You're viewing our updated article page. If you need more time to adjust, you can return to the old layout.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Psychol., 06 January 2026

Sec. Health Psychology

Volume 16 - 2025 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1642206

The motivational function of goals in physical activity: a cross-cultural comparison

  • 1. Gdansk University of Physical Education and Sport, Gdańsk, Poland

  • 2. University WSB Merito Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland

  • 3. University of Lower Silesia, Wrocław, Poland

  • 4. University College of Professional Education in Wroclaw Poland, Wroclaw, Poland

  • 5. University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland

  • 6. Laboratory of Psychological and Educational Tests, Gdańsk, Poland

  • 7. Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland

  • 8. Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milano, Italy

  • 9. Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China

  • 10. Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman

  • 11. Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Iași, Romania

  • 12. Department of Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran

  • 13. Human Research and Development LLP, Astana University, Astana, Kazakhstan

Article metrics

View details

1,3k

Views

67

Downloads

Abstract

Objective:

The aim of the study was to show the differences in the dominant motivational function of physical activity (PA) between women and men from Poland (PL), China (CN), Iran (IR), Kazakhstan (KZ), Egypt (EG), Romania (RO), and Italy (IT).

Methods:

A total of 6,195 participants (females = 3,376 and males = 2,819) aged 18–88 years (M = 28.5, SD = 12.74), residing in the seven countries, were analyzed for the purpose of this study. Twelve goal types were distinguished by the Inventory of Physical Activity Objectives (IPAO) tool were used in the study.

Results:

The analysis results indicated the significant main effects of gender and country. The three-way interaction between gender, type of goal, and country was significant, indicative that the largest differences in the rating of the goals’ importance between males and females occurred in evaluating objective 4 (fit, shapely body) in RO. Males in RO assessed this goal significantly lower than females. Among females, one of the largest differences occurred in the evaluation of the importance of objective 7 (boosting confidence, gaining appreciation from others) between PL and EG, as well as PL and IR.

Conclusion:

Understanding the motives behind PA and gender differences is crucial for developing effective health interventions and future cross-cultural research. The results of the study can be used in marketing by tailoring the content of the message to the audience. In schools, understanding the motives for physical activity will allow the curriculum to be adapted and thus increase student engagement in exercise. Understanding the profile of the exercise participant by the instructor will allow their needs to be effectively met and will positively correlate with persistence in activity.

1 Introduction

Motivation constitutes a central construct in understanding why individuals engage in, maintain, or abandon physical activity (PA). According to self-determination theory (SDT), the quality of motivation—ranging from autonomous to controlled regulation—shapes both the intensity and sustainability of PA behaviors (Deci and Ryan, 2000, 2002; Hagger and Chatzisarantis, 2008). Internal motivation, rooted in self-determination, personal satisfaction, and intrinsic enjoyment, yields long-term adherence and consistent performance improvement, whereas extrinsic forms—driven by rewards or social approval—tend to produce only short-term compliance (Alkasasbeh and Akroush, 2025; Deng et al., 2023; Kalajas-Tilga et al., 2020; Tock et al., 2024). The achievement goal theory (AGT) complements this perspective, emphasizing that mastery-oriented goals enhance persistence, enjoyment, and perceived competence, while performance-based goals may undermine sustained participation (Lochbaum and Gottardy, 2015; Lochbaum et al., 2013; Lochbaum et al., 2023; Mascret et al., 2015). In contrast, Zaleski's (1991) Motivational Goal Function theory highlights the key role of goals in human motivation. A goal is a realistic image of a future state of affairs that has subjective value for the individual and determines their behavior. This theory is based on the broader framework of goal-setting theory and emphasizes how goals, as cognitive motivators, energize and direct actions toward achieving desired outcomes. By providing direction and promoting effort, goals influence motivation and behavior, helping individuals achieve desired outcomes (Alispahić, 2013). Research indicates that both the goals people pursue and the reasons behind those goals significantly influence engagement in physical activity (Deci and Ryan, 2000; Lindwall et al., 2016). Understanding the goals people set for themselves provides an opportunity to understand their behavior. Therefore, the main research objective was explicitly defined as verifying cross-cultural and gender-related differences in the motivational goals underlying physical activity engagement among respondents from Poland (PL), China (CN), Iran (IR), Kazakhstan (KZ), Egypt (EG), Romania (RO), and Italy (IT). This objective stems from the broader aim of understanding how sociocultural and gender variables influence health-related behaviors and informs public health strategies promoting active lifestyles.

The study shows that motivational differences reflect different socialization patterns, cultural norms, and value systems prevailing in a given society. The identified differences are important for the design of health-promoting interventions and strategies for promoting physical activity. The results can be used in practice to develop personalized incentive programs that take into account local cultural conditions and gender differences in the perception of physical activity. In the context of health policy, this means that messages promoting activity need to be differentiated—in countries where health motives dominate, the prevention of lifestyle diseases and mental wellbeing should be emphasized, while in countries where competition is important, narratives related to achievement and success should be used. In addition, the data obtained can form the basis for developing educational strategies aimed at physical education teachers, coaches, and sports instructors who, knowing the motivational profile of participants, will be able to better adapt their working methods to individual needs. From a social perspective, the study contributes to a better understanding of how cultural values shape pro-health behaviors, which can support the development of sustainable public policies in the area of health.

In relation to the main aim of the study, the following section discusses separately the issue of gender and cultural affiliation as key factors determining motivational patterns regarding physical activity.

1.1 Gender as a factor determining the motives for physical activity – a review of studies

Empirical evidence across various cultural contexts consistently demonstrates that gender plays a significant role in shaping motivational patterns for engaging in physical activity. Studies conducted in Finland (Uimonen et al., 2021), the United States (Alecu et al., 2025), India (Salgaonkar and Mahadevan, 2025), Nigeria (Eo and In, 2024), as well as meta-analyses (Zhang et al., 2024), indicate that women more often declare internal motivation (pleasure, health), while men more often indicate external motivation (competition, appearance) for physical activity. A study conducted by Wilczyńska et al. (2021) showed that Polish women were characterized by a significantly higher escape from everyday life than Polish men, and Chinese women had a significantly higher level of social motivation than Chinese men. Furthermore, male students in China showed greater involvement in sports, driven by socialization and motivation to have fun, while female students prioritized aspects of physical appearance and health (Li and Pengfei, 2024). Other studies indicate that women exercised to lose weight and tone their bodies more often than men, while men exercised for pleasure more often than women (Craft et al., 2014). The reviewed literature supports the formulation of the first research question: whether gender differentiates motives for physical activity across the seven national groups under investigation. The next section expands this perspective by addressing cross-national variations in motivational structures.

1.2 Motivations for physical activity: a review of research from an international perspective

Cross-national research highlights substantial cultural variation in physical activity motivations. When examining global motivational trends, for instance in China, a study involving 2,544 students found health motivation to be the primary reason for engaging in PA, followed by motivations related to appearance, competence, and social factors (Liu et al., 2023). Another Chinese study highlighted that motivations differ based on the type of activity: health, stress management, and belongingness were key for physical exercise, whereas cultural leisure activities were driven by stress management, pleasure, and belongingness (Rahman et al., 2019). Another qualitative study on extreme leisure sports in China identified seven PA motives: mastery, enjoyment, physical fitness, belonging, mental fitness, expectations of others, and competition (Molanorouzi et al., 2015; Zhou et al., 2019). In Egypt and Saudi Arabia, medical students were motivated by health maintenance, weight control, muscle strength, and body image (El-Gilany and El-Masry, 2011). In Europe, for example, 93.2% of Romanian respondents cited health and fitness as their main PA motivators, followed by mental wellbeing, stress relief, appearance, and happiness (Buhaș et al., 2020). Research in Italy revealed that 67.6% of respondents cited health maintenance as their top PA motivator, similar to findings from Norway (Gjestvang et al., 2020). Additionally, the study on Ukrainian and Polish medical students revealed that Ukrainian students cited self-esteem improvement as their main PA motivator, with weight control being more prominent than among Polish students, despite lower obesity rates. Both Ukrainian and Polish respondents recognized the health benefits of PA (Kosendiak et al., 2023). According to a CBOS (2018) report, 69% of Poles engage in sports most often for health reasons, followed by pleasure (55%) and to improve their wellbeing and relieve stress (44%). Czarnecki et al. (2022) and his colleagues also showed that health is the main motivator among women and men in Poland. In turn, a report by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN, 2021) indicates that in all age groups (youth, adults, seniors), the main motivators for physical activity are physical and mental health, as well as good appearance and wellbeing. A study analyzing the motives for regular physical activity among medical students from the Western Balkans suggests that the most frequently declared motives are improved wellbeing, stress reduction, improved appearance, weight loss, and control of chronic diseases (Ilić et al., 2022). A profile of the motives for sports activity among elite athletes from Kazakhstan showed that the leading motivation was achievement motivation, followed by self-improvement and the need to compete (Krasmik et al., 2023). Consequently, the second research question sought to determine whether nationality differentiates the motivational goals associated with physical activity.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Participants

