Social Bonds and Exercise: Evidence for a Reciprocal Relationship (Study 1)

Included here are data from Study 1 of a research article submitted to PLOS One for publication. The title of the article is: "Social Bonds and Exercise: Evidence for a Reciprocal Relationship" and the authors are Arran Davis, Jacob Taylor, and Emma Cohen. <strong>Abstract:</strong> In two experimental studies, we investigated mechanisms hypothesized to underpin two pervasive and interrelated phenomena: that certain forms of group movement and exercise lead to social bonding and that social bonding can lead to enhanced exercise performance. In Study 1 we manipulated synchrony and exercise intensity among rowers and found that, compared with low-intensity exercise, moderate-intensity exercise led to significantly higher levels of cooperation in an economic game; no effect of synchrony vs. non-synchrony was found. In Study 2, an elite, highly bonded team of rugby players participated in solo, synchronized and non-synchronized warm-up sessions; participants' anaerobic performance significantly improved after the brief synchronous warm-up relative to a non-synchronous warm-up. The findings substantiate claims concerning the reciprocal links between group exercise and social bonding, and may help to explain the ubiquity of collective physical activity across cultural domains as varied as play, ritual, sport, and dance. Please see research article for a description of the methods used in Study 1. <strong>Data Labels – Study 1:</strong> <strong>*Participant #</strong>: The number assigned to each participant for consent forms, bookkeeping, analysis, etc. (*n.b., participants 51-53 should be excluded from data analysis as they did not follow the experimental procedure). <strong>Group:</strong> This is the experimental trial or group with which each participant did the study. Some groups have 2 participants and some have 3, depending on whether there was a cancelation and a confederate was used to fill in. <strong>Intensity:</strong> 0 represents low intensity rowing and 1 represents high intensity rowing. <strong>Synchrony:</strong> 0 represents asynchronous rowing and 1 represents synchronous rowing. <strong>Condition:</strong> This is the participant’s experimental condition. 1 represents asynchronous, low intensity rowing. 2 represents synchronous, low intensity rowing. 3 represents asynchronous, high intensity rowing. 4 represents synchronous, high intensity rowing. <strong>Group Fund Contribution:</strong> this is how much in GBP that the participant donated to the group fund in the public goods game (from £0-£5). <strong>IOS:</strong> this is the participant’s score on the modified Inclusion of the Other in the Self Scale (from 1-7, with 7 representing the highest interdependent self-construal). <strong>PWB:</strong> this is the participant’s score on the “psychological well-being” component of the Subjective Exercise Experience Scale. <strong>PD:</strong> this is the participant’s score on the “psychological distress” component of the Subjective Exercise Experience Scale. <strong>FAT:</strong> this is the participant’s score on the “fatigue” component of the Subjective Exercise Experience Scale. <strong>Cooperation:</strong> this is the participant’s answer to the question “How much did you and the other participants cooperate during the experiment?” on a 7-point Likert Scale (with 1 being “not at all”, 4 being “moderately”, and 7 being “very much so”). <strong>Similarity:</strong> this is the participant’s answer to the question “How similar are you to the other participants?” on a 7-point Likert Scale (with 1 being “not at all”, 