Television Viewing Does Not Have to Be Sedentary: Motivation to Participate in a TV Exercise Program

Table 4

Logistic regression analysis of the IMI subscales on participation in the NOM-tv exercises, corrected for background characteristics.

Independent variables	Model 1		Model 2
	OR (CI)	P value	OR (CI)	P value
Gender	1.81 (1.18–2.76)	.006	1.57 (.99–2.50)	ns
Age	1.00 (.98–1.03)	ns	1.02 (1.00–1.04)	ns
BMI	.91 (.88–.95)	<.001	.95 (.91–.99)	.011
Marital status	.89 (.78–1.03)	ns	.92 (.79–1.07)	ns
Occupational status	.98 (.88–1.09)	ns	.96 (.86–1.07)	ns
Educational level	1.41 (1.03–1.94)	.034	1.62 (1.14–2.29)	.007
Urbanization	.79 (.58–1.08)	ns	.71 (.50–.99)	.044
Nationality	.71 (.37–1.36)	ns	.55 (.27–1.09)	ns
Perceived personal health status	1.12 (.99–1.27)	ns	.99 (.86–1.14)	ns
Compliance with physical activity guidelines	1.49 (1.09–2.05)	.014	1.20 (.85–1.70)	ns
Viewing habits	2.47 (2.06–2.95)	<.001	1.86 (1.51–2.28)	<.001
Interest-enjoyment			1.38 (1.11–1.70)	.003
Perceived competence			1.55 (1.29–1.86)	<.001
Effort-importance			1.65 (1.32–2.07)	<.001
Pressure-tension			.84 (.68–1.05)	ns
Perceived choice			.78 (.58–1.06)	ns
Value-usefulness			.78 (.62–.98)	.034
Nagelkerke’s	.21		.35

Note. ns = not significant.