What Brings Young Adults to the Yoga Mat? Cross-Sectional Associations Between Motivational Profiles and Physical and Psychological Health Among Participants in the Project EAT-IV Survey

Abstract

Objectives:

This study examines motivations for yoga and identifies unique motivational profiles among a sample of young adult yoga practitioners. This study further determines how young adult yoga practitioners’ motivational profiles associate with physical health behaviors and psychological factors.

Subjects/Setting:

Survey data were drawn from the fourth wave of a large, population-based study (Project EAT-IV; Eating and Activity in Teens and Young Adults).

Design:

Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to identify motivational profiles among Project EAT-IV participants practicing yoga (n = 297; mean age: 30.8–1.7 years; 79.7 % female). Cross-sectional associations between latent motivational profiles, physical health behaviors, and psychological factors were determined with unadjusted and adjusted (gender, race/ethnicity, and body mass index) general linear models.

Results:

Across motivational profiles, most young adult yoga practitioners were motivated by enhanced fitness and stress reduction/relaxation. Additional motivations for yoga clustered by appearance (desire to change body appearance or weight) or mindfulness (desire to increase present moment awareness) underpinnings. The LCA characterized motivational profiles as “Low Appearance, Low Mindfulness” (Class 1; n = 77), “Low Appearance, High Mindfulness” (Class 2; n = 48), “High Appearance, Low Mindfulness” (Class 3; n = 79), and “High Appearance, High Mindfulness” (Class 4; n = 93). Having a profile with high mindfulness and low appearance motivations (Class 2) was associated with higher body satisfaction in comparison to the other classes (p < 0.001). Relative to Class 2, those with low mindfulness motivations (Class 1; Class 3) reported less total physical activity (p = 0.002) and those with high appearance motivations (Class 3; Class 4) reported higher compulsive exercise scores (p = 0.002).

Conclusions:

In this sample, high mindfulness and low appearance motivations for yoga appeared optimal for physical and psychological health. Cross-sectional findings suggest that young adult yoga practitioners' mind-body health may be supported by motivational underpinnings that emphasize yoga's internal (mindfulness) rather than external (appearance) benefits.

Introduction

Yoga is a mind–body practice that may incorporate physical postures (asana), breathing techniques (pranayama), and various meditative practices; when all of these components are present, yoga is often viewed as a holistic practice that includes physical movement, as well as mental and spiritual components.¹ Approximately 14% of adults in the United States report having practiced yoga in the past 12 months and yoga has gained popularity as a health-promoting practice in recent years.^2,3

Yoga has been used in community and clinical settings to improve physical fitness and health, to promote mental and emotional wellness, and to reduce disordered eating and other clinical psychopathologies.^4–16 Although the effects of yoga appear multifaceted and positive, it is possible that yoga carries a level of risk for some practitioners. For example, harmful behaviors or cognitions may be reinforced by yoga practice if one's underlying motivations (i.e., motivational underpinnings) for engaging in yoga are maladaptive. Thus, it is important to understand yoga practitioners' motivational underpinnings to design person-centered yoga programs that minimize unintentional yet potentially harmful effects.

Yoga practitioners often identify physical (e.g., improved health) and mental or spiritual (e.g., stress reduction, mindfulness, enhanced spirituality) motivations for yoga.^2,17–19 Although not yet studied, it is conceivable that those primarily motivated by externally driven physical factors, such as a desire to change one's appearance or weight, may report more harmful physical health behaviors than their peers. Conversely, those primarily motivated by internally driven mental or spiritual factors, such as a desire to be mindful, may report greater psychological well-being than their peers.

Further, it is possible that physical, mental, and spiritual motivations for yoga cluster together to create unique motivational underpinning profiles that impact both physical and psychological health outcomes. Notably, yoga practitioners tend to develop or strengthen certain motivations as they engage in their practice across time.^18,19 Therefore, examining yoga practitioners' motivational profiles in specific life stages may have health implications.

