Bivariate correlations; Regression/Mediation analysis
Sweet et al., 2009 [102]				Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ)	BIV: AutMot (+)		Amount of PA (kcal/month)	Bivariate correlations; Regression/Mediation analysis
Fortier et al., 2011 [36]	Experimental (13wk); RCT	120 (69)	Inactive patients (Mean 47.3 yr): intensive vs. brief PA intervention	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2)	BIV: IM, ID, INTR, EXT, and RAI were not significant predictors		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
Fortier et al., 2007 [17]	Experimental (13wk); RCT	120 (69)	Autonomy supportive vs brief PA counseling (Mean 47.3 yr)	Canada	Treatment self-regulations (TSRQ-PA)	MV: AutMot (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Path/Mediation analysis
Fortier et al., 2007 [17]	Experimental (13wk); RCT	120 (69)	Autonomy supportive vs brief PA counseling (Mean 47.3 yr)	Canada	Treatment self-regulations (TSRQ-PA)	BIV: AutMot (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Path/Mediation analysis
Levy & Cardinal, 2004 [40]	Experimental (2mo); RCT	185 (68)	Adults (Mean 46.8 yr); SDT-based mail intervention vs. controls	USA	Exercise self-regulations (EMS)	MV: IM, INTEG, ID, INTR, EXT, and AMOT were not significant predictors		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Manovas with repeated measures
Mildestvedt et al., 2008 [68]	Experimental (4wk); RCT	176 (22)	Cardiac rehabilitation patients (Mean 56 yr): SDT-based vs standard rehab treatment	Norway	Autonomous and controlled motivations (TSRQ)	BIV: AutMot (+); CtMot (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (composite score); exercise intensity	ANOVAs with repeated measures
Silva et al., 2010 [33]	Experimental (12mo); RCT	239 F	OW/Obese women (Mean 38 yr); SDT-treatment vs controls	Portugal	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E)	MV: IM (+)*, ID (n.s.), INTR (n.s.), EXT (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise: MVPA * (7-day PAR); lifestyle PA index	Bivariate correlations; PLS analysis; Mediation analysis
Silva et al., 2010 [33]	Experimental (12mo); RCT	239 F	OW/Obese women (Mean 38 yr); SDT-treatment vs controls	Portugal	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E)	BIV: IM (+), ID (+), INTR (+), EXT (n.s.)			Bivariate correlations; PLS analysis; Mediation analysis
Silva et al., 2010 [32]	Experimental (1 yr + 2y follow-up); RCT	221 F	OW/Obese women (Mean 38 yr); SDT-treatment vs controls	Portugal	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E) at 1 yr and 2 yr	MV: AutMot 2 yr (+), INTR 2 yr (n.s.), EXT 2 yr (n.s.)		2-yr self-reported exercise: MVPA (7-day PAR)	Bivariate correlations; PLS analysis; Mediation analysis
Silva et al., 2010 [32]	Experimental (1 yr + 2y follow-up); RCT	221 F	OW/Obese women (Mean 38 yr); SDT-treatment vs controls	Portugal	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E) at 1 yr and 2 yr	BIV: AutMot 1 and 2 yr (+), INTR 2 yr (+), EXT 2 yr (n.s.)		2-yr self-reported exercise: MVPA (7-day PAR)	Bivariate correlations; PLS analysis; Mediation analysis
*II. Exercise-related psychological need satisfaction*
Puente & Anshel, 2010 [77]	Cross-sectional	238 (57)	College students (Mean 20.4 yr)	USA	Basic Psychological Needs Scale (BPNS); Perceived Competence Scale (PCS)	MV: Competence (+)		Exercise frequency	Bivariate correlations; SEM; Relatedness not measured.
Puente & Anshel, 2010 [77]	Cross-sectional	238 (57)	College students (Mean 20.4 yr)	USA		BIV: Autonomy (n.s.), Competence (+)		Exercise frequency	Bivariate correlations; SEM; Relatedness not measured.
