ABSTRACT
Previous research documented that "extremely high prioritization" strategies that involved allocation of all resources for time or energy on pursuing goals related to leisure-time physical activity and none of available resources on competing behavioral goals were optimal in terms of yielding highest levels of participation in physical activities. This study examined whether a "marginally higher prioritization" strategy that involved an intention to invest large but slightly more resources on physical activity than competing behaviors was optimal. In addition, we examined whether linear and quadratic models supported different conclusions about optimal prioritizations strategies. Response surface analyses of a quadratic model revealed that marginally higher prioritization was the most effective strategy. In addition, a linear regression model led us to incorrectly reject a "simultaneous goal pursuit" strategy in favor of an extremely high prioritization strategy. Findings suggest that prioritization strategies that "garner" low opportunity costs are the most optimal.
