Activity, MotorNCT04573972
Using Social Connectedness to Increase Physical Activity
A study testing Social Incentive and Standard Incentive in people with Activity, Motor and Social Isolation, run by Carnegie Mellon University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
A randomized controlled trial will test the effectiveness of social incentives relative to traditional incentives in promoting walking behavior among college students (N=200). Participants who are rewarded for walking together will be compared to those who are rewarded for walking even when alone. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Activity, Motor, Social Isolation
- What is being tested?
- Social Incentive and Standard Incentive
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 172 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 30 Sep 2020to 4 Jan 2021
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age 18+
- Able to read and understand English-language surveys
- Own either iPhone or Android smartphones
- Willing to carry the smart phone during the study period and to respond to daily texts or emails from the study team
- Registered for the study as a dyad (friend pairs), with one member of the dyad a Carnegie Mellon University student
Who cannot join
- Contraindications for increased physical activity
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15213
About this study
A randomized controlled trial will test the effectiveness of social incentives relative to traditional incentives in promoting walking behavior among college students (N=200). Participants who are rewarded for walking together will be compared to those who are rewarded for walking even when alone. Research participants will download activity tracking apps (Fitbit app and AWARE app) that provide activity and location data. Participants will be consented and then randomized to one of two incentive schemes for walking. Over a 2-week intervention period, the standard incentive group will earn $2 per day when they meet their walking goal regardless of whether they walk alone or with others. The social incentive group will earn $1 per day when they reach their walking goal plus an additional $1 when they walk at least 2000 steps with their walking partner. The incentive scheme will be in place for 2-weeks, preceded by a 1-week baseline period and followed by a 2-week follow-up period.
Read the detailed description
The objective of the study is to test whether social incentives that encourage physical activity with another person are more effective than incentives for individual exercise. Physical inactivity and social isolation are growing epidemics linked to increased morbidity and mortality particularly among aging Americans. This research aims to address both problems by encouraging co-productive physical activities among college students. Co-productive physical activity mean anything involving physical activity that two people can do together, e.g., walking their dogs or shopping together. Additionally, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, walking together in this study means either walking while communicating digitally or over the phone, or by physically walking together while wearing a mask, staying 6 feet apart, and following the recommendations from health professionals. A small randomized controlled trial will test the effectiveness of social incentives relative to traditional incentives in promoting walking behavior. Participants who are rewarded for walking together will be compared to those who are rewarded for walking even when alone. The results will indicate whether social incentives are more motivating than traditional incentives for walking behavior.
- Conditions
- Activity, Motor, Social Isolation
- Being tested
- Social Incentive, Standard Incentive
- Keywords
- incentives
- Medical subject headings
- Motor Activity, Social Isolation
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Social IncentiveBehavioural
Receiving half the monetary incentive conditional on meeting a step goal and half the monetary incentive conditional on walking together
Standard IncentiveBehavioural
Receiving the full monetary incentive conditional on meeting a step goal and not conditional on walking together
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Regular incentive | Active comparator | During the two-week intervention period, the standard incentive group will earn $2 per day when they meet their step goal, and this reward is earned regardless of whether they walk alone or with others. Receives: Behavioral: Standard Incentive |
| Social Incentive | Experimental | During the two-week intervention period, he social incentive group will earn $1 per day when they meet their step goal and an additional $1 if they walk 2,000 steps together with another study participant. Receives: Behavioral: Social Incentive |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Mean Daily Steps Walked From Baseline Period (Week 1) to Intervention Period (Weeks 2 and 3)
Change in mean daily steps walked from baseline (week 1) to intervention period (weeks 2 and 3), as recorded on the FitBit app
Measured: week 2-3
Change in Mean Daily Steps Walked From Baseline Period (Week 1) to Follow-up Period (Weeks 4-5)
Change in mean daily steps walked from baseline to follow-up period, as recorded on the FitBit app
Measured: week 4-5
Mean Number of Days Met Daily Step Goal During Intervention Period (Weeks 2-3) Minus Mean Number of Days Met Same Level of Walking in Baseline Period (Week 1)
Mean number of days when an individual's number of steps walked was at or above daily goal during the intervention period (weeks 2 \& 3) minus the mean number of days the individual's number of step's walking was at or above that same level during the baseline period (week 1)
Measured: week 2-3
Mean Number of Days Met Daily Step Goal During Follow-up Period (Weeks 4-5) Minus Mean Number of Days Met Same Level of Walking in Baseline Period (Week 1)
Mean number of days when an individual's number of steps walked was at or above daily goal during the follow-up period (weeks 4 \& 5) minus the mean number of days the individual's number of step's walking was at or above that same level during the baseline period (week 1)
Measured: week 4-5
Change in Score on University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Loneliness Scale (Survey Measure)
20-item scale measuring subjective feelings of loneliness and social isolation. Minimum score = 0; maximum score = 60; higher scores indicate more loneliness. We computed the difference in score from baseline (beginning of week 1) to end of study (end of week 5).
