Page 80 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 80 of 189 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
71
consistency of the questions, as well as to expose weaknesses in the wording or structure of
questions that needed to be revised for clarity (Robinson & Firth-Leonard, 2019).
Ethics
As Merriam and Tisdell (2016) attest, the validity and reliability of a qualitative research
study largely depend on the ethics of the researcher (p. 260). Ethical considerations for
qualitative research involving the use of human subjects include both abiding by the ethical
standards and guidelines set forth by institutional review boards, as well as the researcher’s
awareness of the researcher-respondent dynamic and attentiveness to ethical issues that may arise
in the field (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The actions and procedures described in the following
sections were taken to best support the safety and well-being of participants, and to ensure that
individual privacy was respected and upheld.
The proposed research study was submitted to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of
the University of Southern California to protect the safety of the human subjects of the study. To
comply with the requirements for IRB approval, informed consent was obtained from all
participants prior to their participation in the study. Key provisions for participants in the
research included the detail that participation was voluntary and that participants could withdraw
from participation at any time in the study.
Research participants should have a reasonable expectation of privacy (Glesne, 2011). As
such, those who were willing to serve as interview subjects received a written explanation stating
the following: that study participation is voluntary and may be withdrawn at any time, that all
responses will remain confidential, and that individuals’ identities will be protected in relation to
any information they provide throughout the study (Glesne, 2011). The researcher repeated the
same information prior to the beginning of each interview, and permission to record the
Object Description
| Title | Physical activity interventions to reduce rates of sedentary behavior among university employees: a promising practice study |
| Author | DeFrank, Ginny Mary |
| Author email | ginnydefrank@gmail.com;defrank@usc.edu |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2020-06-19 |
| Date submitted | 2020-08-11 |
| Date approved | 2020-08-11 |
| Restricted until | 2020-08-11 |
| Date published | 2020-08-11 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Malloy, Courtney |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Canny, Eric Stowe, Kathy |
| Abstract | The purpose of this study was to understand factors influencing employee participation in a university-offered physical activity program to inform recommendations for other institutions of higher education seeking to address high rates of university employee sedentary behavior with physical activity programming. The instructor-led program was held four times per week beginning at noon each day and lasted one hour in duration on a university campus in the western United States. The program, which was offered at no cost to employees, typically served 20-30 participants each week. The Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Framework (2008) was employed to assess relevant knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences affecting university employee engagement with the physical activity program. The study utilized a convergent parallel mixed methods design, engaging 24 university employees by means of a fifty-four-item quantitative survey. Six survey respondents also participated in interviews. Research findings revealed the importance of the interplay of employee factual and metacognitive knowledge, as well as motivation influences including self-efficacy and expectancy value within the organization’s cultural models and settings. Recommendations for other institutions seeking to engage employees in physical activity were informed by the findings and supported by a review of literature. Recommendations include the use of training, communication strategies, information guides, modeling, and opportunities for reflection to meet employee knowledge and motivational needs. Evaluating and changing organizational policies, cultural values, and existing physical activity programming was recommended to ensure employees understand an organization’s support for participation in physical activity. Additionally, implications for practice involved a focus on the role of instructors and the development of communities of continuity to support and improve rates of university employee engagement in physical activity during the workday. |
| Keyword | sedentary behavior; physical activity; workplace physical activity; physical activity intervention; university physical activity; exercise |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | DeFrank, Ginny Mary |
| Physical access | The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given. |
| Repository name | University of Southern California Digital Library |
| Repository address | USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 7002, 106 University Village, Los Angeles, California 90089-7002, USA |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-DeFrankGin-8921.pdf |
| Archival file | Volume13/etd-DeFrankGin-8921.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 80 |
| Full text | 71 consistency of the questions, as well as to expose weaknesses in the wording or structure of questions that needed to be revised for clarity (Robinson & Firth-Leonard, 2019). Ethics As Merriam and Tisdell (2016) attest, the validity and reliability of a qualitative research study largely depend on the ethics of the researcher (p. 260). Ethical considerations for qualitative research involving the use of human subjects include both abiding by the ethical standards and guidelines set forth by institutional review boards, as well as the researcher’s awareness of the researcher-respondent dynamic and attentiveness to ethical issues that may arise in the field (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The actions and procedures described in the following sections were taken to best support the safety and well-being of participants, and to ensure that individual privacy was respected and upheld. The proposed research study was submitted to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of Southern California to protect the safety of the human subjects of the study. To comply with the requirements for IRB approval, informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their participation in the study. Key provisions for participants in the research included the detail that participation was voluntary and that participants could withdraw from participation at any time in the study. Research participants should have a reasonable expectation of privacy (Glesne, 2011). As such, those who were willing to serve as interview subjects received a written explanation stating the following: that study participation is voluntary and may be withdrawn at any time, that all responses will remain confidential, and that individuals’ identities will be protected in relation to any information they provide throughout the study (Glesne, 2011). The researcher repeated the same information prior to the beginning of each interview, and permission to record the |