It is important to understand the relationship between motivational profiles and health outcomes in young adult yoga practitioners given the high prevalence of certain physical and psychological health challenges among young adult populations (i.e., 25–40 years). In the United States, participation in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) tends to decrease between the ages of 12 and 29 years²⁰ and young adults report a high prevalence of depression²¹ and anxiety²² compared with other age demographics.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, young adults are also at risk for compulsive exercise²³ and disordered eating,^24,25 and these maladaptive behaviors are associated with body dissatisfaction and poor self-esteem.^26–29 However, self-determination theory posits that positive internal states enhance motivational salience for and increase participation in healthful behaviors.³⁰ Thus, it is plausible that young adults' motivations for mind–body practices, such as yoga, are meaningfully related to mind–body outcomes such as physical and psychological health components. However, little is known about young adults' motivations for yoga, nor how young adults' motivational profiles might relate to both physical health behaviors and psychological factors.

The present study examines motivational characteristics among a sample of young adult yoga practitioners who were identified through their participation in a population-based study and further determines associations between the yoga practitioners' motivational profiles, physical health behaviors, and psychological factors. The following research questions were addressed: (1) What motivates young adults to practice yoga? (2) Do young adults' motivations for yoga cluster together in unique patterns of motivational underpinning profiles? (3) How do young adults' motivational profiles relate to physical health behaviors and psychological factors? Study findings have implications for designing effective, health-promoting, and motivationally salient yoga programs for young adults.

Materials and Methods

Study design and Project EAT-IV yoga practitioner population

Data for this cross-sectional analysis were drawn from Project EAT-IV (Eating and Activity in Teens and Young Adults), the fourth wave of a population-based cohort study that focuses on healthful eating, physical activity, and other weight-related variables among young people. The present analytic sample includes 237 female and 60 male young adults (mean age = 30.8 ± 1.6 years) who responded to the fourth wave assessment and self-identified as a yoga practitioner. In 1998–1999, students enrolled at middle schools and senior high schools in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area of Minnesota completed the first wave assessment of the Project EAT study, including cross-sectional surveys and anthropometric measures.^31,32

Given growing research interest in the eating and weight-related health of young people, a decision was made to follow-up via mailed/online assessments at 5-year intervals with participants who provided sufficient contact information (N = 3672 of 4746) as part of the first wave assessment.^25,33,34 The fourth wave assessment in 2015–2016 was similarly conducted online and by mail with the purpose of building further understanding of the progression through young adulthood; accordingly, only participants who previously responded to Wave 2, Wave 3, or both other follow-up assessments were invited. The University of Minnesota's Institutional Review Board Human Subjects Committee approved all Project EAT study protocols at each wave.

Complete fourth wave assessment data were collected online, by mail, or by phone from 66.1% of the young adults for whom correct contact information was available (N = 1830 of 2770). Of note, the research questions for the present study were not in reference to the overall population-based Project EAT sample but rather about a subgroup of individuals who reported practicing yoga via the EAT-IV survey. The study sample of young adult yoga practitioners was primarily female (79.7%), white, non-Hispanic (73.7%), university-educated (69.9%), and had a body mass index (BMI) less than 25 m/kg² (54.9%). Because the present analyses were restricted to this subsample of self-identified young adult yoga practitioners, it is acknowledged that the study sample may not be representative of the underlying Project EAT population.

Survey development and variables

The EAT-IV survey assessed participants' health and weight-related behaviors in a manner consistent with the surveys used at previous study waves (EAT I–III).^31,35 In line with the emergent interest in yoga across the United States, yoga questions were added to the EAT-IV survey.³⁶ Those who self-identified as yoga practitioners via the EAT-IV survey were asked to select (yes/no) up to nine main reasons for practicing yoga (see yoga motivations items listed in Table 1). Response items were fixed, and motivations ranged from the perceived physical health (“enhanced physical fitness; weight control”) to mental or spiritual health (“greater awareness of myself; enhanced spirituality”) benefits of yoga.

Table 1.