Measured: week 5
Secondary outcomes (4)
Fraction of Days Participant Walked Together With Partner (Self Report) During Intervention Period (Weeks 2-3)
Fraction of days with self report of walking at least 2,000 steps with another participant during intervention period (weeks 2-3)
Measured: week 2-3
Fraction of Days Participant Walked Together With Partner (Self Report) During Follow-up Period (Weeks 4-5)
Fraction of days with self report of walking at least 2,000 steps with another participant during follow-up period (weeks 3-5)
Measured: week 4-5
Proportion of Days Participant Walked Together With Partner (Coded)
A machine learning (ML) algorithm will compare the walking records from the Aware app of each dyad of participants and assess whether they walked together on each day
Measured: week 2-3
Proportion of Days Participant Walked Together With Partner (Coded)
A machine learning (ML) algorithm will compare the walking records from the Aware app of each dyad of participants and assess whether they walked together on each day
Measured: week 4-5
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Oct 2020
- Study start30 Sep 2020
- Primary completion25 Nov 2020
- Study completion4 Jan 2021
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for Activity, MotorStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Two group, between-subjects design
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 172 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Carnegie Mellon University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Virginia
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Gretchen Chapman, Carnegie Mellon University
- Investigators
- GRETCHEN B CHAPMAN, PhD, Principal investigator, Carnegie Mellon University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04573972
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- STUDY2019_00000296
- Status last verified
- Oct 2023
- First submitted
- 21 Sep 2020
- Last updated
- 28 Mar 2024
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Only de-identified data will be shared
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Mar 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Using Social Connectedness to Increase Physical Activity
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04573972
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- STUDY2019_00000296
- Conditions
- Activity, Motor, Social Isolation
- Keywords
- incentives
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 172 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Carnegie Mellon UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Virginia
- Study start
- 30 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 25 Nov 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 4 Jan 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 5 Oct 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 22 Nov 2021
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
A randomized controlled trial will test the effectiveness of social incentives relative to traditional incentives in promoting walking behavior among college students (N=200). Participants who are rewarded for walking together will be compared to those who are rewarded for walking even when alone. Research participants will download activity tracking apps (Fitbit app and AWARE app) that provide activity and location data. Participants will be consented and then randomized to one of two incentive schemes for walking. Over a 2-week intervention period, the standard incentive group will earn $2 per day when they meet their walking goal regardless of whether they walk alone or with others. The social incentive group will earn $1 per day when they reach their walking goal plus an additional $1 when they walk at least 2000 steps with their walking partner. The incentive scheme will be in place for 2-weeks, preceded by a 1-week baseline period and followed by a 2-week follow-up period.