There were seven countries included in this study: CN, EG, IR, IT, PL, KZ, and RO. The sample consisted of a total of 6,195 participants (54.5% female, 45.5% male), aged 18–88 years (M = 28.5, SD = 12.74), mostly single—never married (61.21%). Most participants live in the city, and only 27.64% live in the village. Regarding education level, most of the participants have a higher level of education (41.23%—bachelor’s degree, 15.77%—master’s degree, 3.52%—MD/PhD/doctorate). Above 48% (48.31) were students, and 30.57% were employed for wages. Detailed sociographic data by country are presented in Table 1.

Table 1

N CN
1,467		 EG
1,183		 IR
699		 IT
542		 KZ
728		 PL
1,084		 RO
492		 Total
6,195
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
n % n % n % n % n % n % n % n %
Age 26.04 8.83 19.72 1.61 32.07 10.95 27.92 12.54 26.22 10.75 38.38 17.55 34.02 11.69 28.50 12.74
Gender Female 783 53.37 591 49.96 347 49.64 320 59.04 362 49.73 642 59.23 331 67.28 3,376 54.50
Male 684 46.63 592 50.04 352 50.36 222 40.96 366 50.27 442 40.77 161 32.72 2,819 45.50
Place of residence Village 276 18.81 839 70.92 30 4.29 212 39.11 148 20.33 126 11.62 81 16.46 1712 27.64
Small town (up to 20,000 inh.) 328 22.36 109 9.21 61 8.73 70 12.92 46 6.32 76 7.01 72 14.63 762 12.30
Medium town/city (20000–100,000 inh.) 313 21.34 164 13.86 150 21.46 136 25.09 68 9.34 141 13.01 108 21.95 1,080 17.43
Big city (more than 100,000 inh.) 370 25.22 58 4.90 153 21.89 40 7.38 210 28.85 633 58.39 212 43.09 1,676 27.05
Huge city (more than 1 million inh.) 180 12.27 13 1.10 305 43.63 84 15.50 256 35.16 108 9.96 19 3.86 965 15.58
The highest educational degree Primary 30 2.04 1 0.08 0 0.00 2 0.37 132 18.13 18 1.66 5 1.02 188 3.03
Vocational 36 2.45 0 0.00 2 0.29 2 0.37 48 6.59 30 2.77 15 3.05 133 2.15
Secondary 162 11.04 987 83.43 155 22.17 164 30.26 222 30.49 350 32.29 85 17.28 2,125 34.30
Bachelor’s degree 1,003 68.37 187 15.81 375 53.65 268 49.45 244 33.52 256 23.62 221 44.92 2,554 41.23
Master’s degree 180 12.27 2 0.17 117 16.74 84 15.50 68 9.34 380 35.06 146 29.67 977 15.77
MD/PhD/doctorate 56 3.82 6 0.51 50 7.15 22 4.06 14 1.92 50 4.61 20 4.07 218 3.52
Employment Employed for wages 398 27.13 16 1.35 218 31.19 124 22.88 338 46.43 505 46.59 295 59.96 1894 30.57
Self-employed 108 7.36 8 0.68 150 21.46 30 5.54 34 4.67 155 14.30 40 8.13 525 8.47
Out of work and looking for work 36 2.45 3 0.25 73 10.44 14 2.58 34 4.67 57 5.26 37 7.52 254 4.10
Out of work but not currently looking for work 46 3.14 3 0.25 12 1.72 14 2.58 28 3.85 60 5.54 8 1.63 171 2.76
A homemaker 30 2.04 1 0.08 56 8.01 6 1.11 6 0.82 20 1.85 7 1.42 126 2.03
A student 843 57.46 1,152 97.38 165 23.61 344 63.47 286 39.29 114 10.52 89 18.09 2,993 48.31
Retired 4 0.27 0 0.00 17 2.43 6 1.11 2 0.27 169 15.59 9 1.83 207 3.34
Unable to work 2 0.14 0 0.00 4 0.57 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.18 2 0.41 10 0.16
Military 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0.57 4 0.74 0 0.00 2 0.18 5 1.02 15 0.24
Marital status Single, never married 1,178 80.30 595 50.30 494 70.67 469 86.53 504 69.23 332 30.63 220 44.72 3,792 61.21
Married 250 17.04 327 27.64 172 24.61 58 10.70 182 25.00 383 35.33 129 26.22 1,501 24.23
Domestic partnership 2 0.14 93 7.86 7 1.00 2 0.37 5 0.69 133 12.27 39 7.93 281 4.54
Living apart together (LAT) 13 0.89 142 12.00 25 3.58 13 2.40 25 3.43 115 10.61 72 14.63 405 6.54
Widowed 14 0.95 2 0.17 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.27 55 5.07 6 1.22 79 1.28
Divorced 4 0.27 18 1.52 1 0.14 0 0.00 6 0.82 60 5.54 22 4.47 111 1.79
Separated 6 0.41 6 0.51 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0.55 6 0.55 4 0.81 26 0.42

Characteristics of the study sample according to the country.

2.2 Methods

The Inventory of Physical Activity Objectives (IPAO), developed by Lipowski and Zaleski (2015), was used in the study conducted. The IPAO is used to measure the motivational function of physical activity goals and allows for controlling variables such as the frequency of PA (understood as physical recreation activities or sports requiring physical effort that are undertaken in a person’s free time), the variety of forms, and socio-demographic conditions in competitive sport (both current and past), as well as their passive attitude. For the purpose of this study, we analyzed only the part of the IPAO that estimates the level of 12 physical activity goals. Respondents indicated to what extent the presented physical activity goals were important to them using a five-point Likert scale from 1 (completely unimportant) to 5 (very important). The 12 goals identified in the IPAO are as follows: Health (right levels of blood pressure, cholesterol, body mass, etc.); physical fitness, being ‘in shape’; company of other people; fit, shapely body (beauty, sculpted, and firm body); wellbeing; being physically active and fit according to fashion; boosting confidence, gaining appreciation from others; pleasure from physical activity; escape from everyday life; managing stress; fulfilling the need for activity; and promoting physical activity by setting a behavioral example.

