ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
"
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- "Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Student engagement in physical education (PE) is an important indicator of meaningful participation and learning in higher education. In the Philippines, where PE forms part of holistic student development, there is a need to understand how motivational constructs operate within specific activity contexts. This study examined the association between individual interest and study engagement among Filipino college students enrolled in an integrated PE context involving individual and dual sports. Methods: A quantitative cross-sectional design was used with 327 undergraduate students enrolled in PATH-Fit 4 at a state university in the Philippines. Drawing on the tripartite model of individual interest, it was modeled as a reflective-reflective higher-order construct composed of positive affect and willingness to reengage (PAWR), stored utility value (SUV), and stored attainment value and knowledge-seeking intentions (SAVKSI). Data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling. Results: The higher-order model showed that individual interest was positively and significantly associated with study engagement, although the effect size and explanatory power were small. The dimensional model explained a greater proportion of variance than the higher-order model. Among the three factors, only PAWR demonstrated a significant positive association with study engagement, while SUV and SAVKSI were not significant. These findings indicate that the dimensions of individual interest were not equally associated with engagement in this context. Discussion: The results suggest that individual interest is a coherent multidimensional construct, but its engagement relevance depends on the specific factors examined. In PE involving individual and dual sports, affective attraction and willingness to reengage appear to be more immediately associated with students' engagement than perceived usefulness or knowledge-seeking orientation. The findings provide preliminary support for a context-sensitive interpretation of the tripartite model and highlight the importance of designing sport-based PE experiences that foreground enjoyment, emotional safety, manageable challenge, and opportunities for repeated participation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.