Sociodemographic Characteristics, Yoga Motivations, Physical Behaviors, and Psychological Factors of the Project EAT-IV Young Adult Yoga Practitioner Sample (N = 297)

Characteristics
Age (years), mean (SD)	30.8 (1.7)
BMI (kg/m2), mean (SD)	25.4 (5.2)
Yoga experience (years), mean (SD)	2.9 (1.6)
Gender, female, % (n)	79.8 (237)
Educational attainment, % (n)
<University degreea	30.1 (89)
4-Year college/university degree	45.6 (135)
Advanced degree	24.3 (72)
Race/ethnicity, % (n)
BIPOC	26.3 (78)
White, non-Hispanic	73.7 (219)
Main reason(s) for practicing yoga, % (n)
Stress reduction and relaxation	89.6 (266)
Enhanced physical fitness (e.g., strength, flexibility)	88.2 (262)
Health benefits (e.g., decrease lower back pain, lower blood pressure)	74.4 (221)
Helps me feel better about my body	62.0 (184)
Makes my body look better	55.9 (166)
Greater awareness of myself	52.9 (157)
Helps me be in the present moment	51.5 (153)
Weight control	45.5 (135)
Enhanced spirituality	27.9 (83)
Physical health behaviors (h/week), mean (SD)
Total PA	8.7 (5.63)
MVPA	5.4 (3.8)
Yoga	3.0 (1.0)
Psychological factors, scores, mean (SD)
Compulsive exercise, range: 3–12	6.5 (2.0)
Eating to cope, range: 5–25	9.5 (4.0)
Body satisfaction, range: 13–65	42.4 (10.3)
Self-esteem, range: 6–24	19.3 (3.3)
Depression, range: 6–18	10.7 (2.9)
Stress index, range: 0.1–10	1.0 (0.8)

^a Includes high school degree/GED, some college, and 2-year degrees.

BIPOC, Black, Indigenous, People of Color; BMI, body mass index; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; PA, physical activity; SD, standard deviation.

Additional study variables include survey-reported participant characteristics, physical health behaviors (total physical activity, MVPA, yoga), and psychological factors (compulsive exercise, eating to cope, body satisfaction, self-esteem, depression, stress). Scale psychometrics were examined in the full Project EAT-IV sample and in the yoga practitioner subsample, and no differences in internal consistency values were observed (subsequent Cronbach's α values were determined to represent the yoga practitioner subsample). A subgroup of 103 participants completed the EAT-IV survey twice during a 1- to 4-week period, and estimates of item test–retest reliability were assessed. Survey questions and psychometric properties for the study variables are described in Table 2.

Table 2.

Study Variables and Descriptions of Project EAT-IV Survey Items

Constructs and variables	Survey item descriptions
Physical health behaviors	A continuous frequency measure, expressed in hours per week, was created for each physical health behavior variable defined next by using the assigned midpoint of each response category.
Total activity and MVPA	Frequency of total physical activity and MVPA were assessed by using a modified version of the Godin-Shepard Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire.59 In alignment with previous validation studies, this survey was validated against accelerometry-derived MVPA in a previous EAT cohort.60 Survey respondents were asked to identify how many hours per week they participated in mild (“requiring little effort”), moderate (“non-exhaustive”), and strenuous (“causes the heart to beat rapidly”) activity to determine total activity (test–retest r = 0.81). Weekly MVPA was assessed by examining only the moderate and strenuous activities (test–retest r = 0.84). Total activity and MVPA response options ranged from none to 6+h/week.
Yoga	To assess the frequency of engaging in yoga, respondents were asked to report how often they practiced yoga over the past year; response options ranged from less than 30-min/week to 10+ h/week (test–retest r = 0.74).
Psychological factors	All psychological factors shown next are expressed as scores.
Compulsive exercise	Compulsive exercise was measured by using three items (e.g., “when I miss a scheduled exercise session, I may feel tense, irritable, or depressed”; “when I don't exercise, I feel guilty”) from the Obligatory Exercise Questionnaire.61 Response options ranged from 1 (never) to 4 (always), with higher scores indicating a higher frequency of experiencing compulsive exercise attitudes (Cronbach's α = 0.75). Scale range: 3–12
Eating to cope	Eating to cope was measured by using a 5-item coping subscale (“How often do you eat…” … “because you're depressed or sad?”; … “as a way to help you cope?”) of the Motivations to Eat subscale62, with higher scores indicating more frequent eating to cope behaviors (1 = almost never or never, 5 = almost always or always; Cronbach's α = 0.90). Scale range: 5–25
Body satisfaction	Body satisfaction was assessed by using a modified version of the Body Shape Satisfaction Scale. Participants rated their satisfaction with 10 different body parts (e.g., height, weight, body shape, waist, hips, thighs, stomach, face, body build, shoulders) by using a 5-point Likert scale, and response options ranged from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied) with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction (Cronbach's α = 0.93, test–retest r = 0.82). Scale range: 13–65
Self-esteem	Self-esteem was measured with six items from the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (“On the whole, I am satisfied with myself; I am able to do things as well as most other people”).63 Response options ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree), and responses were summed such that higher scores indicate higher self-esteem (Cronbach's α = 0.85, test–retest r = 0.81). Scale range: 6–24
Depression	Depression was assessed by the respondents' report of whether they felt bothered or troubled by up to six items in the past year (“feeling unhappy, sad, or depressed; feeling hopeless about the future”). Response options ranged from 1 (not at all) to 3 (very much), with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms (Cronbach's α = 0.84, test–retest r = 0.77).64 Scale range: 6–18
Stress	Stress was measured with a stress index that combined self-reported perceptions of stress (range 1–10, r = 0.85) and stress management capabilities (range 1–10, r = 0.73) within the past 30 days. Previous work indicates that a stress index score above 1.0 is a marker of unmanaged stress.65,66 Scale range: 0.1–10
Sociodemographic characteristics	Project EAT-IV survey respondents reported on age, gender (male, female), ethnicity/race, educational attainment, and anthropometric characteristics.67 Weight status was classified according to BMI criteria (<25 kg/m2 vs. ≥25 kg/m2).