2.3 Statistical analysis

To examine how the importance of the goals is influenced by the type of goal, gender, and country, we performed three-way mixed ANOVA with one within-subjects factor (12 types of goals were distinguished by the IPAO) and two between-subjects (grouping) factors: gender (male vs. female) and country (seven countries: CN, EG, IR, IT, PL, KZ, RO). The Games–Howell test was used for post-hoc comparisons for between-subject comparisons (country) as it is recommended to control for type I error per comparison in heterogeneous variances and unequal sample sizes (Agbangba et al., 2024; Toothaker, 1993). Bonferroni correction as an adjustment for multiple comparisons was used if significant within-subjects and interaction effects were observed. Post-hoc power analysis was conducted using G*Power (Cohen, 1988) to determine the statistical power for detecting the interaction effect in a repeated measures ANOVA. The analysis was based on a total sample size of 6,195, with eight groups and twelve repeated measures. The effect size was set to f(U) = 0.084, with an alpha level of 0.05. The results indicated that the statistical power (1 − β) for detecting the interaction effect was 1.00, suggesting that the study was well powered to detect even small effects. According to Cohen (Faul et al., 2007), power levels above 0.80 are considered adequate to detect true effects, reinforcing the robustness of the current study’s design. The statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS version 29 for Windows (IBM Corp, 2023). Statistical significance for all the conducted analyses was established at p < 0.05. Missing data were marked with the code 999 and declared in SPSS as user-defined missing values. Due to the small percentage of missing data, no imputation was used; these values were technically excluded from the analyses, which allowed the integrity of the data set to be preserved.

2.4 Procedure of the study

Participants were recruited for the survey through a multi-faceted approach to ensure diverse representation. Email invitations were sent to schools, universities, and cultural centers within various city and village areas across seven countries. Additionally, paper notices were placed in these institutions, including churches. Online platforms, such as social media, forums, and community boards, were utilized to promote the survey. QR codes in promotional materials provided easy access. Community events, virtual information sessions, SMS invitations, and a referral program further encouraged participation.

The inclusion criterion for the study was holding citizenship and residing in one of the seven surveyed countries. The survey used an online questionnaire, and participants completed the informed consent form before starting the survey.

3 Results

3.1 Main and two-way interaction effects

The analysis results indicated significant main effects of gender, F(1, 4,204) = 16.26; p < 0.001; ηp2 = 0.004; and country, F(6, 4,204) = 25.65; p < 0.001; ηp2 = 0.035. Both effects were small. The main effect of type of goal significantly violated the sphericity assumption (W = 0.25, p < 0.001). Therefore, the F-values for the main effect of goal and its interaction with the between-group variables (gender and country) were corrected for this violation using the Greenhouse–Geisser correction. The main effect of the type of goal was significant (F(8.725, 36678.407) = 574.65; pG-G < 0.001; ηp2 = 0.120) (Table 2). The ringed interaction effect was moderate.

Table 2

Type of goal CN EG IR IT KZ PL RO Total
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)
Goal 1 Health (right levels of: blood pressure, cholesterol, body mass, etc.) Fe 4.46 (0.92) 4.27 (1.02) 4.51 (0.89) 4.46 (0.83) 4.49 (0.86) 4.54 (0.76) 4.39 (0.86) 4.46 (0.88)
Ma 4.47 (0.87) 4.31 (0.92) 4.53 (0.77) 4.54 (0.65) 4.27 (0.99) 4.18 (0.98) 4.14 (1.21) 4.35 (0.92)
Total 4.46 (0.90) 4.30 (0.96) 4.52 (0.83) 4.49 (0.76) 4.36 (0.94) 4.39 (0.88) 4.30 (1.00) 4.41 (0.90)
Goal 2 Physical fitness, being ‘in shape’ Fe 4.25 (1.06) 4.23 (1.02) 4.65 (0.73) 4.49 (0.73) 4.33 (0.96) 4.58 (0.67) 4.34 (0.79) 4.41 (0.89)
Ma 4.33 (1.02) 3.99 (1.20) 4.29 (0.92) 4.50 (0.65) 4.35 (0.98) 4.40 (0.87) 4.12 (1.10) 4.28 (1.01)
Total 4.28 (1.04) 4.09 (1.13) 4.47 (0.85) 4.49 (0.70) 4.35 (0.97) 4.51 (0.76) 4.26 (0.91) 4.35 (0.95)
Goal 3 Company of other people Fe 4.01 (1.07) 3.86 (1.15) 3.71 (1.28) 3.74 (1.22) 3.47 (1.29) 3.79 (1.20) 3.63 (1.24) 3.80 (1.19)
Ma 3.72 (1.22) 3.92 (0.96) 3.66 (1.12) 3.93 (1.14) 3.84 (1.29) 3.57 (1.30) 3.36 (1.24) 3.75 (1.19)
Total 3.89 (1.14) 3.90 (1.04) 3.69 (1.20) 3.82 (1.19) 3.70 (1.30) 3.71 (1.24) 3.54 (1.24) 3.77 (1.19)
Goal 4 Fit, shapely body (beauty, sculpted and firm body) Fe 4.37 (0.90) 4.32 (0.96) 4.65 (0.71) 4.05 (0.95) 4.39 (0.91) 4.28 (0.93) 4.00 (1.06) 4.30 (0.94)
Ma 4.32 (0.92) 4.33 (0.81) 4.29 (0.81) 3.93 (1.06) 4.14 (1.10) 3.84 (1.10) 3.21 (1.24) 4.11 (1.02)
Total 4.35 (0.91) 4.33 (0.87) 4.47 (0.78) 4.00 (1.00) 4.24 (1.03) 4.11 (1.02) 3.72 (1.18) 4.21 (0.98)
Goal 5 Wellbeing Fe 4.45 (0.86) 4.28 (1.00) 4.79 (0.53) 4.80 (0.52) 4.59 (0.84) 4.73 (0.55) 4.53 (0.70) 4.59 (0.76)
Ma 4.53 (0.79) 4.21 (0.97) 4.61 (0.78) 4.79 (0.48) 4.48 (0.87) 4.49 (0.84) 4.35 (0.87) 4.47 (0.85)
Total 4.48 (0.83) 4.24 (0.98) 4.70 (0.67) 4.80 (0.50) 4.52 (0.86) 4.63 (0.69) 4.47 (0.77) 4.53 (0.80)
Goal 6 Being physically active and fit according to fashion Fe 3.46 (1.32) 4.03 (1.11) 4.39 (0.89) 3.27 (1.32) 3.73 (1.30) 3.02 (1.39) 3.44 (1.22) 3.53 (1.33)
Ma 3.43 (1.32) 4.22 (0.94) 4.19 (1.00) 3.78 (1.31) 3.86 (1.26) 2.46 (1.41) 3.04 (1.34) 3.59 (1.37)
Total 3.45 (1.32) 4.15 (1.01) 4.29 (0.95) 3.48 (1.34) 3.80 (1.28) 2.79 (1.42) 3.30 (1.27) 3.56 (1.35)
Goal 7 Boosting confidence, gaining appreciation from others Fe 4.00 (1.12) 4.38 (0.96) 4.35 (1.03) 3.68 (1.13) 3.98 (1.17) 3.04 (1.49) 3.78 (1.16) 3.81 (1.28)
Ma 3.97 (1.04) 4.35 (0.84) 4.00 (1.06) 3.86 (1.15) 3.95 (1.24) 2.74 (1.32) 3.41 (1.44) 3.80 (1.24)
Total 3.99 (1.09) 4.36 (0.89) 4.18 (1.06) 3.76 (1.14) 3.96 (1.21) 2.92 (1.43) 3.65 (1.28) 3.80 (1.26)
Goal 8 Pleasure from physical activity Fe 4.40 (0.87) 4.23 (1.01) 4.54 (0.82) 4.48 (0.89) 4.26 (1.04) 4.46 (0.83) 3.91 (1.03) 4.36 (0.92)
Ma 4.36 (0.86) 4.20 (0.95) 4.39 (0.83) 4.54 (0.82) 4.33 (0.97) 4.33 (0.95) 4.16 (1.00) 4.33 (0.92)
Total 4.39 (0.87) 4.21 (0.98) 4.47 (0.82) 4.51 (0.86) 4.30 (1.00) 4.41 (0.88) 4.00 (1.02) 4.34 (0.92)
Goal 9 Escape from everyday life Fe 3.58 (1.19) 3.53 (1.26) 3.31 (1.46) 3.78 (1.24) 2.59 (1.40) 3.59 (1.16) 3.83 (1.13) 3.51 (1.28)
Ma 3.67 (1.16) 3.38 (1.24) 3.24 (1.35) 3.79 (1.29) 2.67 (1.44) 3.80 (1.17) 3.67 (1.11) 3.44 (1.31)
Total 3.62 (1.18) 3.44 (1.25) 3.27 (1.4) 3.79 (1.25) 2.63 (1.43) 3.67 (1.17) 3.78 (1.12) 3.48 (1.29)
Goal 10 Managing stress Fe 4.09 (1.09) 4.02 (1.07) 4.36 (0.97) 4.25 (0.98) 4.20 (1.07) 4.03 (0.99) 4.21 (0.97) 4.14 (1.03)
Ma 4.24 (0.91) 3.98 (1.08) 4.17 (0.98) 4.18 (0.9) 4.22 (1.04) 3.90 (1.24) 3.87 (1.22) 4.10 (1.06)
Total 4.16 (1.02) 4.00 (1.07) 4.26 (0.98) 4.22 (0.94) 4.22 (1.05) 3.98 (1.10) 4.09 (1.07) 4.12 (1.04)
Goal 11 Fulfilling the need for activity Fe 4.15 (0.95) 4.16 (0.96) 4.39 (0.86) 4.32 (0.88) 4.39 (0.99) 4.27 (0.91) 4.05 (0.94) 4.23 (0.93)
Ma 4.13 (0.95) 4.05 (1.01) 4.19 (0.91) 4.27 (0.91) 4.28 (0.95) 3.99 (1.08) 3.92 (1.10) 4.12 (0.99)
Total 4.14 (0.95) 4.09 (0.99) 4.29 (0.89) 4.30 (0.89) 4.33 (0.96) 4.16 (0.99) 4.00 (1.00) 4.18 (0.96)
Goal 12 Promoting PA by setting a behavior example Fe 3.76 (1.10) 4.13 (0.97) 4.25 (0.98) 3.88 (1.29) 3.90 (1.24) 3.53 (1.25) 3.51 (1.12) 3.81 (1.17)
Ma 3.75 (1.08) 4.19 (0.91) 4.14 (0.89) 4.26 (0.93) 4.01 (1.17) 3.24 (1.42) 3.36 (1.31) 3.86 (1.16)
Total 3.76 (1.09) 4.16 (0.93) 4.19 (0.94) 4.04 (1.17) 3.97 (1.2) 3.41 (1.32) 3.46 (1.19) 3.83 (1.17)
Main effects:
Gender F(1, 4,204) = 16.26; p < 0.001; ηp2= 0.004
Country F(6, 4,204) = 25.65; p < 0.001; ηp2= 0.035
Goal F(8.725, 36678.407) = 574.65; pG-G < 0.001; ηp2= 0.120
2-way interactions
Gender x Country F(6, 4,204) = 6.14; p < 0.001; ηp2= 0.009
Gender x Goal F(8.725, 36678.407) = 7.98; pG-G < 0.001; ηp2= 0.002
Country x Goal F(52.348, 36678.407) = 56.54; pG-G < 0.001; ηp2= 0.075
3-way interactions
Goal x Gender x Country F(52.348, 36678.407) = 4.61; pG-G < 0.001; ηp2= 0.007