Edmunds et al., 2006 [44]	Cross-sectional	369 (52)	Healthy individuals (Mean 31.9 yr)	UK	Psychological need satisfaction (BNSWS adapted)	MV: Autonomy (n.s.), Competence (+), Relatedness (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (total and strenuous PA; LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Regression analysis; mediation analysis
Edmunds et al., 2006 [44]	Cross-sectional	369 (52)	Healthy individuals (Mean 31.9 yr)	UK	Psychological need satisfaction (BNSWS adapted)	BIV: Autonomy (+), Competence (+), Relatedness (+)		Self-reported exercise (total and strenuous PA; LTEQ)
Edmunds et al., 2006 [51]	Cross-sectional	339 (53)	Symptomatic vs asymptomatic for exercise dependence (Mean 32.1 yr)	UK	Psychological need satisfaction (BNSWS adapted)	BIV: Autonomy (n.s.), Competence (+), Relatedness (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (total and strenuous PA; LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations. No associations with mild/moderately intense PA
Peddle et al., 2008 [43]	Cross-sectional	413 (46)	Colorectal cancer survivors (Mean 60 yr)	Canada	Psychological need satisfaction (PNSE)	BIV: Autonomy (+), Competence (+), Relatedness (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
McDonough et al., 2007 [50]	Cross-sectional	558 (72)	Recreational dragon boat paddlers (Mean 45 yr)	Canada	Exercise need satisfaction (PNSE)	MV: Autonomy (−), Competence (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; SEM
McDonough et al., 2007 [50]	Cross-sectional	558 (72)	Recreational dragon boat paddlers (Mean 45 yr)	Canada	Exercise need satisfaction (PNSE)	BIV: Autonomy (n.s.), Competence (+), Relatedness (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; SEM
Sebire et al., 2009 [19]	Cross-sectional	410 (71)	Exercisers (Mean 41.4 yr)	UK	Exercise need satisfaction (PNSE)	BIV: Exercise need satisfaction (composite score) (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
Milne et al., 2008 [87]	Cross-sectional	558 F	Breast cancer survivors (Mean 59 yr)	Australia	Perceived competence (PCS)	MV: Competence (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ); Exercise categories (meeting vs. not meeting guidelines)	Anovas; Hierarchical regression analysis
Milne et al., 2008 [87]	Cross-sectional	558 F	Breast cancer survivors (Mean 59 yr)	Australia	Perceived competence (PCS)	BIV: Competence (+)			Anovas; Hierarchical regression analysis
Halvary et al., 2009 [76]	Cross-sectional	190 (44)	Healthy adults (Mean 21.8 yr)	Norway	Perceived competence (PCS)	MV: Competence (n.s.)		Exercise frequency and duration	Bivariate correlations; SEM/Mediation analysis
Halvary et al., 2009 [76]	Cross-sectional	190 (44)	Healthy adults (Mean 21.8 yr)	Norway	Perceived competence (PCS)	BIV: Competence (+)		Exercise frequency and duration	Bivariate correlations; SEM/Mediation analysis
Vlachopoulos & Michailidou, 2006 [103]	Cross-sectional	508 (50)	Greek adults (Mean 30 yr)	Greece	Psychological needs satisfaction in exercise (BPNES)	MV: Autonomy (n.s.), Competence (+); Relatedness (n.s.)		Exercise frequency	SEM
Markland & Tobin, 2010 [88]	Cross-sectional	133 F	Exercise referral scheme clients	UK	Autonomy need (LCE); Perceived Competence (IMI); Relatedness (8-item scale)	BIV: Autonomy (+), Competence (+), Relatedness (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
Russell & Bray, 2009 [98]	Cross-sectional and prospective (6 + 6wk)	68 (13)	Cardiac rehabilitation outpatients (Mean 64.9 yr)	Canada	Exercise need satisfaction (PNSE)	BIV: Autonomy (n.s.), Competence (+)*, Relatedness (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (7Day-PAR) at 3wk and 6wk* follow-up	Bivariate correlations
