The Effects of Calisthenics Versus Conventional Resistance Training on Exercise Adherence Motivation in Women

Pour Hemmat, Behnaz; Serjuei, Zahra

doi:10.22089/mbj.2026.18453.2232

The Effects of Calisthenics Versus Conventional Resistance Training on Exercise Adherence Motivation in Women

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Behnaz Pour Hemmat

Zahra Serjuei

Department of Motor Behaviour and Sport Psychology, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.22089/mbj.2026.18453.2232

Abstract

Extended Abstract
Background and Purpose
Physical activity and regular exercise are among the most effective components of a healthy lifestyle, contributing significantly to both physical and psychological well-being. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that adults engage in at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity activity per week to reap health benefits. Despite these benefits, sedentary behavior remains a major public health concern, particularly among women, who face cultural, social, and logistical barriers that limit their participation in exercise. In Iran, women encounter additional challenges due to cultural and social norms, limited dedicated spaces, and family obligations. Motivation plays a critical role in sustaining engagement in physical activity, with intrinsic motivation being especially important for long-term adherence. According to Self-Determination Theory (SDT), fulfilling the basic psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness enhances autonomous motivation and promotes consistent exercise behavior. Exercise programs that are varied, challenging, and enjoyable are more likely to foster intrinsic motivation and adherence. Among these, calisthenics, which utilizes bodyweight movements, and conventional resistance training have shown potential to improve physical fitness and enhance motivation. This study aimed to compare the effects of calisthenics and conventional resistance training on sports participation motivation and its dimensions among overweight middle-aged women.
Methods
A quasi-experimental study with a pre-test–post-test design and two intervention groups was conducted to examine the effects of calisthenics and conventional resistance training on motivation and exercise adherence in overweight middle-aged women. The study population consisted of women aged 30–40 years with a body mass index (BMI) between 25 and 30, who regularly attended sports clubs in Isfahan in 2024 (1403). Sixty participants were purposefully recruited based on their willingness to participate and were randomly assigned to either the calisthenics group (n = 30) or the conventional resistance training group (n = 30). Eligibility criteria included general good health, no history of cardiovascular or musculoskeletal disorders, and no regular engagement in resistance training over the past six months. Participants with more than three absences during the intervention were excluded.
Both groups completed an eight-week exercise program comprising three 75-minute sessions per week. Each session included a 10–15-minute warm-up, 45–50 minutes of main exercise, and 5–10 minutes of cool-down. Calisthenics sessions involved bodyweight exercises such as push-ups, squats, lunges, planks, pull-ups, and dips. Exercise intensity was controlled at 55–70% of heart rate reserve (HRR, based on the Karvonen formula), with progressive overload applied approximately every two weeks (5% increase) to ensure continual adaptation. The resistance training group performed structured exercises using free weights and resistance machines, targeting major muscle groups including chest, back, arms, and legs, with intensity matched to the calisthenics group (55–70% of 1RM or target repetitions). All sessions were supervised by the researcher and a specialist coach with a master's degree and over five years of experience.
Motivation was assessed using the validated Iranian version of the Sports Participation Motivation Questionnaire (PMQ), comprising 30 items and 8 subdimensions related to intrinsic and extrinsic factors, with Cronbach's alpha reliability ranging from 0.78 to 0.86. Anthropometric measures, including height (using SECA stadiometer, 0.1 cm precision), weight (using SECA scale, 0.1 kg precision), and BMI, were recorded using standardized procedures. Pre-test measurements were taken before the intervention, and post-test assessments were conducted immediately after the eight-week program. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics to summarize participant characteristics, paired t-tests for within-group comparisons, Kolmogorov–Smirnov for normality, and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with pre-test as covariate, checking assumptions of homogeneity of slopes and variances to examine between-group differences. Bonferroni post hoc tests were used for adjusted mean comparisons. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05, and effect sizes (partial eta squared, η²) were calculated to determine the magnitude of observed differences. All analyses were performed using SPSS version 26.
Results
Both intervention groups exhibited significant improvements in overall sports participation motivation as well as across all subdimensions following the eight-week intervention (p < 0.001). In the calisthenics group, the mean motivation score increased from 52.10 ± 6.85 at pre-test to 76.66 ± 6.25 at post-test (t (29) = -34.10, p < 0.001). In the resistance training group, the mean motivation score increased from 52.13 ± 7.38 to 68.43 ± 7.95 (t (29) = -34.49, p < 0.001). Paired t-tests indicated statistically significant within-group improvements in all subdimensions, including achievement (calisthenics: t = -11.36; resistance: t = -11.93), group orientation (calisthenics: t = -11.35; resistance: t = -16.90), readiness (calisthenics: t = -11.42; resistance: t = -4.22), energy release (calisthenics: t = -21.91; resistance: t = -18.49), situational factors (calisthenics: t = -12.24; resistance: t = -6.43), skill improvement (calisthenics: t = -33.65; resistance: t = -10.49), friendship (calisthenics: t = -15.12; resistance: t = -12.28), and recreation (calisthenics: t = -35.32; resistance: t = -11.61) (all p < 0.001). These results demonstrate that both types of training effectively enhanced motivational outcomes, with calisthenics producing more pronounced gains.
Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) controlling for pre-test scores revealed that post-test motivation was significantly higher in the calisthenics group compared to the resistance training group (F (1,56) = 48.205, p < 0.001, η² = 0.491, power = 1.000). Adjusted mean difference: calisthenics 75.97 vs. resistance 69.13 (p < 0.001). Effect size estimates indicated that calisthenics improved overall motivation by approximately 49% more than conventional resistance training. Subdimension effect sizes favored calisthenics as follows: achievement (F = 6.120, p = 0.017, η² = 0.109, power = 0.679), group orientation (F = 2.473, p = 0.047, η² = 0.047, power = 0.338), readiness (F = 8.648, p = 0.005, η² = 0.147, power = 0.822), energy release (F = 4.921, p = 0.031, η² = 0.090, power = 0.585), situational factors (F = 4.692, p = 0.035, η² = 0.086, power = 0.565), skill improvement (F = 19.780, p = 0.001, η² = 0.283, power = 0.992), friendship (F = 10.980, p = 0.002, η² = 0.180, power = 0.901), and recreation (F = 5.066, p = 0.029, η² = 0.092, power = 0.598). Bonferroni post hoc analysis confirmed that all adjusted mean differences between groups were statistically significant (p < 0.05). Table 1 provides a detailed summary of pre- and post-test scores for both intervention groups. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the line chart comparisons of pre- and post-test motivation scores for the calisthenics and resistance training groups, respectively, showing a steeper upward trajectory for the calisthenics group across all subdimensions.
Overall, the results indicate that while both calisthenics and conventional resistance training significantly increase sports participation motivation, calisthenics offers greater improvements across all measured dimensions with adequate statistical power. These outcomes suggest that the dynamic, bodyweight-based, and group-oriented nature of calisthenics may contribute to more substantial gains in intrinsic motivation and adherence potential. Such evidence supports the implementation of calisthenics-based interventions in programs targeting overweight middle-aged women, particularly when the aim is to maximize sustained engagement in physical activity.