Means, standard deviations, and results of 3-way mixed ANOVA for gender, country (between-subjects factors), and type of goals (within-subjects factor) as independent variables and importance of the goal as dependent variable.

CN, China; EG, Egypt; IR, Iran; IT, Italy; KZ, Kazakhstan; PL, Poland; RO, Romania; Fe, females; Ma, males.

It also turned out that the two-way interaction effects of gender x country, as well as goal x gender and goal x country, were significant (Table 2). However, due to the significant three-way interaction effects, the interpretation of the main effects and two-way interactions may be incomplete or misleading. Therefore, the interpretation of three-way interactions was further analyzed and interpreted.

3.2 Three-way interaction effects

Since the three-way interaction between gender, type of goal, and country was significant, F(52.348, 36678.407) = 4.61; pG-G < 0.001; ηp2 = 0.007 (Table 2). The effect of the interaction of the three factors was small. We analyzed the two-way interaction (gender × type of goal) at each level of the third variable (country). We also repeated the procedure for the type of goal x country interaction at different levels of gender.

3.3 Gender x type of goal interaction at each level of country

The pairwise multiple comparisons (PMC) with Bonferroni correction (Table 3) indicated that the largest differences in the rating of the goals’ importance between males and females occurred in evaluating objective 4 (fit, shapely body) in RO. Males in RO assessed this goal significantly lower (M = 3.21; SD = 1.24) than females (M = 4.00; SD = 1.06). A high gender difference was also shown in the evaluation of goal 6 (being physically active and fit according to fashion) in PL (p < 0.001) and IT (p < 0.001). Females in PL assessed objective 6 as more important (M = 3.02; SD = 1.39) than Polish males (M = 2.46; SD = 1.41). In contrast, Italian females rated this target significantly lower (M = 3.27; SD = 1.32) than Italian males (M = 3.78; SD = 1.31).

Table 3

Country Goal Difference in means (Female–Male) SE pbonf
CN 1 −0.02 0.06 0.761
2 −0.08 0.06 0.202
3 0.29* 0.08 <0.001
4 0.05 0.06 0.458
5 −0.08 0.05 0.128
6 0.03 0.08 0.720
7 0.03 0.08 0.740
8 0.04 0.06 0.514
9 −0.09 0.08 0.287
10 −0.15* 0.07 0.027
11 0.01 0.06 0.833
12 0.01 0.07 0.856
EG 1 −0.04 0.07 0.599
2 0.24*** 0.07 0.001
3 −0.06 0.09 0.518
4 −0.01 0.08 0.900
5 0.07 0.06 0.268
6 −0.20* 0.10 0.048
7 0.04 0.09 0.708
8 0.03 0.07 0.633
9 0.15 0.10 0.127
10 0.03 0.08 0.680
11 0.11 0.08 0.166
12 −0.06 0.09 0.507
IR 1 −0.01 0.08 0.897
2 0.37*** 0.09 <0.001
3 0.05 0.11 0.632
4 0.36*** 0.09 <0.001
5 0.18* 0.07 0.011
6 0.20 0.11 0.078
7 0.35*** 0.11 0.001
8 0.15 0.08 0.073
9 0.08 0.12 0.514
10 0.19* 0.10 0.048
11 0.20* 0.09 0.022
12 0.11 0.10 0.274
IT 1 −0.09 0.09 0.317
2 −0.01 0.09 0.897
3 −0.19 0.11 0.095
4 0.12 0.09 0.192
5 0.01 0.08 0.948
6 −0.51*** 0.12 <0.001
7 −0.18 0.11 0.116
8 −0.06 0.09 0.474
9 −0.01 0.12 0.930
10 0.06 0.10 0.528
11 0.05 0.09 0.617
12 −0.38*** 0.11 0.001
KZ 1 0.23** 0.08 0.005
2 −0.02 0.09 0.812
3 −0.37*** 0.11 0.001
4 0.25** 0.09 0.004
5 0.11 0.07 0.128
6 −0.13 0.11 0.256
7 0.03 0.11 0.798
8 −0.07 0.08 0.398
9 −0.08 0.12 0.481
10 −0.02 0.10 0.814
11 0.12 0.09 0.190
12 −0.12 0.10 0.269
PL 1 0.36*** 0.06 <0.001
2 0.18** 0.07 0.005
3 0.22** 0.08 0.009
4 0.44*** 0.07 <0.001
5 0.24*** 0.06 <0.001
6 0.56*** 0.09 <0.001
7 0.30*** 0.08 <0.001
8 0.13* 0.07 0.048
9 −0.21* 0.09 0.020
10 0.13 0.07 0.079
11 0.29*** 0.07 <0.001
12 0.29*** 0.08 <0.001
RO 1 0.25* 0.10 0.015
2 0.23* 0.11 0.033
3 0.27* 0.14 0.047
4 0.79*** 0.11 <0.001
5 0.18* 0.09 0.042
6 0.40** 0.14 0.005
7 0.37** 0.13 0.006
8 −0.25* 0.10 0.016
9 0.16 0.14 0.259
10 0.33** 0.12 0.005
11 0.13 0.11 0.234
12 0.15 0.13 0.257

The results of multiple comparisons: significance of differences between gender (used as grouping factor) among types of goals in goal importance (dependent variable) in individual countries.

