Assessing the Feasibility and Acceptability of a Social Identity Informed Virtual Running Group Program

Total number of individuals expressing interest in the program.

Participant enrolment will be assessed with the total number of participants enrolled in the study.

Participants' affective attitudes towards exercise will be assessed using four bipolar semantic differential adjectives (Conner et al., 2011) rated on a seven-point scale ranging from 1 to 7 (pleasant-unpleasant; enjoyable-unenjoyable; exciting-boring; satisfying-unsatisfying). The four items will be mean-scored (potential range 1-7), with higher scores reflecting higher positive affective attitudes towards exercise, and a more positive outcome.

One item, adapted from a pilot study conducted by Vincze et al. (2018), will be used to assess general satisfaction with the program. Participants (virtual running program only) will rate their satisfaction with the STRIDE program on a 5-point Likert-type scale anchored by 1 (Not at all satisfied) to 5 (Extremely satisfied). Higher scores will reflect greater program satisfaction and a more positive outcome.

The percentage of participants who adhere to the study.

Percentage of questionnaires completed.

Percentage of weekly Zoom meetings attended.

10 semi-structured interviews will be conducted with members of the intervention group to assess participants' experiences and satisfaction with the program, as well as their perceptions of social support, group identification, and exercise identity throughout the program.

Domain general well-being will be assessed using the 8-item Flourishing Scale from Diener et el., (2010). Participants will respond to the 8 flourishing items on a 7-point Likert-type scale anchored by 1 (Strongly disagree) to 7 (Strongly agree). The 8 items will be mean-scored (potential range 1-7), with higher scores indicating higher psychological flourishing and a more positive outcome.

Social support in the context of exercise will be assessed using a four-item social support scale (Gleibs et al., 2011; Haslam et al., 2005) adapted for the context of exercise participation. Participants will respond to the 4 social support items on a 5-point Likert-type scale anchored by 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). The 4 items will be mean-scored (potential range 1-5), with higher scores reflecting greater perceived social support from others in the context of exercise and a more positive outcome.

Participants will complete the six-item (Bostic et al., 2000) Subjective Vitality Scale (SVS; Ryan & Frederick, 1997) adapted for the context of exercise behaviour. Participants will respond to the 6 exercise-related subjective vitality items on a 7-point Likert-type scale anchored by 1 (Not at All True) to 7 (Very True). The 6 items will be mean-scored (potential range 1-7), with higher scores reflecting greater subjective experiences of vitality in the context of exercise and a more positive outcome.

Participants will complete the nine-item Exercise Identity Scale (Anderson & Cychosz, 1994). Participants will respond to the 9 exercise identity items on a 7-point Likert-type scale anchored by 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree). Consistent with Wilson and Muon (2008), two separate scores will be calculated to reflect the role-identity dimension and the exercise beliefs dimension of the scale. Items 1, 2, and 6 will be mean-scored (potential range 1-7), with higher score reflecting a greater role identity in relation to exercise behaviour, and items 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 9 will be mean-scored (potential range 1-7), with higher scores reflecting greater exercise-related beliefs and a more positive outcome.

Using a four-item social identification scale (Doosje et al., 1995), participants in the intervention condition will respond to four items inquiring the degree to which they positively identify with their running group. Participants will respond to the 4 social identification items using a 7-point Likert-type scale anchored by 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree). The 4 items will be mean-scored (potential range 1-7), with higher scores reflecting stronger positive identification with the running group and a more positive outcome.

In reference to the past month, participants will report the number of times per week (on average) they engaged in mild, moderate, and vigorous exercise using the Godin Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire (Godin & Shephard, 1985), and the average duration of mild, moderate, and vigorous exercise sessions (Courneya et al., 2004). Consistent with Courneya et al. (2004), the researchers will create an indicator of average weekly moderate-to-vigorous exercise minutes (in past month) for each participant using the following equation: (number of moderate exercise bouts x average minutes per bout) + (number of vigorous exercise bouts x average minutes per bout). The scores will have a minimum value of 0 minutes, with more minutes indicating greater participation in moderate-to-vigorous exercise and a more positive outcome.

Participants will log their daily exercise (type of activity) at the end of each week

Participants will log their daily exercise (duration of activity) at the end of each week

Items addressing sex/gender, age, ethnicity, height, weight, residence (City, Province), disability, marital status, swelling type, living situation (alone, others), undergraduate major