EAT-IV, Eating and Activity in Teens and Young Adults.

Statistical analyses

All analyses were conducted in SAS software (version 9.4; Cary, NC, USA) and statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Descriptive statistics assessed sociodemographic characteristics, yoga motivations, physical health behaviors, and psychological factors among the full sample of young adult yoga practitioners. Only incidental data were missing (no more than n = 6 for each study variable); therefore, only these cases were excluded from study analyses. To answer research question 1, the prevalence of the nine dichotomous (yes/no) motivations for yoga survey items was examined.

To answer research question 2, latent class analysis (LCA) was used to determine whether previously unobserved motivational underpinning patterns would emerge as distinct, mutually exclusive classes (i.e., motivational profiles) using the nine motivations for yoga survey items. Multiple latent class models, ranging from two- to six-class models, were fit to the data. The authors selected the most appropriate latent class model based on model fit indices (e.g., low Bayesian information criterion [BIC] values are often considered an indicator of model fit) as well as class parsimony and interpretability (Table 3).^37,38

Table 3.

Criteria to Assess Model Fit for the Latent Two- to Six-Class Models Characterizing Young Adult Yoga Practitioners' Motivational Profiles

No. of classes
	2	3	4	5	6
BICa	511.8	455.0	447.1	469.6	504.7
CAICa	530.8	484.0	486.1	518.6	563.7
ABICa	451.5	363.1	323.5	314.2	317.6
Entropyb	0.78	0.83	0.78	0.82	0.86

^a Lower values indicate superior model fit.³⁷

^b Entropy values indicate how well the classes differentiate; values greater than 0.80 indicate “good” classification of individuals into classes.³⁷

ABIC, adjusted Bayesian information criterion; BIC, Bayesian information criterion; CAIC, Consistent Akaike information criterion.

Once the appropriate model was selected, yoga practitioners were assigned to the motivational profile for which they had the highest posterior probability of latent class membership. Next, sociodemographic and yoga-relevant characteristics were examined across motivational profiles by using Wald Chi-square tests and multinomial logistic regression models to determine potential covariates. To answer research question 3, general linear modeling was used to examine the associations between the young adult yoga practitioners' motivational profiles, physical health behaviors, and psychological factors. These models were unadjusted and adjusted for covariates (i.e., gender, race/ethnicity, BMI). All multinomial logistic and general linear models used a reference class.

Results

Motivations for yoga

The sample of young adult yoga practitioners indicated their experience with yoga (>3 years of practice = 70.0%) and were asked to select one or more main reasons for practicing yoga (Table 1). For descriptive purposes, the prevalence of each motivation for yoga item was assessed. Many young adult yoga practitioners identified “stress reduction and relaxation” (classified as a mental motivation; 89.6%) and “enhanced fitness” (physical motivation; 88.2%) as their main reasons for practicing yoga. The least commonly reported reason for practicing yoga was “enhanced spirituality” (spiritual motivation; 27.9%).