Only significant results were presented at the table. Goal: 1 – health (right levels of: blood pressure. Cholesterol. body mass. Etc.); 2 – physical fitness. Being ‘in shape’; 3 – company of other people; 4 – fit. Shapely body (beauty. Sculpted and firm body); 5 – wellbeing; 6 – being physically active and fit according to fashion; 7 – boosting confidence. Gaining appreciation from others; 8 – pleasure from physical activity; 9 – escape from everyday life; 10 – managing stress; 11 – fulfilling the need for activity; 12 – promoting pa by setting a behavior example.

pbonf - p-value with Bonferroni correction.

***, pbonf < 0.001; **, pbonf < 0.01; *, pbonf < 0.05.

In particular, the PMC showed that:

  • In CN, females rated goal 3 (company of other people) significantly higher than male, and goal 10 (managing stress) significantly lower.

  • In EG, females rated goal 2 (physical fitness) significantly higher than male, and target 6 (being physically active and fit according to fashion) was assessed significantly lower by females than by males.

  • In IR, females rated targets 2 (physical fitness), 4 (fit, shapely body), 5 (wellbeing), 7 (confidence, appreciation), 10 (managing stress), and 11 (need for activity) higher than males.

  • In IT, females assessed objectives 6 (being physically active and fit according to fashion) and 12 (promoting PA) significantly lower than males.

  • In KZ, goals 1 (health) and 4 (fit, shapely body) were assessed significantly higher females than by males, and goal 3 (company of other people) was rated significantly lower by females.

  • In PL, the importance of each goal (except 9 and 10) was significantly higher among females than males. In fact, males rated objective 9 (escape from everyday life) significantly higher than females.

  • In RO, females rated the importance of goals 1–7 and 10 (managing stress) significantly higher than males, whereas goal 8 (pleasure from physical activity) was evaluated as less important by females.

3.4 Type of goal x country interaction at each level of gender

The pairwise multiple comparisons with Bonferroni correction indicated that among females, one of the largest differences occurred in the evaluation of the importance of objective 7 (boosting confidence, gaining appreciation from others) between PL and EG (diff = −1.35; p < 0.001), as well as PL and IR (diff = −1.31; p < 0.001). The Polish women assessed goal 7 as significantly less important (M = 3.04; SD = 1.49) than women in EG (M = 4.38; SD = 0.96) and IR (M = 4.35; SD = 1.03).

A relatively big difference was also shown regarding target 6 (being physically active and fit according to fashion) between females in IR and PL (diff = 1.37; p < 0.001), IR and IT (diff = 1.12; p < 0.001), as well as EG and PL (diff = 1.01; p < 0.001). The Polish women assessed goal 6 as significantly less important (M = 3.02; SD = 1.39) than women in IR (M = 4.39; SD = 0.89) and EG (M = 4.03; SD = 1.11). The women in IT also rated objective 6 as less important (M = 3.27; SD = 1.32) than women in IR.

The next biggest difference was observed in the ratings of objective 9 (escape from everyday life) between females in KZ and IT (diff = −1.20; p < 0.001), PL (diff = −1.01; p < 0.001), and RO (diff = −1.25; p < 0.001). It occurred that women in KZ considered this type of goal as significantly less important (M = 2.59; SD = 1.40) than women in IT (M = 3.78; SD = 1.24), PL (M = 3.59; SD = 1.16) and RO (M = 3.83; SD = 1.13). All PMCs were presented in Supplementary Table 1.

The PMCs with Bonferroni correction indicated that one of the largest differences occurred in the evaluation of the importance of objective 4 (Fit, shapely body) between males in RO and CN (diff = −1.11; p < 0.001), EG (diff = −1.12; p < 0.001), and IR (diff = −1.08; p < 0.001). The analysis showed that males in RO assessed goal 4 as significantly less important (M = 3.21; SD = 1.24) than males in EG (M = 4.33; SD = 0.81) and IR (M = 4.29; SD = 0.81).

The biggest difference was also shown in evaluating target 6 (being physically active and fit according to fashion) between males in PL and EG (diff = −1.77; p < 0.001), IR (diff = −1.73; p < 0.001), IT (diff = −1.33; p < 0.001), KZ (diff = −1.40; p < 0.001), as well as between males in RO and EG (diff = −1.18; p < 0.001) and IR (diff = −1.14; p < 0.001). The Polish men assessed goal 6 as significantly less important (M = 2.46; SD = 1.41) than men in EG (M = 4.22; SD = 0.94), IR (M = 4.19; SD = 1.00), and KZ (M = 3.86; SD = 1.26). Additionally, men in RO rated objective 6 as less important (M = 3.04; SD = 1.34) than men in EG and IR.

Another relatively relevant difference was observed in the ratings of objective 7 (boosting confidence, gaining appreciation from others) between males in PL and CN (diff = −1.23; p < 0.001), EG (diff = −1.61; p < 0.001), IR (diff = −1.26; p < 0.001), IT (diff = −1.12; p < 0.001), and KZ (diff = −1.22; p < 0.001). It turned out that men in PL considered this type of goal significantly less important (M = 2.74; SD = 1.32) than men in CN (M = 3.97; SD = 1.04), EG (M = 4.35; SD = 0.84), IR (M = 4.00; SD = 1.06), IT (M = 3.86; SD = 1.15), and KZ (M = 3.95; SD = 1.24).

The next high difference among males in goal importance ratings between countries was observed with respect to goal 9 (escape from everyday life) between KZ and CN (diff = −1.00; p < 0.001), IT (diff = −1.13; p < 0.001), PL (diff = −1.13; p < 0.001), and RO (diff = −1.01; p < 0.001). The men in KZ rated this type of goal significantly lower (M = 2.67; SD = 1.44) than men in CN (M = 3.67; SD = 1.16), IT (M = 3.79; SD = 1.29), PL (M = 3.80; SD = 1.17), and RO (M = 3.67; SD = 1.11).

Additionally, there was a relevant difference in ratings of target 12 (promoting PA) between males in PL and IT (diff = −1.02; p < 0.001). The Polish men assessed this objective as less important (M = 3.24; SD = 1.42) than Italian men (M = 4.26; SD = 0.93) (Supplementary Table 1—only significant results at a level < 0.05 are presented due to the extensive data set).

4 Discussion

4.1 Main findings

Contemporary research indicates that the most significant factor threatening health is a sedentary lifestyle (Czarnecki et al., 2023). The World Health Organization has identified the promotion of physical activity as a major goal of modern public health strategies (Biernat, 2011). For the promotion of physical health to be effective, it is essential to understand the motivators for engaging in it. Therefore, two questions were posed in this study: Does gender differentiate the motives for physical activity in PL, CN, IR, KZ, EG, RO, and IT? Does nationality determine motivation for physical activity?

Considering the first research question, the results showed that there are several significant differences between women and men in different countries; however, the strength of the gender-country interaction effect was small. The results show that in Poland, Iran, Egypt, and Romania, women declared the importance of the goal defined as a “physical fitness and being in shape” higher than men. In addition, women from Kazakhstan, Poland, and Romania indicated a “health-related” goal as more important than men. In Iran, Poland and Romania, the motivation described as “wellbeing” is lower among men than women. Similar results were obtained by Lipowski and Ussorowska (2018), indicating that physical activity undertaken by women serves health and wellbeing. The results obtained can be substantiated by referring to gender-stereotypical demands, according to which physical beauty is required of women. Gender-stereotypical demands, particularly those related to physical beauty, place significant and disproportionate pressures on women, leading to both social and economic consequences. The existence of a “beauty premium” in the labor market highlights how women are often judged based on their appearance, which can both benefit and penalize them depending on how well they meet societal expectations (Andreoni and Petrie, 2008). This notion is reinforced by the prescriptive beauty norm (PBN), which compels women to continuously pursue beauty to maintain social and professional status. The PBN reflects and perpetuates gender hierarchies, particularly in the workplace, where women in high-power roles are subjected to stricter beauty standards than men (Ramati-Ziber et al., 2020). Media representations further amplify these demands by portraying idealized beauty standards, suggesting that adhering to specific beauty practices is essential for a woman’s attractiveness and social success (Emeksiz, 2021). These socio-psychological effects can lead to body dissatisfaction and the prioritization of physical appearance over other personal attributes, ultimately reinforcing the gender hierarchy and maintaining the social control of women based on their looks (Shyian et al., 2021).