Detailed description
The objective of the study is to test whether social incentives that encourage physical activity with another person are more effective than incentives for individual exercise. Physical inactivity and social isolation are growing epidemics linked to increased morbidity and mortality particularly among aging Americans. This research aims to address both problems by encouraging co-productive physical activities among college students. Co-productive physical activity mean anything involving physical activity that two people can do together, e.g., walking their dogs or shopping together. Additionally, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, walking together in this study means either walking while communicating digitally or over the phone, or by physically walking together while wearing a mask, staying 6 feet apart, and following the recommendations from health professionals. A small randomized controlled trial will test the effectiveness of social incentives relative to traditional incentives in promoting walking behavior. Participants who are rewarded for walking together will be compared to those who are rewarded for walking even when alone. The results will indicate whether social incentives are more motivating than traditional incentives for walking behavior.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Two group, between-subjects design
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Regular incentive | Active comparator | Behavioral: Standard IncentiveDuring the two-week intervention period, the standard incentive group will earn $2 per day when they meet their step goal, and this reward is earned regardless of whether they walk alone or with others. |
| Social Incentive | Experimental | Behavioral: Social IncentiveDuring the two-week intervention period, he social incentive group will earn $1 per day when they meet their step goal and an additional $1 if they walk 2,000 steps together with another study participant. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Age 18+
- Able to read and understand English-language surveys
- Own either iPhone or Android smartphones
- Willing to carry the smart phone during the study period and to respond to daily texts or emails from the study team
- Registered for the study as a dyad (friend pairs), with one member of the dyad a Carnegie Mellon University student
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Contraindications for increased physical activity
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Social IncentiveReceiving half the monetary incentive conditional on meeting a step goal and half the monetary incentive conditional on walking together | Behavioural | Social Incentive |
| Standard IncentiveReceiving the full monetary incentive conditional on meeting a step goal and not conditional on walking together | Behavioural | Regular incentive |
Primary outcome
Change in Mean Daily Steps Walked From Baseline Period (Week 1) to Intervention Period (Weeks 2 and 3)
Time frame: week 2-3
Change in mean daily steps walked from baseline (week 1) to intervention period (weeks 2 and 3), as recorded on the FitBit app
Change in Mean Daily Steps Walked From Baseline Period (Week 1) to Follow-up Period (Weeks 4-5)
Time frame: week 4-5
Change in mean daily steps walked from baseline to follow-up period, as recorded on the FitBit app
Mean Number of Days Met Daily Step Goal During Intervention Period (Weeks 2-3) Minus Mean Number of Days Met Same Level of Walking in Baseline Period (Week 1)
Time frame: week 2-3
Mean number of days when an individual's number of steps walked was at or above daily goal during the intervention period (weeks 2 \& 3) minus the mean number of days the individual's number of step's walking was at or above that same level during the baseline period (week 1)
Mean Number of Days Met Daily Step Goal During Follow-up Period (Weeks 4-5) Minus Mean Number of Days Met Same Level of Walking in Baseline Period (Week 1)
Time frame: week 4-5
Mean number of days when an individual's number of steps walked was at or above daily goal during the follow-up period (weeks 4 \& 5) minus the mean number of days the individual's number of step's walking was at or above that same level during the baseline period (week 1)
Change in Score on University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Loneliness Scale (Survey Measure)
Time frame: week 5
20-item scale measuring subjective feelings of loneliness and social isolation. Minimum score = 0; maximum score = 60; higher scores indicate more loneliness. We computed the difference in score from baseline (beginning of week 1) to end of study (end of week 5).
4 secondary outcomes
Fraction of Days Participant Walked Together With Partner (Self Report) During Intervention Period (Weeks 2-3)
Time frame: week 2-3
Fraction of Days Participant Walked Together With Partner (Self Report) During Follow-up Period (Weeks 4-5)
Time frame: week 4-5
Proportion of Days Participant Walked Together With Partner (Coded)
Time frame: week 2-3
Proportion of Days Participant Walked Together With Partner (Coded)
Time frame: week 4-5
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Mar 2024.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Only de-identified data will be shared
Related trials for Activity, Motor
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
A Study of Sonrotoclax (BGB-11417) in Children With Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia and B-cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
Relapsed Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Not yet recruiting
Virtual Reality to Advance Dementia Care and Quality of Life
Dementia, Agitation
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
A Pilot Study to Investigate the Safety and Clinical Activity of Avelumab (MSB0010718C) in Thymoma and Thymic Carcinoma After Progression on Platinum-Based Chemotherapy
Thymoma, Thymic Carcinoma
RecruitingPhase 1
Imatinib to Increase RUNX1 Activity in Participants With Germline RUNX1 Deficiency
Inherited Bone Marrow Failure Syndrome, Familial Platelet Disorder With Predisposition to Myeloid Malignancies
RecruitingPhase 1/2
A Study to Evaluate the Effect of GDC-4198 Alone and in Combination With Giredestrant Versus Abemaciclib and Giredestrant in Participants With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Estrogen Receptor-Positive (ER+), Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Negative (HER2-) Breast Cancer
Breast Cancer
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
GRETCHEN B CHAPMAN, PhD principal investigator
Carnegie Mellon University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Social Incentive and Standard Incentive in people with Activity, Motor and Social Isolation, run by Carnegie Mellon University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Mar 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 22 Nov 2021). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Mean Daily Steps Walked From Baseline Period (Week 1) to Intervention Period (Weeks 2 and 3) (time frame: week 2-3). The study lists 5 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 Mar 2024.