LCA and emergent motivational profiles

A four-class model was selected to represent motivational underpinning profiles based on favorable model fit indices, distinct differences in item-response probabilities across classes, and the ability to easily interpret motivational patterns by latent class (Table 4). The motivations for yoga items “greater awareness of myself” and “helps me be in the present moment” tended to cluster together in high or low item-response probability patterns and were termed “mindfulness” motivations for yoga. Similarly, the items “helps me feel better about my body,” “make my body look better,” and “weight control” tended to cluster together in high or low item-response probability patterns and were termed “appearance” motivations for yoga.

Table 4.

Response Probabilities of the Motivations for Yoga Items by Latent Class Motivational Profile

Main reason(s) for practicing yoga	Class 1: LALMa (n = 77; 25.9%)	Class 2: LAHMb (n = 48; 16.2%)	Class 3: HALMc (n = 79; 26.6%)	Class 4: HAHMd (n = 93; 31.3%)
Stress reduction and relaxation	0.74	0.99	0.86	0.99
Enhanced physical fitness (e.g., strength, flexibility)	0.70	0.79	0.98	0.99
Health benefits (e.g., decrease lower back pain, lower blood pressure)	0.57	0.61	0.80	0.91
Helps me feel better about my body	0.20	0.38	0.78	0.95
Makes my body look better	0.08	0.18	0.85	0.92
Greater awareness of myself	0.04	0.87	0.30	0.94
Helps me be in the present moment	0.10	0.88	0.14	0.98
Weight control	0.18	0.04	0.65	0.73
Enhanced spirituality	0.06	0.44	0.03	0.58

^a Low appearance, low mindfulness motivations for yoga.

^b Low appearance, high mindfulness motivations for yoga.

^c High appearance, low mindfulness motivations for yoga.

^d High appearance, high mindfulness motivations for yoga.

The “enhanced spirituality” motivations for yoga item tended to cluster with the mindfulness items. However, the item-response probabilities for this spiritual motivation had less differentiation across motivational profiles in comparison to the mindfulness and appearance items.

Per LCA, the “Low Appearance, Low Mindfulness” motivational profile (Class 1: LALM; 25.9%) was characterized by a low likelihood of selecting the appearance and mindfulness motivations for yoga items as well as the spirituality item. The “Low Appearance, High Mindfulness” motivational profile (Class 2: LAHM; 16.2%) was characterized by a low likelihood of selecting the appearance items and a high likelihood of selecting the mindfulness items as motivations for practicing yoga. Both the “High Appearance, Low Mindfulness” (Class 3: HALM; 26.6%) and “High Appearance, High Mindfulness” (Class 4: HAHM; 31.3%) motivational profiles were characterized by a moderate to high likelihood of selecting the appearance motivations for yoga items.

However, those with the Class 4: HAHM motivational profile were more likely to select the mindfulness and spirituality items as motivations for yoga than those with the Class 3: HALM motivational profile. Subsequent models were adjusted for gender, race/ethnicity, and BMI due to variations in these characteristics across latent class motivational profiles.

Physical and psychological outcomes and associations by latent class

For descriptive purposes, means and standard deviations of physical health behaviors and psychological factors by latent class motivational profiles are presented in Table 5. Unadjusted and adjusted associations between motivational profiles and study outcomes are presented in Table 6; the models did not substantially differ and, therefore, the adjusted p-values are reported next. In this sample of young adult yoga practitioners, those who were highly motivated by the mindfulness, rather than appearance, benefits of yoga (Class 2: LAHM) reported the greatest participation in physical activity and highest body satisfaction.

Table 5.

Descriptive Statistics of Physical Behaviors and Psychological Factors by Latent Class Motivational Profile