4 being “moderately”, and 7 being “very much so”). <strong>Trust:</strong> this is the participant’s answer to the question “How much do you trust the other participants?” on a 7-point Likert Scale (with 1 being “not at all”, 4 being “moderately”, and 7 being “very much so” – see attached post-experiment questionnaire). <strong>Like:</strong> this is the participant’s answer to the question “How much do you like the other participants?” on a 7-point Likert Scale (with 1 being “not at all”, 4 being “moderately”, and 7 being “very much so” – see attached post-experiment questionnaire). <strong>Same Team:</strong> this is the participant’s answer to the question “How much do you feel that you and the other participants were on the same team?” on a 7-point Likert Scale (with 1 being “not at all”, 4 being “moderately”, and 7 being “very much so”). <strong>Difficulty:</strong> this is the participant’s answer to the question “How difficult was the rowing trial?” on a 7-point Likert Scale (with 1 being “not at all”, 4 being “moderately”, and 7 being “very much so”). <strong>Know:</strong> this is the participant’s answer to the question “How much do you know the other participants? (Please make a circle for each of the other two participants – you can circle the same number twice).” on a 7-point Likert Scale (with 1 being “not at all”, 4 being “moderately”, and 7 being “very much so”). <strong>Pain - Pre:</strong> this is participant’s pre-experiment pain threshold measured in mmGH (see research article). <strong>Pain - Post:</strong> this is participant’s post-experiment pain threshold measured in mmGH (see research article). <strong>Location:</strong> this is the location in the gym at which the experiment took place where participants’ pain thresholds were measured, where they played the public goods game, filled out the Subjective Exercise Experience Scale, and answered the questions described above. <strong>Heart BPM:</strong> this is the participant’s average heart rate in beats per minute (BPM) during the rowing portion of the experiment. <strong>Experimenter:</strong> this is the experimenter that measured the participant’s pain thresholds and gave them the public goods game, Subjective Exercise Experience Scale, and post-experiment questionnaire. <strong>Date:</strong><strong></strong> this is the date on which the experiment took place. <strong>Amount paid:</strong> this is how much the participant earned in GBP for participating in the experiment. This amount is dependent on the results of the public goods game. <strong>Confederate:</strong> this is whether or not a confederate was used. This was done when a participant did not show up for the experiment and an extra rower was needed. 0 represents trials in which the confederate was not used, 1 represents trials in which the confederate was used. <strong>Pain - Change:</strong> this is the difference in participant’s pre-experiment and post-experiment pain threshold measured in mmHG (see research article). <strong>Sex:</strong> this is the participant’s sex - 0 represents female and 1 represents male. <strong>Mixed Group:</strong> this is whether the group in which the participants rowed with was same sex or mixed sex – 0 represents same sex groups (all male or all female) and 1 represents mixed sex groups. <strong>Bondedness Factor Score:</strong> a principal components analysis (PCA) was conducted on the IOS scale and the questions from the post-experiment questionnaire on similarity, trust, cooperation, team work and how much participants liked each other (see research article) due to the potential that they could represent a single underlying