Barbeau et al., 2009 [101]	Prospective (1mo)	118 (65)	Healthy adults (Mean 19 yr)	Canada	Exercise need satisfaction (PNSES)	BIV: Autonomy (+), Competence (+), Relatedness (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
Hagger et al., 2006 [34]	Prospective (4 wk)	261 (64)	Exercise sample of university students (Mean 24.9 yr)	UK	Psychological need satisfaction	BIV: Psychological need satisfaction (composite score) (+)		Self-reported exercise (frequency).	Bivariate correlations
Edmunds et al., 2007 [38]	Prospective (uncontrolled intervention) (3mo)	49 (84)	OW/Obese patients (BMI: 38.75; Mean 45 yr)	UK	Psychological need satisfaction (PNSS)	MV: Autonomy (n.s.), Competence (n.s.); Relatedness (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ); (Increase in relatedness overtime)	Multilevel regression analysis; Paired T-tests
Fortier et al., 2007 [17]	Experimental (13 wk); RCT	120 (69)	Healthy adults (Mean 47.3 yr)	Canada	Perceived Competence (PCES)	MV: Competence (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Path analysis; Mediation analysis
Levy & Cardinal, 2004 [40]	Experimental (2mo); RCT	185 (68)	Adults (Mean 46.8 yr); SDT-based mail intervention vs. controls	USA	Perceived autonomy satisfaction (LCE)	MV: Autonomy (+ F), Competence (n.s.), Relatedness (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Manovas with repeated measures
Silva et al., 2010 [33]	Experimental (12mo); RCT	239 F	OW/Obese women (Mean BMI: 31.5; Mean 38 y); SDT-based weight loss treatment vs controls	Portugal	Perceived autonomy satisfaction (LCE); Competence (IMI)	BIV: Autonomy (+), Competence (+)		Self-reported exercise: MVPA (7-day PAR); lifestyle PA index	Bivariate correlations
*III. Exercise motives and related measures*
Ingledew et al., 2009 [79]	Cross-sectional	251 (52)	University Students (Mean 19.5 yr)	UK	Exercise motives (EMI-2)	MV: Intrinsic motives: Stress management (+), Affiliation (+), Challenge (+); Extrinsic: Health/fitness (+); body-related (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (measure analogous to LTEQ)	Partial Least Squares Analysis (PLS); Mediation analysis
Ingledew & Markland, 2008 [46]	Cross-sectional	252 (48)	Office workers (Mean 40 yr)	UK	Exercise motives (EMI-2)	BIV: Intrinsic motives (n.s.), Extrinsic motives: health/fitness (+) and body-related (−)		Self-reported exercise (measure analogous to LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
Frederick & Ryan, 1993 [59]	Cross-sectional	376 (64)	Healthy individuals (Mean 39 yr)	USA	Exercise motives (MPAM)	Intrinsic motives: interest/enjoyment (+); competence (+); Extrinsic motives: body-related (+)		Self-reported exercise (levels, intensity)	Differences between PA categories; correlations and Manovas
Frederick et al., 1996 [104]	Cross-sectional	118 (68)	College students (Mean 22 yr)	USA	Exercise motives (MPAM-r)	MV: Extrinsic: body-related (+ M)		Self-reported exercise: frequency, volume	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Frederick et al., 1996 [104]	Cross-sectional	118 (68)	College students (Mean 22 yr)	USA	Exercise motives (MPAM-r)	BIV: Intrinsic motives (+ F), Extrinsic: body-related (+ M)		Self-reported exercise: frequency, volume	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Buckworth et al., 2007 [30] a	Cross-sectional	184;220 (60)	University students (Mean 18–22 yr)	USA	Exercise motives (EMI and IMI; total and subscales)	Intrinsic motives (except choice) (+); Extrinsic motives (except tangible rewards) (+)		Exercise stages of change	Anovas and profile analysis
Sebire et al., 2009 [19]	Cross-sectional	400 (73)	Exercisers (Mean 41.4 yr)	UK	Exercise goal content (GCEQ)	MV: Intrinsic motives (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Hierarchical regression analysis