	Class 1: LALMa (n = 77; 25.9%)	Class 2: LAHMb (n = 48; 16.2%)	Class 3: HALMc (n = 79; 26.6%)	Class 4: HAHMd (n = 93; 31.3%)
Physical health behaviors, mean (SD)
Total activity, h/week	7.5 (5.6)	10.5 (5.9)	7.8 (5.1)	9.2 (5.7)
MVPA, h/week	4.5 (3.5)	6.1 (4.0)	5.2 (3.6)	5.8 (4.0)
Yoga, h/week	2.7 (0.8)	3.1 (1.0)	3.0 (1.0)	3.3 (1.0)
Psychological factors, scores, mean (SD)
Compulsive exercise	5.9 (1.9)	6.0 (2.0)	6.9 (1.9)	7.0 (2.0)
Eating to cope	8.7 (3.7)	9.7 (4.1)	9.4 (4.0)	10.3 (4.0)
Body satisfaction	42.3 (11.6)	46.1 (9.8)	40.6 (9.9)	42.0 (9.3)
Self-esteem	19.2 (3.5)	20.1 (3.4)	19.1 (3.3)	19.1 (3.2)
Depression	10.1 (2.8)	10.2 (2.3)	10.5 (3.0)	10.9 (3.0)
Stress index	1.0 (0.9)	1.2 (0.8)	1.0 (0.7)	1.0 (0.8)

^a Low appearance, low mindfulness motivations for yoga.

^b Low appearance, high mindfulness motivations for yoga.

^c High appearance, low mindfulness motivations for yoga.

^d High appearance, high mindfulness motivations for yoga.

Table 6.

Cross-Sectional Unadjusted and Adjusted Associations Between Latent Class Motivational Profiles and Physical and Psychological Outcomes

	Class 1: LALMa (n = 77; 25.9%)	Class 2: LAHMb (n = 48; 16.2%)	Class 3: HALMc (n = 79; 26.6%)	Class 4: HAHMd (n = 93; 31.3%)	p
Physical health behaviors
Total activity, h/week
β (95% CI), unadjusted	−2.98 (−4.99 to −0.97)	Reference	−2.69 (−4.69 to −0.69)	−1.31 (−3.25 to 0.63)	0.012
β (95% CI), adjusted	−2.93 (−4.93 to −0.93)	Reference	−2.34 (−4.34 to −0.35)	−0.84 (−2.78 to 1.11)	0.002
MVPA, h/week
β (95% CI), unadjusted	−1.52 (−2.89 to −0.16)	Reference	−0.87 (−2.23 to 0.49)	−0.26 (−1.58 to 1.05)	0.001
β (95% CI), adjusted	−1.48 (−2.83 to −0.13)	Reference	−0.63 (−1.98 to 0.73)	0.06 (−1.26 to 1.37)	0.009
Yoga, h/week
β (95% CI), unadjusted	−0.39 (−0.73 to −0.05)	Reference	−0.11 (−0.45 to 0.23)	0.20 (−0.13 to 0.53)	0.001
β (95% CI), adjusted	−0.38 (−0.72 to −0.04)	Reference	−0.08 (−0.42 to 0.26)	0.24 (−0.09 to 0.57)	<0.001
Psychological factors, scores
Compulsive exercise
β (95% CI), unadjusted	−0.09 (−0.79 to 0.62)	Reference	0.95 (0.25 to 1.66)	0.99 (0.32 to 1.68)	< 0.001
β (95% CI), adjusted	−0.07 (−0.78 to 0.65)	Reference	0.96 (0.25 to 1.67)	0.98 (0.29 to 1.67)	0.002
Eating to cope
β (95% CI), unadjusted	−0.94 (−2.38 to 0.49)	Reference	−0.33 (−1.77 to 1.10)	0.58 (−0.81 to 1.97)	0.095
β (95% CI), adjusted	−1.08 (−2.46 to 0.29)	Reference	−0.67 (−2.05 to 0.71)	0.22 (−1.13 to 1.57)	<0.001
Body satisfaction
β (95% CI), unadjusted	−3.82 (−7.50 to −0.13)	Reference	−5.45 (−9.12 to −1.79)	−4.03 (−7.59 to −0.47)	0.034
β (95% CI), adjusted	−3.86 (−7.22 to −0.50)	Reference	−5.30 (−8.67 to −1.94)	−3.94 (−7.22 to −0.67)	<0.001
Self-esteem
β (95% CI), unadjusted	−0.89 (−2.10 to 0.31)	Reference	−0.94 (−2.14 to 0.26)	−0.96 (−2.12 to 0.21)	0.372
β (95% CI), adjusted	−0.93 (−2.14 to 0.28)	Reference	−0.94 (−2.15 to 0.27)	−0.93 (−2.11 to 0.25)	0.280
Depression
β (95% CI), unadjusted	−0.07 (−1.11 to 0.96)	Reference	0.36 (−0.67 to 1.39)	0.79 (−0.21 to 1.79)	0.208
β (95% CI), adjusted	−0.04 (−1.07 to 1.00)	Reference	0.32 (−0.72 to 1.35)	0.70 (−0.31 to 1.70)	0.082
Stress index
β (95% CI), unadjusted	−0.13 (−0.42 to 0.16)	Reference	−0.15 (−0.44 to 0.13)	−0.14 (−0.42 to 0.14)	0.738
β (95% CI), adjusted	−0.14 (−0.43 to 0.16)	Reference	−0.18 (−0.47 to 0.11)	−0.17 (−0.45 to 0.12)	0.721