Another observation from the current study was that women from Poland, Romania, and Iran differed from men in most of the 12 PA motives analyzed, with the exception of the motive: “escape from everyday life.” These gender differences highlight the influence of sociocultural factors on physical activity motivations, which vary based on gender and the country’s specific social and cultural context. For instance, studies on physical activity in Iran have shown significant gender-specific patterns, with men engaging more frequently in physical activities across various domains, while women showed reduced engagement, particularly in work-related physical activity (Koohpayehzadeh et al., 2014). Similarly, in Poland and Romania, traditional gender roles continue to shape women’s involvement in physical activities, with cultural expectations and health-related motivations playing a significant role in determining the extent and nature of their participation (Kuśnierz et al., 2020).

On the other hand, when observing the motives of males, they scored substantially higher on some specific motives, and those differences can be attributed to cultural, social, and psychological factors that shape gender roles and expectations. Italian and Egyptian males, who showed a higher motivation for “being physically active and fit according to fashion,” likely reflect societal pressures where physical appearance and fashionability are culturally significant, particularly among men who associate fitness with social status and attractiveness (Szabo et al., 2019). Italian males also rated the motive of “promoting physical activity by setting a behavioral example” higher than females, suggesting that men in this context might feel a stronger societal or cultural responsibility to be role models in physical activity, perhaps due to traditional gender roles that emphasize leadership and public behavior in men (Molanorouzi et al., 2015). In Kazakhstan, males scored higher on the motive of “enjoying the company of others” compared to females, which may indicate that social interaction is a stronger motivator for men in this region, possibly due to cultural norms that promote male bonding through group activities (Guérin, 2013). Polish males, who placed a higher importance on “escaping from everyday life,” might reflect a gender-specific coping mechanism where men use physical activity as an escape from stress or routine, which aligns with findings that men are more likely to use physical activity as a stress relief tool (Bednarek et al., 2016). Finally, Romanian males’ higher motivation for “finding pleasure in physical activity” compared to females suggests that men may derive more intrinsic enjoyment from physical activities, potentially due to a societal emphasis on male participation in sports and physical competition from a young age. These variations highlight how gendered cultural expectations and societal norms influence the motivation for physical activity differently across countries (Molanorouzi et al., 2015).

The results relating to the second research question showed that Polish women differ from women in other countries surveyed in two specific motives, with these motives also being lower among Polish men. Specifically, Polish women exhibited a lower level of the sixth PA motive, “engaging in physical activity and staying fit according to fashion,” compared to Iranian and Egyptian women. Similarly, Polish men scored significantly lower on this motive than men from Iran, Egypt, and Kazakhstan. The second motive, “boosting confidence and gaining appreciation from others,” was also lower in Polish women compared to Iranian and Egyptian women. Polish men similarly showed lower levels of this motive compared to men from Iran, Egypt, and Kazakhstan. Furthermore, Polish men differed from Italian men in having a lower level of the twelfth PA motive, “promoting physical activity by setting a behavioral example.” On the other hand, Italian women exhibited lower levels of the PA goal “engaging in physical activity and staying fit according to fashion” compared to Iranian women. Additionally, Kazakh women and men showed lower levels of the ninth PA motive, “escaping from everyday life,” compared to Polish, Italian, and Romanian women and men. Kazakh men also demonstrated lower levels of this motive compared to Chinese men. Romanian men, in turn, showed lower levels of the PA motives “engaging in physical activity and staying fit according to fashion” and “achieving a fit and shapely body” compared to Egyptian and Iranian men. Moreover, in the latter motive, Romanian men scored lower than Chinese men as well.

The cultural differences in physical activity motives, particularly in the comparison between Polish, Iranian, Egyptian, Kazakh, Chinese, and Romanian men and women, are well explained by several studies that highlight how cultural norms, values, and socio-economic conditions shape the motivations for engaging in physical activity. For instance, Mirsafian (2016) discusses the role of cultural values and societal norms in shaping physical activity participation, particularly noting how Iranian women’s participation is hindered by societal attitudes toward women in sports, while Polish students demonstrate more freedom in their physical activity engagement due to different cultural and socio-economic conditions. Similarly, Bednarek et al. (2016) compare Polish and Turkish students, showing that Polish students engage in more vigorous physical activity, which might be influenced by different educational and health promotion policies in Poland compared to Turkey. Additionally, research on Polish and Chinese sociocultural attitudes by Guo et al. (2023) highlights how cultural adaptation goals impact motivations for physical activity, particularly how young men and women in China and Poland differ in their focus on physical appearance and social motivations in relation to sports. These studies demonstrate how variations in cultural values, economic conditions, and gender norms play significant roles in influencing the motives behind physical activity across different countries.

4.2 Practical implications

The results of the study, which show differences in the motives for physical activity in different countries and between genders, have a number of practical implications for health policy, education, marketing, and the promotion of physical fitness. Firstly, the cultural differences revealed indicate the need to design campaigns promoting physical activity in a way that is tailored to local values and priorities. This means that in countries where health motives dominate, programs should place particular emphasis on disease prevention and mental and physical wellbeing, while in countries where competition or physical fitness are key, messages can be based on narratives of achievement and challenge. In physical education, it is worth adapting curricula to the dominant motives in a given group in order to strengthen student engagement by aligning content with their expectations. For example, physical activities combining health and esthetic elements (such as dance or Pilates) may be more effective for girls, while activities involving competition (such as team sports) may be more effective for boys. Allowing students to choose their activities will contribute to a greater sense of autonomy. Marketing activities should take into account the language and content of the message directed at the audience. In addition, it is worth using ambassadors and opinion leaders whose lifestyle is consistent with the dominant themes in a given culture to promote physical fitness. Sports infrastructure planning should also take into account preferences resulting from prevailing goals—e.g., greater emphasis on recreational facilities where relaxation is a priority or sports fields and training halls in competitive contexts. It is also important that coaches and instructors are trained to recognize participants’ motivational profiles, which will allow them to individualize their approach. It is also worth developing applications and digital tools that personalize training goals and motivational messages based on the user’s cultural profile.

4.3 Limitations

The current study has some limitations. One of the primary limitations of this study is the reliance on self-reported data for assessing physical activity motives across different countries. Self-reported measures are susceptible to bias, including social desirability bias, which could lead participants to overreport or underreport their true motivations. Furthermore, the study did not account for potential confounding variables such as socio-economic status, education, or access to sports facilities (some of these variables were only described), all of which can significantly impact an individual’s motivation for physical activity. The study was correlational in nature, so it is impossible to draw causal conclusions.

4.4 Further research directions

Future research should focus on using more objective measures of physical activity and motivation, such as accelerometers or ecological momentary assessments, to complement self-reported data. Expanding the study to include a broader range of countries and cultural contexts could provide more comprehensive insights into the global diversity of physical activity motivations. Longitudinal studies could also be valuable to examine how motivations for physical activity evolve over time, particularly in response to changing cultural norms or public health interventions. Goals are highly malleable structures that can be modified over time (Brazo-Sayavera et al., 2021). Moreover, future studies should explore the impact of additional factors such as socio-economic status, education, age, and access to resources on physical activity motives. Incorporating qualitative methods, such as interviews or focus groups, could offer deeper insights into the cultural and gender-specific nuances that shape physical activity motivations. Lastly, considering interventions that target specific cultural and gender-related barriers to physical activity could help develop more tailored public health strategies to promote active lifestyles globally.

