How do you motivate people not only to sign up for a gym but also to actually visit it regularly? Not with money as a reward, it turns out. Social support or a frame of reference seems to work better.
Getting Paid to Go to the Gym
Researchers from the American National Bureau of Economic Research offered new gym members various rewards if they visited at least 9 times in the first 6 weeks [1]. That’s about one and a half training sessions per week. The rewards consisted of a $30 gift card, $30 in cash, or $60 in cash. A total of 836 new members participated in the study.
The researchers concluded that financial motivation had no influence on the number of times new members visited the gym.
The researchers suspect that the financial reward does not outweigh the obstacles of adopting a new routine. If improved health or a better body is insufficient motivation, then it’s not surprising that a few dollars won’t suddenly make you more motivated or disciplined. In the US, just like elsewhere, people make annual resolutions to go to the gym. And just like elsewhere, a third of people in the US have given up on these resolutions before the end of January [2].
By summer, half of them have stopped going to the gym.
New members may underestimate the effort required to visit the gym regularly. They may not take into account the changes needed in their daily schedule. Waking up earlier, going to bed later, going straight to the gym after work instead of relaxing first—these are all tactics you need to figure out yourself if you want to succeed long-term. It’s no wonder that the popular saying is that fitness is a lifestyle. If you don’t approach it with the mindset that you’ll need to fundamentally change your week, you’re doomed to fail. Working on your body is different from taking a fun salsa dancing course where you learn the basics in a few weeks (and then forget them).
Fitness is ongoing, and when you stop, the benefits disappear.
Competition or Support for More Motivation?
So, money doesn’t work in the US, and joking aside, I think the same applies in the Netherlands. A greater drive is needed to get through that initial period when you haven’t developed a routine yet. We’ve written a lot about motivation, of course, but let’s talk about an interesting study from 2016 that we haven’t covered yet. Researchers from the University of Pennsylvania divided 790 students into four (online) groups [3]:
- Competition
- Competition and support
- Support
- A control group (no competition, no support)
The participants in the different teams or groups were in contact with each other online. Then, the number of workouts within each group was tracked, and rewards were given based on individual participants or the group average.
Group 1 was divided into online teams of 6 where scoring was based on individual performance. This way, there was competition within the online team based on points and individual wins.
Group 2 was divided into teams of 6 online, competing against five other teams. Participants supported each other within their team but also had the competitive element against other groups.
Group 3 was divided into teams of 6 people rewarded based on the performance of the whole team. They weren’t compared to other groups. Therefore, there was only the element of mutual support to receive the largest possible reward as a team.
Results
Below are the results expressed in the average total number of workouts per week followed by the different teams in the various groups:
- Competition (social comparison) 35.7
- Competition and support (combined) 38.5
- Support (social support) 16.8
- Control group 20.3
Competition, especially combined with support, resulted in 90% higher attendance rates than support alone or neither (control group). However, what also stands out is that the group where participants only supported each other scored lower than the control group.
Competition in Fitness?
From the fact that the group offering only support for a group reward scored low, the researchers inferred that a reference value is needed. In the ‘social comparison’ group, where individual scores were compared within a team, participants compared their own results with those of others in the group. In the group where teams competed against each other and teammates supported each other (combined), participants used the other teams as a reference. This latter group performed better than the group where participants ‘competed’ individually without support. This could indicate that the reference value, a norm, was more important than whether individuals scored individually or as a team.
Now, the question is how to translate this into practice. Do you start a Facebook page with a group of friends to track how much each member has worked out? It could work, especially if you’re all following the same training program. You could start an online running group where you track the extent to which certain goals have been achieved, such as the number of days you’ve run in a week and the progress in time or distance compared to the previous week. You have a reference value in others and social support from the group. Prefer to compete as a team? Start a club at work and challenge another department. For example, by tracking the total number of stairs each member has climbed daily.
References
- nber.org/papers/w23567
- marketwatch.com/story/more-than-a-third-of-americans-have-abandoned-their-new-year-new-workout-routine-resolutions-2017-01-30
- Zhang J, Brackbill D, Yang S, Becker J, Herbert N, Centola D. Support or competition? How online social networks increase physical activity: A randomized controlled trial. Preventive Medicine Reports. 2016;4:453-458. doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.08.008.