Bold values indicate statistical significance.

^a Low appearance, low mindfulness motivations for yoga.

^b Low appearance, high mindfulness motivations for yoga.

^c High appearance, low mindfulness motivations for yoga.

^d High appearance, high mindfulness motivations for yoga.

CI, confidence interval.

Relative to the Class 2: LAHM motivational profile, membership in a class with low mindfulness motivations for yoga (Class 1: LALM; Class 3: HALM) was associated with significantly less total physical activity (p = 0.002) and membership in any other class was associated with significantly lower body satisfaction (p < 0.001). Of note, those who were highly motivated by appearance (Class 3: HALM, Class 4: HAHM) were more likely to report higher compulsive exercise scores relative to the Class 2: LAHM motivational profile (p = 0.002). However, no statistically significant associations between the latent class motivational profiles and the eating to cope, self-esteem, depression, and stress scores were observed.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to characterize motivations for yoga and to determine the associations between motivational underpinnings and physical and psychological health aspects among a sample of young adult yoga practitioners. Previous research has examined the motivations for yoga among general adult populations^2,17–19 and the current study builds on this prior work by identifying combinations of motivations for yoga among young adults. In the present study, LCA identified four unique motivational profiles comprising physical (appearance) and mental or spiritual (mindfulness) motivational clusters among a sample of young adult yoga practitioners.

Results provide preliminary evidence that young adult yoga practitioners' motivational underpinnings may be linked to physical activity, compulsive exercise, and body satisfaction outcomes with a high mindfulness and low appearance motivational profile appearing ideal. Importantly, findings from the present study may explain discrepancies in the literature regarding an unexpected link between yoga and adverse appearance-based outcomes in some practitioners and provide implications for future practice.

It is possible that practicing yoga could have adverse consequences for some individuals who are sensitive to or motivated by appearance-related factors. In general, research demonstrates that yoga is favorably connected to physical and psychological health, including positive physical activity, healthful eating, body satisfaction, body image, and embodiment outcomes.^39–45 However, findings are not consistent across studies, with some research showing an increase in appearance comparisons among weight-diverse yoga practitioners when mirrors are present in yoga studios and disproportionate dropout of yoga interventions among practitioners with body image concerns and elevated BMI.^46,47

Further, yoga imagery overwhelmingly depicts hyper-thin and athletic yoga practitioners⁴⁸ and these body types have been heavily marketed as the typical or desired “yoga body” ideal.⁴⁹ Of concern, thin- and athletic-ideal internalizations are associated with disordered eating patterns^50,51 and compulsive exercise.^26,52

Although yoga practice has not been associated with these harmful effects, some appearance-based components of yoga environments (e.g., challenging physical poses, revealing clothing) have the potential to negatively impact body image via internal critiques and body comparisons.⁵³ Therefore, it is possible that yoga environments may promote healthful psychological factors (e.g., high body satisfaction) and related physical behaviors (e.g., adaptive physical activity) in some practitioners, yet they may reinforce or lead to little improvement in risky psychological factors and behaviors (e.g., low body satisfaction, compulsive exercise) in others based on predisposing personal characteristics, such as one's yoga-related motivational underpinnings.

Findings from the present study add to this body of literature by showing that young adult yoga practitioners report comparatively more compulsive exercise and less body satisfaction when their motivations for yoga are grounded in appearance rather than mindfulness outcomes. Therefore, it may be prudent to identify appearance motivations as an important risk factor among young adult yoga practitioners since these individuals are likely beginning their yoga practice and any changes in motivational profiles could have cascading effects on physical and psychological health outcomes across time.