Sebire et al., 2009 [19]	Cross-sectional	400 (73)	Exercisers (Mean 41.4 yr)	UK	Exercise goal content (GCEQ)	BIV: Intrinsic motives (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations; Hierarchical regression analysis
Segar et al., 2006 [64]	Cross-sectional	59 F	Healthy adults (Mean 45.6 yr)	USA	Body and non-body shape motives for exercise (via inductive, qualitative methods)	BIV: Body motives (−); non-body shape motives (+).		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Hierarchical regression analysis
Sit et al., 2008 [105]	Cross-sectional	360 F	Chinese adults (30–59 yr)	China	Exercise motives (MPAM-r)	MV: Intrinsic motives : competence/challenge (+), interest/enjoyment (+); Extrinsic: fitness/health (+); appearance (n.s.)		Exercise stages of change	Manovas
Davey et al., 2009 [106]	Cross-sectional	134 (66)	Employees (estimated mean age between 25–44 yr)	New Zeland	Exercise motives (based on MPAM-r and SMS)	MV: Intrinsic motives: enjoyment (+), competence/challenge (+); Extrinsic: appearance (−); Fitness (n.s.)		Total number of steps in 3wk	Multiple regression analysis
Segar et al., 2008 [65]	Prospective	156 F	Healthy women (Mean 49.3 yr)	USA	Extrinsic and Intrinsic goals (based on a list of goals and on cluster analysis)	MV: Intrinsic goals (+); Extrinsic goals: weight maintenance/toning (−); health benefits (−)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Linear mixed model
Ingledew et al., 1998 [107]	Prospective (3mo)	425 (34)	Government employees (Mean 40 yr)	UK	Exercise motives (EMI-2)	MV: Intrinsic motives: enjoyment (+); Extrinsic: body-related (+ action; - maintenance); health pressures (+ preparation; - action/maintenance)		Exercise stages of change	Discriminant function analysis
Ryan et al., 1997 [27] a	Prospective (10wk)	40 (80)	University students and employees (Mean 21 yr)	USA	Exercise motives (MPAM)	MV: Intrinsic motives: enjoyment (+), competence (+); body-related motives (n.s.)		Reduced dropout and attendance to exercise classes	Manovas and multiple regressions
Ryan et al., 1997 [27] b	Prospective (10wk)	155 (57)	New fitness center members (Mean 19.5 yr)	USA	Exercise motives (MPAM-R)	MV: Intrinsic motives: enjoyment (+), competence (+), social interactions (+); Extrinsic motives: fitness (n.s.), appearance (n.s.)		Attendance to and duration of exercise workout	Manovas and multiple regressions
Buckworth et al., 2007 [30] b	Experimental (10wk)	142 (66)	College Students (Mean 21.3 yr)	USA	Exercise motives (EMI and IMI);	BIV: Intrinsic motives: effort/competence (+) and interest/enjoyment (+); Extrinsic motives: appearance (+) *		Exercise patterns (from stable inactive to stable active); Activity vs. Lecture (no activity) Classes *	Anovas with repeated measures.
*IV. Perceived need support*
Peddle et al., 2008 [43]	Cross-sectional	413 (46)	Colorectal cancer survivors (Mean 60 yr)	Canada	Perceived need support (PAS, based on HCCQ-short)	BIV: Need support (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
Milne et al., 2008 [87]	Cross-sectional	558 F	Breast cancer survivors (Mean 59 yr)	Australia	Perceived need support (mHCCQ)	MV: Need support (+) BIV: Need support (+)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ); exercise categories (meeting vs. not meeting guidelines)	Anovas; Hierarchical regression analysis
Hurkmans et al., 2010 [92]	Cross-sectional	271 (66)	Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (Mean 62 yr)	Netherlands	Perceived need support (HCCQ-mod)	MV: Need support (n.s.)		Self-reported PA (SQUASH)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Hurkmans et al., 2010 [92]	Cross-sectional	271 (66)	Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (Mean 62 yr)	Netherlands	Perceived need support (HCCQ-mod)	BIV: Need support (n.s.)		Self-reported PA (SQUASH)	Bivariate correlations; Multiple regression analysis
