INHE 1003 Week 3 Article Summary Example

Introduction to Psychology Walden University Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

This INHE 1003 Week 3 article summary example reports on Rhodes and Courneya's study of the theory of planned behavior in exercise, under four plain headings. Purpose comes first in two sentences: how best to measure attitude, perceived social pressure and perceived control, the three predictors in Ajzen's theory, when predicting intention to be active. Method follows as design, participants and measures, naming the 300 undergraduates and 272 cancer survivors and the self-report questionnaires. Findings report associations in the verbs the authors used, and none is upgraded to cause: a general norm factor and a specific self-efficacy component predicted intention best. Walden INHE 1003, Introduction to Psychology, teaches BS in Integrative Health students that limits deserve the longest paragraph, and this one covers correlation, self-report and the two specific samples.

CourseINHE 1003 Introduction to Psychology
WeekWeek 3
Paper typeArticle summary
LengthAbout 540 words, 4 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolWalden University
ProgramBS in Integrative Health
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for INHE 1003 Week 3

1

Attitudes, Norms and Perceived Control Behind Exercise Intentions: An Article Summary of Rhodes and Courneya's Test of the Theory of Planned Behavior in Undergraduates and Cancer Survivors, Reporting Findings in the Authors' Own Verbs and Giving Its Limits the Longest Paragraph

Student Name

Walden University

INHE 1003: Introduction to Psychology

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title names the study and the two disciplines the summary keeps: the authors' verbs and a full account of limits.
2

Attitudes, Norms and Perceived Control Behind Exercise Intentions: An Article Summary of Rhodes and Courneya's Test of the Theory of Planned Behavior in Undergraduates and Cancer Survivors, Reporting Findings in the Authors' Own Verbs and Giving Its Limits the Longest Paragraph

Purpose

Rhodes and Courneya (2003) asked how best to measure the three predictors that the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1991) uses to forecast exercise: how favorably a person views the behavior, the social pressure they sense and their sense of being able to carry it out. Specifically, they asked whether each predictor works better as one general factor or as two separate parts, such as the feelings and the practical judgments that make up an attitude.

What this page is doingThe purpose is stated in two sentences, so the reader knows what question the study asked before reading what it found.
3

Method

The design was survey-based, with exercise behavior measured by self-report. Participants were two groups: 300 undergraduates, with an average age of 20, and 272 cancer survivors, with an average age of 61. Measures were questionnaires assessing each part of the three predictors, intention to exercise and self-reported exercise. The authors compared statistical models that treated each predictor either as a general factor or as separate parts.

Findings

The authors reported that a general subjective norm factor predicted intention better than separate measures of what others expect and what others do. For perceived behavioral control, a specific self-efficacy component, confidence in one's ability to exercise, predicted intention better than controllability or a general factor, in both groups. For attitude, the best way of modeling it differed between the undergraduates and the cancer survivors. The authors described these as results about how the predictors are best conceptualized; they did not claim that the predictors cause exercise.

Limits

Several limits shape what the study can show. First, it is correlational: it shows which measures were associated with intention and behavior, not that changing a person's attitude or confidence would change how much they exercise. Second, exercise was self-reported, and people often overstate how active they are. Third, the two samples were specific, students and cancer survivors, so the findings may not describe other groups, such as older adults without cancer or people in physically demanding jobs. Fourth, the study compared ways of measuring the theory's predictors; it does not settle whether the theory itself is the best explanation of exercise. Finally, the finding that the best attitude model differed between groups suggests that conclusions from one population should be applied to another with care.

What this page is doingThe limits paragraph is the longest, because it tells the reader which claims the study can and cannot support.
4

How the Findings Were Reported

The summary keeps the authors' own verbs: the predictors "predicted" intention in statistical models, which means they accounted for differences in intention between people. That is weaker than saying the predictors caused intention, and the summary avoids upgrading it. Reporting a study in its own terms is part of reading it accurately, especially when a finding sounds like advice.

Why It Matters for This Course

The study shows that a theory's predictors can be measured more than one way, and that the choice affects what the theory appears to explain. For an integrative health student, its most practical finding is the importance of confidence in one's ability to exercise, which links the theory of planned behavior to self-efficacy, a concept the course textbook treats separately and the course takes up later (Spielman et al., 2020).

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Rhodes, R. E., & Courneya, K. S. (2003). Investigating multiple components of attitude, subjective norm, and perceived control: An examination of the theory of planned behaviour in the exercise domain. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42(1), 129-146. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466603763276162

Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/details/books/psychology-2e

Reading the INHE 1003 Week 3 instructions

Week 3 asks for a summary of one research article in about five hundred words under four headings: purpose, method, findings and limits. State the study's purpose in two sentences. Describe the method as design, participants and measures, naming the sample. Report the findings using the authors' own verbs, without upgrading associations into causes. Give the limits the longest paragraph, explaining which claims the study can and cannot support and why. Add a short note on why the study matters for the course. Cite the article in the course's citation style, along with any theory it tests. Write in your own words; avoid quoting the abstract.

How this INHE 1003 Week 3 example is built

The summary's purpose section names the three predictors and the study's question about measuring them as one factor or two parts. The method section describes survey measures, self-reported exercise and two samples, students and cancer survivors. The findings section reports, in the authors' terms, that a general subjective norm factor and a specific self-efficacy component predicted intention best, and that the best attitude model differed between groups. The limits section, the longest, covers correlation, self-report, the specific samples, the focus on measurement rather than theory and the risk of applying findings across groups. A section on reporting verbs and a note on self-efficacy close it. Every sentence about results uses the authors' own verbs.

Reading the INHE 1003 Week 3 rubric

Faithful reporting of findings counts most here. Readers check that associations are reported as associations, in the authors' terms, and that no claim of cause appears. The limits paragraph is weighed heavily, since it shows whether the writer understands what the design can support. Method should be described precisely, including the sample. A summary written in the writer's own words earns credit; one that paraphrases the abstract closely earns less. The purpose should be clear and brief. Summaries that report findings as proof, omit limits, misdescribe the sample or quote heavily from the article fall into the middle band. Accurate numbers for the sample also matter, since they tell readers how far the findings can travel.

Common INHE 1003 Week 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them

Go through the article two times: first for its overall argument, then for the method and results in detail. Write the purpose in two sentences without looking at the abstract. List the design, who took part and what was measured. When you report findings, copy the authors' verbs, such as predicted or was associated with, and avoid words like caused or proved. Then list every reason the findings might not apply more widely; that becomes your limits paragraph. Keep to about five hundred words. Check your draft for the word cause and replace it unless the study was an experiment that tested cause. A tutor can check that your verbs match the authors', and the exercise study summary above shows the four headings.

Get a INHE 1003 Week 3 example written to your instructions

Because a summary is only useful about the study you were assigned, attach that article or its full reference together with the instructions and rubric. The finished summary arrives in 24 to 48 hours, free as a first sample. Summarizing a different study would show the headings and miss the accuracy that carries the grade.

Request this week free All INHE 1003 weeks Finished samples

More INHE 1003 papers and BS in Integrative Health samples

INHE 1003 Week 3 questions, answered

Where can I find a free INHE 1003 Week 3 sample paper?

The theory of planned behavior article summary is reproduced above.

What did the study in the INHE 1003 Week 3 sample examine?

How best to measure the predictors of exercise intention in the theory of planned behavior.

Who took part?

300 undergraduates and 272 cancer survivors.

What predicted intention best?

A general subjective norm factor and a specific self-efficacy component.

Why are the limits the longest section?

They show which claims a correlational, self-report study can and cannot support.