Study results provide several implications for practice. In clinical settings (e.g., eating disorder programs), it may be important to screen for appearance motivations before beginning yoga practice and to match at-risk practitioners with health psychologists to avoid unintentional harm. In community settings, it may be important to screen for both appearance motivations and history of disordered behaviors before initiating yoga programs.

It is possible that those with a history of discorded eating or exercise behaviors are more likely to report appearance motivations for yoga. Further, is conceivable that appearance-motivated yoga practitioners are at a heightened risk for developing harmful physical and psychological outcomes, such as maladaptive eating habits, compulsive exercise, and poor body image, if they are continually exposed to appearance- or weight-related norms within yoga settings.

Therefore, to avoid appearance bias and embrace body representation in yoga environments, it is essential to hire yoga instructors who represent the full spectrum of appearance and body diversity (e.g., all weight statuses, physical abilities, racial/ethnic backgrounds) to exemplify that all bodies practicing yoga are “yoga bodies.” Further, to avoid inner critiques and peer comparisons, body-neutral scripts should be used and instructors should always offer adaptations for poses to accommodate varying levels of experience, body size, flexibility, and athleticism.

Past studies suggest that developing an internal appreciation of mental or spiritual factors, such as enhanced mindfulness, may increase one's intrinsic motivation for and participation in yoga and other healthful physical activity behaviors.^39,54 Accordingly, instructors might ask practitioners to set mindfulness goals and track changes in internal factors (e.g., self-awareness) to support intrinsic motivations for yoga. These implications for practice correspond with results from the present study, which suggest that a low appearance and high mindfulness motivational profile may support young adult yoga practitioners' non-compulsive physical activity and body satisfaction relative to other motivational profiles.

These findings demonstrate that a positive and healthful relationship with yoga may best be developed by emphasizing the mental or spiritual and internally derived benefits of yoga, such as increased mindfulness, rather than the physical and externally derived benefits, such as changes in appearance.

Study findings should be interpreted in the context of strengths and limitations. Study strengths include the analytic approach used to identify motivational profiles in young adult yoga practitioners and the use of multicomponent health data from a large, population-based study. Although differences in yoga motivations are apparent in the general adult population, the authors are unaware of studies identifying how latent combinations of physical and mental or spiritual motivational underpinnings associate with specific physical and psychological outcomes.

Further, no previous research has determined associations between motivational profiles and physical and psychological health in a young adult sample, although certain health risks are prevalent during this life stage and it is a time period when yoga practice is often first adopted. Importantly, all analyses were cross-sectional, and therefore, causality cannot be inferred. It is unclear whether motivations for yoga altered young adults' physical activity behaviors, compulsive exercise attitudes, and body satisfaction or, conversely, whether pre-established physical health regimens or psychological characteristics increased the salience of given motivational profiles. An additional limitation is the lack of data on the magnitude of the reported motivations for practicing yoga.

In conclusion, study findings demonstrate that young adults' motivations for yoga may substantially differ by appearance (external, physical) and mindfulness (internal, mental, or spiritual) motivational underpinnings. Correspondingly, unique motivational profiles with combinations of appearance and mindfulness motivations for yoga appear to be associated with physical activity, compulsive exercise, and body satisfaction. Given the public health implications of using yoga as a health-promoting practice,^55–58 it is important to understand the complex relationship between motivations for yoga and factors affecting physical and psychological health.

Future research should explore how motivational profiles develop or change across time. It is also essential to understand how contradictory motives—such as engaging in compulsive exercise as opposed to practicing mindfulness to alleviate emotional distress—are linked to yoga and health. By equipping yoga instructors and interventionists with background knowledge about practitioners' potential motivational profiles and health risks, yoga-related messaging and curricula may be individually adapted and optimized for delivery in community and clinical settings.

Authors' Contributions

E.N.K.-K. conceptualized and wrote all article drafts and conducted data analysis. J.A.F., N.E.S., D.J.B.-A., N.L., and D.N.-S. contributed to data interpretation, article writing, and critical review. All authors approved of the article and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the study regarding the accuracy or integrity of any part of the study.

Disclaimer

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute or the National Institutes of Health.

Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Funding Information

This study was supported by Grant Number R01HL116892 (PI: D.N.-S.) and Award Number T32HL150452 (PI: D.N.-S.) from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.