Halvary et al., 2009 [76]	Cross-sectional	190 (44)	Healthy adults (Mean 21.8 yr)	Norway	Perceived need support (SCQ based on HCCQ)	BIV: Need support (+)		Exercise frequency and duration	Bivariate correlations
Markland & Tobin, 2010 [88]	Cross-sectional	133 F	Exercise referral scheme clients	UK	Need support (15-item scale)	BIV: Need support (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
Puente & Anshel, 2010 [77]	Cross-sectional	238 (57)	College students (Mean 20.4 yr)	USA	Exercise need support (SCQ)	BIV: Need support (+)		Exercise frequency	Bivariate correlations
Russel & Bray, 2010 [99]	Cross-sectional and prospective (14wk)	53 M	Exercise cardiac rehabilitation patients (Mean 62.8 yr)	Canada	Perceived need support (HCCQ-short)	MV: Need support (n.s.)		Exercise frequency; duration (+); volume – 7Day-PAR	Bivariate correlations; Hierarchical regression analysis
Russel & Bray, 2010 [99]	Cross-sectional and prospective (14wk)	53 M	Exercise cardiac rehabilitation patients (Mean 62.8 yr)	Canada	Perceived need support (HCCQ-short)	BIV: Need support (+)		Exercise frequency; duration (+); volume – 7Day-PAR	Bivariate correlations; Hierarchical regression analysis
Levy et al., 2008 [108]	Prospective (8-10wk)	70 (37)	Injured exercisers in rehabilitation (Mean 33 yr; 69% recreational)	UK	Perceived need support (HCCQ)	MV: Need support (+) ^{a, c}		Exercise adherence: ^a clinical, ^b home-based; ^c attendance	Bivariate correlations; Manovas
Levy et al., 2008 [108]	Prospective (8-10wk)	70 (37)		UK	Perceived need support (HCCQ)	BIV: Need support (+) ^{a, c}			Bivariate correlations; Manovas
Edmunds et al., 2007 [38]	Uncontrolled Prospective (3mo)	49 (84)	OW/Obese patients (BMI: 38.75; Mean 45 yr) on an exercise scheme	UK	Perceived need support (HCCQ)	MV: Need support (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ);	Multilevel regression analysis
Fortier et al., 2007 [17]	Experimental (13 wk); RCT	120 (69)	Autonomy supportive vs. brief PA counseling (Mean 47.3 yr)	Canada	Perceived need support (HCCQ)	BIV: Need support		Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Bivariate correlations
Mildestvedt et al., 2008 [68]	Experimental (4wk); RCT	176 (22)	Cardiac rehabilitation patients (Mean 56 yr): autonomy supportive vs. standard rehab	Norway	Perceived need support (mHCCQ)	MV: Need support (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (composite score); exercise intensity	Manovas with repeated measures
Silva et al., 2010 [33]	Experimental (12mo); RCT	239 F	OW/Obese women (Mean BMI: 31.5; Mean 38 y): SDT-based WL treatment vs. controls	Portugal	Perceived need support (HCCQ)	MV: Need support (+)		Self-reported exercise: MVPA (7-day PAR); lifestyle PA index	Bivariate correlations; PLS/mediation analysis
Silva et al., 2010 [33]	Experimental (12mo); RCT	239 F		Portugal	Perceived need support (HCCQ)	BIV: Need support (+)			Bivariate correlations; PLS/mediation analysis
Silva et al., 2010 [32]	Experimental (1 yr + 2y follow-up); RCT	221 F	OW/Obese women (Mean BMI: 31.5; Mean 38 y): SDT-based WL treatment vs. controls	Portugal	Perceived need support (HCCQ)	BIV: Need support (+)		Self-reported exercise: MVPA (7-day PAR)	Bivariate correlations
*V. Exercise Causality Orientations*
Rose et al., 2005 [56]	Cross-sectional	375 (51)	Volunteers (17–60 yr)	UK	Exercise causality orientations (ECOS)	MV: Autonomy O. (+), Controlling O. (− F), and Impersonal O. (−)		Exercise stages of change	Discriminant function analysis. Gender differences
Kwan et al., 2011[53]	Prospective (4 wk)	104 (58)	Undergraduate students; active (Mean 18.2 yr)	USA	Exercise causality orientations (ECOS)	BIV: Autonomy O. (+), Controlling O. (−), and Impersonal O. (n.s.)		Self-reported exercise (online diary)	Bivariate correlations