5 Conclusion

This study provides valuable insights into the gender and cross-cultural differences in physical activity motives across several countries, including Poland, China, Iran, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Romania, and Italy. The findings suggest that women, particularly in Poland, Iran, and Romania, are more motivated by health-related goals and wellbeing, likely influenced by societal pressures around physical appearance. On the other hand, men’s motivations were more varied, with influences from cultural and social norms, such as enjoying social interactions or using physical activity as an escape from daily stress. These findings emphasize the importance of considering cultural and gender-specific factors when developing public health strategies aimed at promoting physical activity. Addressing these nuanced motivations could enhance the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase physical activity across diverse populations.

The research underscores the potential of interdisciplinary collaboration between psychology, public health, and sociology in shaping sustainable behavioral interventions.

Statements

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by the Research Project Ethics Committee (Ethics Board for Research Projects at the Institute of Psychology, University of Gdańsk Decision No. 33/2020) Recording and results system - ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04432038. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s) for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.

Author contributions

ZW: Writing – original draft, Conceptualization, Resources, Methodology, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis. DW: Project administration, Writing – original draft, Formal analysis, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Funding acquisition. EC: Writing – original draft, Formal analysis, Methodology, Data curation. KK: Writing – original draft, Funding acquisition. JL: Data curation, Resources, Writing – original draft. MałL: Supervision, Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization, Project administration, Validation. AL-M: Resources, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft. BR: Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Methodology. US-R: Writing – original draft, Formal analysis, Data curation. BI: Formal analysis, Writing – original draft. AG: Methodology, Writing – original draft. PV: Writing – original draft, Project administration, Resources. TL: Resources, Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Project administration. MH: Writing – review & editing, Supervision. VE: Supervision, Writing – review & editing, Resources. NP: Supervision, Resources, Validation, Writing – review & editing. AB: Supervision, Writing – review & editing, Resources. MarL: Project administration, Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. This work was supported by the Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange under the Urgency Grants program (BPN/GIN/2021/1/00010/U/00001).

Conflict of interest

AB was employed by Human Research and Development LLP.

The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The authors declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1642206/full#supplementary-material

References

  • 1

    Agbangba C. E. Aide E. S. Honfo H. Kakai R. G. (2024). On the use of post-hoc tests in environmental and biological sciences: a critical review. Heliyon10, 1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25131

  • 2

    Alecu S. Onea G. A. Badau D. (2025). The relationship between motivation for physical activity, physical activity level, and body mass index for university students. Sports13:96. doi: 10.3390/sports13040096,

  • 3

    Alispahić S. (2013). Motivational function of plans and goals. PsychArchives6, 196–203. doi: 10.23668/psycharchives.1934

  • 4

    Alkasasbeh W. J. Akroush S. H. (2025). Sports motivation: a narrative review of psychological approaches to enhance athletic performance. Front. Psychol.16:1645274. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1645274,

  • 5

    Andreoni J. Petrie R. (2008). Beauty, gender and stereotypes: evidence from laboratory experiments. J. Econ. Psychol.29, 73–93. doi: 10.1016/J.JOEP.2007.07.008

  • 6

    ASEAN (2021). Survey on sports participation. Measuring sports’ contribution to socio-economic development in 10 cities. Jakarta, Indonesia: ASEAN.

  • 7

    Bednarek J. Pomykała S. Bigosińska M. Szygula Z. (2016). Physical activity of polish and Turkish university students as assessed by IPAQ. Cent. Eur. J. Sport Sci. Med.16, 13–22. doi: 10.18276/CEJ.2016.4-02

  • 8

    Biernat E. (2011). Physical activity of Warsaw residents on the example of selected professional groups. Warsaw: SGH.

  • 9

    Brazo-Sayavera J. Aubert S. Barnes J. D. González S. A. (2021). TremblayM.S. Gender differences in physical activity and sedentary behavior: results from over 200,000 Latin-American children and adolescents. PLoS One16:e0255353. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0255353

  • 10

    Buhaș R. Săveanu S. Bacter C. (2020). Physical activity and other health-related behaviours in adults from Oradea, Romania. Balt. J. Health Phys. Act.15, 36–45. doi: 10.29359/BJHPA.12.Spec.Iss1.05

  • 11

    CBOS (2018). Physical activity of Poles. CBOS online. Available online at: http://www.cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2018/K_125_18.PDF [Accessed January 15, 2024]

  • 12

    Cohen J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

  • 13

    Craft B. B. Carroll H. A. Lustyk M. K. (2014). Gender differences in exercise habits and quality of life reports: assessing the moderating effects of reasons for exercise. Int. J. Lib. Arts Soc. Sci.2, 65–76,

  • 14

    Czarnecki D. Skalski D. W. Kowalski D. Vynogradskyi B. Grygus I. (2022). Physical activity of seniors as a condition for health and good quality of life. Rehabil. Recreat.12, 105–112. doi: 10.32782/2522-1795.2023.14.17

  • 15

    Czarnecki D. Skalski D. W. Tsyhanovska N. V. Svyshch L. Kyryk O. (2023). Effects of limited physical activity on the body of adolescents. Rehabil. Recreat.14, 158–163. doi: 10.32782/2522-1795.2023.14.18

  • 16

    Deci E. L. Ryan R. M. (2000). The 'what' and 'why' of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol. Inq.11, 227–268. doi: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

  • 17

    Deci E. L. Ryan R. M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

  • 18

    Deng A. Zarrett N. Moon J. Sweeney A. M. (2023). Changing trajectory of daily physical activity levels among at-risk adolescents: influences of motivational mechanisms. BMC Public Health23:2089. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-16949-1,

  • 19

    El-Gilany A. H. El-Masry R. (2011). Physical inactivity among Egyptian and Saudi medical students. TAF Prev. Med. Bull.10, 35–44. doi: 10.5455/pmb.20101018022143

  • 20

    Emeksiz G. (2021). The stereotypical representation of females in women’s health magazine’s cosmetic advertisements. Open J. Soc. Sci.9, 53–70. doi: 10.4236/jss.2021.99005

  • 21

    Eo E. In O. (2024). Gender differences in motivation to physical activity in Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Niger. Health J.24:817. doi: 10.60787/tnhj.v24i3.817

  • 22

    Faul F. Erdfelder E. Lang A. G. Buchner A. (2007). G*power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods39, 175–191. doi: 10.3758/BF03193146,

  • 23

    Gjestvang C. Abrahamsen F. Stensrud T. Haakstad L. A. H. (2020). Motivations and barriers to initiating and maintaining physical activity in a health club - a one-year follow-up study. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports30, 1796–1805. doi: 10.1111/sms.13736

  • 24

    Guérin E. (2013). Not just what you do but why you do it: The influence of self-determination and passion on the relationship between physical activity and well-being in active women with multiple roles. Canada: University of Ottawa.

  • 25

    Guo S. Izydorczyk B. Lipowska M. Lizinczyk S. Kamionka A. Sajewicz-Radtke U. et al . (2023). Sociocultural predictors of obligatory exercise in young men: a polish-Chinese comparison. Front. Psych.14, 1–10. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1123864,

  • 26

    Hagger M. Chatzisarantis N. (2008). Self-determination theory and the psychology of exercise. Int. Rev. Sport Exerc.1, 79–103. doi: 10.1080/17509840701827437

  • 27

    IBM Corp (2023) in IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 29.0.2.0. ed. IBM Corp (Armonk, NY).