construct related to bondedness. Indeed, the PCA revealed that one factor should be extracted from these questions. It was theorized that this factor represents a single underlying construct related to bondedness. The number in this column is the participant’s score on this factor, with larger numbers representing higher perceived bondedness with the other group members in the participant’s trial. <strong>Cooperation level:</strong> as is explained in the research article, participant group fund contributions in the public goods games were binned into ‘low cooperation’ (£0 - £1.67), ‘medium cooperation’ (£1.68 - £3.33), and ‘high cooperation’ (£3.34 - £5) categories. 1 represents low cooperation, 2 represents medium cooperation, and 3 represent high cooperation.

本数据集收录了一篇投稿至《公共科学图书馆·综合》（PLOS One）的研究论文的第一项研究数据。该论文标题为《社会联结与运动：双向关系的证据》，作者为Arran Davis、Jacob Taylor与Emma Cohen。
<strong>摘要：</strong>本研究通过两项实验，探究了两种普遍且相互关联的现象背后的潜在机制：特定形式的集体运动与锻炼可促进社会联结，而社会联结亦能提升运动表现。在第一项研究中，我们对划船参与者的运动同步性与运动强度进行操控，结果发现，相较于低强度运动，中等强度运动可使参与者在经济博弈中的合作水平显著提升，但同步性与非同步性之间未发现显著差异。在第二项研究中，一支精英且高社会联结的橄榄球队参与了单人、同步与非同步热身训练；相较于非同步热身，短暂的同步热身可显著提升参与者的无氧运动表现。本研究结果证实了集体运动与社会联结间存在双向关联的论断，或可解释从游戏、仪式、体育到舞蹈等多元文化领域中集体体育活动的普遍性。有关第一项研究的实验方法细节，请参阅原研究论文。
<strong>研究1数据标签：</strong>
<strong>*参与者编号：</strong>为便于知情同意书管理、数据记录与分析等流程而为每位参与者分配的编号。（*注：参与者51-53未遵循实验流程，应从数据分析中排除。）
<strong>组别：</strong>代表每位参与者参与实验的实验试次或小组。部分小组包含2名参与者，部分包含3名，这取决于是否有参与者取消实验并需要使用实验同盟者补位。
<strong>强度：</strong>0代表低强度划船，1代表高强度划船。
<strong>同步性：</strong>0代表非同步划船，1代表同步划船。
<strong>实验条件：</strong>代表参与者的实验分组：1为非同步低强度划船组，2为同步低强度划船组，3为非同步高强度划船组，4为同步高强度划船组。
<strong>集体基金捐赠额：</strong>指参与者在公共品博弈中向集体基金捐赠的英镑金额（范围为0至5英镑）。
<strong>IOS量表得分：</strong>指参与者在修订版自我包含他人量表（Inclusion of the Other in the Self Scale）上的得分（范围为1至7分，7分代表最高水平的互依型自我建构）。
<strong>PWB：</strong>指参与者在主观运动体验量表（Subjective Exercise Experience Scale）中“心理幸福感”维度的得分。
<strong>PD：</strong>指参与者在主观运动体验量表中“心理痛苦”维度的得分。
<strong>FAT：</strong>指参与者在主观运动体验量表中“疲劳感”维度的得分。
<strong>合作程度：</strong>指参与者对“你与其他参与者在实验中的合作程度如何？”这一问题的作答，采用7点李克特量表（1代表“完全没有”，4代表“中等程度”，7代表“非常高”）。
<strong>相似程度：</strong>指参与者对“你与其他参与者的相似程度如何？”这一问题的作答，采用7点李克特量表（1代表“完全没有”，4代表“中等程度”，7代表“非常高”）。
<strong>信任程度：</strong>指参与者对“你对其他参与者的信任程度如何？”这一问题的作答，采用7点李克特量表（1代表“完全没有”，4代表“中等程度”，7代表“非常高”——详见附件后的实验后问卷）。
<strong>喜爱程度：</strong>指参与者对“你对其他参与者的喜爱程度如何？”这一问题的作答，采用7点李克特量表（1代表“完全没有”，4代表“中等程度”，7代表“非常高”——详见附件后的实验后问卷）。
<strong>同队归属感：</strong>指参与者对“你认为自己与其他参与者是否属于同一团队？”这一问题的作答，采用7点李克特量表（1代表“完全没有”，4代表“中等程度”，7代表“非常高”）。
<strong>任务难度：</strong>指参与者对“本次划船试次的难度如何？”这一问题的作答，采用7点李克特量表（1代表“完全不难”，4代表“中等难度”，7代表“非常困难”）。
<strong>熟悉程度：</strong>指参与者对“你对其他参与者的熟悉程度如何？（请为另外两名参与者各圈选一个数值，可重复圈选同一数值）”这一问题的作答，采用7点李克特量表（1代表“完全不熟悉”，4代表“中等熟悉”，7代表“非常熟悉”）。
<strong>疼痛阈值（实验前）：</strong>指参与者实验前的疼痛阈值，单位为mmGH（详见原研究论文）。
<strong>疼痛阈值（实验后）：</strong>指参与者实验后的疼痛阈值，单位为mmGH（详见原研究论文）。
<strong>测量地点：</strong>指实验中参与者进行疼痛阈值测量、公共品博弈、填写主观运动体验量表以及作答上述问卷问题的健身房具体位置。
<strong>平均心率：</strong>指参与者在实验划船阶段的平均心率，单位为次/分钟（BPM）。
<strong>实验主试：</strong>指负责测量参与者疼痛阈值、发放公共品博弈问卷、主观运动体验量表以及实验后问卷的主试人员。
<strong>实验日期：</strong>指实验开展的日期。
<strong>参与报酬：</strong>指参与者参与本次实验所获得的英镑报酬金额，该金额取决于公共品博弈的实验结果。
<strong>实验同盟者使用情况：</strong>指是否使用了实验同盟者。当有参与者未能按时参与实验且需要额外划船参与者补位时，会使用实验同盟者。0代表未使用实验同盟者的试次，1代表使用了实验同盟者的试次。
<strong>疼痛阈值变化量：</strong>指参与者实验前后疼痛阈值的差值，单位为mmHG（详见原研究论文）。
<strong>性别：</strong>指参与者的性别，0代表女性，1代表男性。
<strong>混合性别组别：</strong>指参与者所在划船小组是否为混合性别组别：0代表同性别小组（全男性或全女性），1代表混合性别小组。
<strong>社会联结因子得分：</strong>由于IOS量表与实验后问卷中关于相似性、信任度、合作度、团队归属感以及同伴喜爱度的问题可能共同反映社会联结这一潜在构念，因此我们对上述变量进行了主成分分析（PCA）。分析结果显示，可提取出一个单一因子，该因子被理论化为反映社会联结的潜在构念。本列中的数值即为参与者在该因子上的得分，得分越高代表参与者所在小组中其感知到的与其他组员的社会联结程度越高。
<strong>合作水平：</strong>如原研究论文所述，公共品博弈中的集体基金捐赠额被划分为“低合作”（0至1.67英镑）、“中合作”（1.68至3.33英镑）与“高合作”（3.34至5英镑）三个类别。1代表低合作水平，2代表中合作水平，3代表高合作水平。