*VI. SDT-based Interventions and other SDT-related measures*
Edmunds et al., 2008 [39]	Experimental (10wk)	55 F	Exercisers (Mean 21 yr)	UK	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2); Need support (PESS); Basic needs (PNSS); Exercise attendance	Groups: SDT-based exercise classes vs. traditional exercise classes	Higher perceived need support, autonomy and relatedness needs; Competence (+), INTRO (+) and amotivation (−) overtime for both groups	Higher exercise attendance	Multilevel regression analysis
Fortier et al., 2007 [17]	Experimental (13wk); RCT	120 (69)	Healthy adults (Mean 47.3 yr)	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (TSRQ-PA); Perceived Competence (PCES); Need Support (HCCQ); Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Groups: autonomy supportive vs. brief PA counseling	Higher perceived need support, autonomous motivation overtime	Higher reported exercise overtime	Ancovas
Fortier et al., 2011 [36]	Experimental (13wk); RCT	120 (69)	Inactive primary care patients (Mean 47.3 yr): intensive vs. brief PA counseling intervention	Canada	Exercise self-regulations (BREQ-2); Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Groups: autonomy supportive - intensive vs. brief PA counseling	Higher perceived need support, autonomous motivation overtime	Higher reported exercise overtime	Ancovas
Mildestvedt et al., 2008 [68]	Experimental (4wk); RCT	176 (22)	Cardiac rehabilitation patients (Mean 56 yr): autonomy supportive vs. standard rehab	Norway	Exercise self-regulations (TSRQ); Perceived need support (mHCCQ); Self-reported exercise	Groups: autonomy supportive vs. standard rehab	No significant differences	No significant differences	Anovas with repeated measures
Levy & Cardinal, 2004 [40]	Experimental (2mo); RCT	185 (68)	Adults (Mean 46.8 yr); SDT-based mail intervention vs. controls	USA	Exercise self-regulations (EMS); Perceptions of autonomy (LCE); Competence (PSPP); Self-reported exercise (LTEQ)	Groups: SDT-based mail vs. controls	Women only: increase in perception of autonomy	Women only: increase self-reported exercise	Anovas with repeated measures
Silva et al., 2010 [18]	Experimental (12mo); RCT	239 F	OW/Obese women (Mean BMI: 31.5; Mean 38 y); RCT	Portugal	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E); Need support (HCCQ); Perceived autonomy (LCE); Self-reported exercise (MVPA, lifestyle, steps)	Groups: SDT-based weight loss treatment vs. controls	Higher need supportive climate, autonomy satisfaction, IM, IDENT, INTRO	Higher reported exercise (all measures)	Effect sizes; T-tests
Silva et al., 2011 [32]	Experimental (1 yr + 2y follow-up); RCT	221 F	OW/Obese women (Mean BMI: 31.5; Mean 38 y); RCT	Portugal	Exercise self-regulations (SRQ-E) at 1 yr and 2 yr; Need support (HCCQ); Self-reported exercise (MVPA)	Groups: SDT-based weight loss treatment vs. controls	Higher 2-yr EXT, INTRO and autonomous regulations	Higher 2-yr reported exercise	Effect sizes; T-tests

Legend: F, female; M, male ; BIV, uni/bivariate associations; MV, multivariate associations; IM, intrinsic motivation; INTEG, integrated regulation; ID, identified regulation; INTR, introjected regulation; EXT, external regulation; AMOT, amotivation; RAI, relative autonomy index; AutMot, autonomous motivations; CtMot, controlled motivations; Autonomy O., autonomy orientation; Controlling O., controlling orientation; Impersonal O., impersonal orientation; (+), positive association; (-), negative association; (n.s.), not significant. Superscript letters are used to signal associations between specific predictors and outcomes (check the ‘significant predictors’ and ‘outcomes’ columns when applied). (*) is used when specific comments need to be made (check the ‘observations’ column on those cases).