  • 28

    Ilić M. Pang H. Vlaški T. Grujičić M. Novaković B. (2022). Motives and barriers for regular physical activity among medical students from the Western Balkans (South-East Europe region). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health19:16240. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192316240,

  • 29

    Kalajas-Tilga H. Koka A. Hein V. Tilga H. Raudsepp L. (2020). Motivational processes in physical education and objectively measured physical activity among adolescents. J. Sport Health Sci.9, 462–471. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2019.06.001,

  • 30

    Koohpayehzadeh J. Etemad K. Abbasi M. Meysamie A. Sheikhbahaei S. Asgari F. et al . (2014). Gender-specific changes in physical activity pattern in Iran: national surveillance of risk factors of non-communicable diseases (2007–2011). Int. J. Public Health59, 231–241. doi: 10.1007/s00038-013-0529-3,

  • 31

    Kosendiak A. Adamczak B. Kuźnik Z. Makles S. (2023). Physical activity of Ukrainian and polish medical students in the beginning of the war in Ukraine. Health Probl. Civiliz.17, 388–398. doi: 10.5114/hpc.2023.131867

  • 32

    Krasmik J. Iancheva T. Rahmalin B. (2023). Comparative analysis of sports motivation and peculiarities of self-realization among Kazakhstan athletes. J. Appl. Sports Sci.7, 76–92. doi: 10.37393/JASS.2023.02.7

  • 33

    Kuśnierz C. Rogowska A. M. Pavlova I. (2020). Examining gender differences, personality traits, academic performance, and motivation in Ukrainian and polish students of physical education: a cross-cultural study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health17:5729. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17165729,

  • 34

    Li W. Pengfei Z. (2024). Exploring gender differences in psychological motivation and effectiveness evaluation for college sports adherence. Soc. Behav. Pers.53:e14501. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4760996/v1

  • 35

    Lindwall M. Weman-Josefsson K. Sebire S. J. Standag M. (2016). Perceiving exercise goal content through the lens of the individual: a self-determination perspective. Psychol. Sport Exerc.27, 85–92. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.06.011

  • 36

    Lipowski M. Ussorowska A. (2018). The motivational function of goal in physical activity and sport. Curr. Issues Personal. Psychol.6, 57–66. doi: 10.5114/cipp.2018.72054

  • 37

    Lipowski M. Zaleski Z. (2015). Inventory of physical activity objectives (IPAO) – a new method in measuring motives for physical activity and sport. Health Psychol. Rep.3, 47–58. doi: 10.5114/hpr.2015.49462

  • 38

    Liu Y. Zhai X. Zhang Y. Jiang C. Zeng J. Yang M. et al . (2023). Promoting effects of exercise motivation on students' physical fitness: a mediation effect model. BMC Public Health23:2244. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-17154-w

  • 39

    Lochbaum M. Gottardy J. (2015). A meta-analytic review of the approach-avoidance achievement goals and performance relationships in the sport psychology literature. J. Sport Health Sci.4, 164–173. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2013.12.004

  • 40

    Lochbaum M. R. Podlog L. Litchfield K. Surles J. Hilliard S. (2013). Stage of physical activity and approach-avoidance achievement goals in university students. Psychol. Sport Exerc.14, 161–168. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.09.004

  • 41

    Lochbaum M. Sisneros C. Kazak Z. (2023). The 3× 2 achievement goals in the education, sport, and occupation literatures: a systematic review with Meta-analysis. Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ.13, 1130–1157. doi: 10.3390/ejihpe13070085,

  • 42

    Mascret N. Elliot A. J. Cury F. (2015). Extending the 3× 2 achievement goal model to the sport domain: the 3× 2 achievement goal questionnaire for sport. Psychol. Sport Exerc.17, 7–14. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.11.001

  • 43

    Mirsafian H. (2016). Perceived constraints to physical activity and sport: a cross-cultural study between Iranian and Hungarian university students. World Leis. J.58, 193–206. doi: 10.1080/16078055.2016.1143390

  • 44

    Molanorouzi K. Khoo S. Morris T. (2015). Motivations for adult participation in physical activity: type of activity, age and gender. BMC Public Health15:66. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1429-7

  • 45

    Rahman M. Liang C. Y. Gu D. Ding Y. Akter M. (2019). Understanding levels and motivation of physical activity for health promotion among Chinese middle-aged and older adults: a cross-sectional investigation. J. Healthc. Eng.2019, 1–9. doi: 10.1155/2019/9828241,

  • 46

    Ramati-Ziber L. Shnabel N. Glick P. (2020). The beauty myth: prescriptive beauty norms for women reflect hierarchy-enhancing motivations leading to discriminatory employment practices. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol.119, 317–343. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000209,

  • 47

    Salgaonkar P. Mahadevan S. P. (2025). A comparative study of exercise motivation between adult males and females in Pune. Int. J. Phys. Educ. Sports Health12, 230–232.

  • 48

    Shyian O. Foster L. Kuzmenko T. Yeremenko L. Liesnichenko N. (2021). Socio-psychological criteria of the formation of gender stereotypes of appearance. J. Intellect. Disabil. Diagn. Treat.9, 651–666. doi: 10.6000/2292-2598.2021.09.06.8

  • 49

    Szabo A. Griffiths M. D. Demetrovics Z. de la Vega R. Ruíz-Barquín R. Soós I. et al . (2019). Obsessive and harmonious passion in physically active Spanish and Hungarian men and women: a brief report on cultural and gender differences. Int. J. Psychol.54, 598–603. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12517,

  • 50

    Tock W. L. Johnson N. A. Andersen R. E. Salaciak M. Angelillo C. Loiselle C. G. et al . (2024). Pilot randomized controlled trial of Lymfit: a theory-guided exercise intervention for young adults with lymphoma. Healthcare12:1101. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12111101,

  • 51

    Toothaker L. E. (1993). Multiple comparison procedures. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

  • 52

    Uimonen M. Repo J. P. Grönroos K. Häkkinen A. Walker S. (2021). Validity and reliability of the motivation for physical activity (RM4-FM) questionnaire. J. Exerc. Rehabil.17, 103–111. doi: 10.12965/jer.2142194.097,

  • 53

    Wilczyńska D. Li J. Yang Y. Fan H. Liu T. Lipowski M. (2021). Fear of COVID-19 changes the motivation for physical activity participation: polish-Chinese comparisons. Health Psychol. Rep.9, 138–148. doi: 10.5114/hpr.2021.105007,

  • 54

    Zaleski Z. (1991). Psychology of goal-directed behaviour. Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

  • 55

    Zhang S. Huang J. Wang H. (2024). Influencing factors of women's sports participation based on self-determination theory: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag.17, 2953–2969. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S465903,

  • 56

    Zhou L. Chlebosz K. Tower J. Morris T. (2019). An exploratory study of motives for participation in extreme sports and physical activity. J. Leis. Res.51, 1–22. doi: 10.1080/00222216.2019.1627175

Summary

Keywords

exercise motivation, sport psychology, pro-healthy behavior, physical activity, nationality

Citation

Wang Z, Wilczyńska DM, Cichoń E, Kreft K, Lu J, Lipowska M, Lada-Masko AB, Radtke BM, Sajewicz-Radtke U, Izydorczyk B, Gmiąt A, Vago P, Liu T, Helmy M, Enea V, Pourvakhshoori N, Bolatov A and Lipowski M (2026) The motivational function of goals in physical activity: a cross-cultural comparison. Front. Psychol. 16:1642206. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1642206

Received

06 June 2025

Accepted

24 October 2025

Published

06 January 2026

Volume

16 - 2025

Edited by

Adelinda Araujo Candeias, University of Evora, Portugal

Reviewed by

Nadia Ayub, Institute of Business Management, Pakistan

Duygu Gurleyik, Özyeğin University, Türkiye

Updates

Copyright

© 2026 Wang, Wilczyńska, Cichoń, Kreft, Lu, Lipowska, Lada-Masko, Radtke, Sajewicz-Radtke, Izydorczyk, Gmiąt, Vago, Liu, Helmy, Enea, Pourvakhshoori, Bolatov and Lipowski.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Katarzyna Kreft,

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Share on WeChat

Scan with WeChat to share this article

Article metrics