Table 1. Pre- and post-test motivation scores

Variable

Calisthenics Pre-test

Calisthenics Post-test

Resistance Training Pre-test

Resistance Training Post-test

Motivation

52.10 ± 6.85

76.66 ± 6.25

52.13 ± 7.38

68.43 ± 7.95

Achievement

10.36 ± 2.47

14.10 ± 2.78

9.83 ± 2.85

12.13 ± 2.59

Group orientation

4.50 ± 1.07

7.26 ± 1.53

5.23 ± 1.43

6.90 ± 1.34

Readiness

5.80 ± 1.44

8.63 ± 0.92

6.10 ± 1.15

7.40 ± 1.90

Energy release

9.33 ± 1.49

12.50 ± 1.54

9.10 ± 1.74

11.70 ± 2.00

Situational factors

5.30 ± 1.20

7.90 ± 0.95

6.00 ± 1.17

7.40 ± 1.22

Skill improvement

5.63 ± 0.76

8.46 ± 0.86

4.83 ± 1.23

7.06 ± 1.33

Friendship

5.83 ± 1.48

9.36 ± 1.63

5.40 ± 1.45

7.80 ± 1.24

Recreation

5.33 ± 0.84

8.43 ± 0.77

5.63 ± 1.21

8.03 ± 1.06

Conclusion
This study demonstrated that both calisthenics and conventional resistance training significantly enhance sports participation motivation among overweight middle-aged women (p < 0.001). Notably, calisthenics led to greater improvements across all motivation subdimensions (ANCOVA: F up to 48.205, p < 0.001, η² up to 0.491), likely due to its intrinsic characteristics, including bodyweight-based movements, dynamic exercise variety, group-oriented sessions, and progressive challenges. These features effectively satisfy the psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness, thereby fostering intrinsic motivation and promoting sustained exercise adherence. The findings highlight calisthenics as a practical, low-cost, and engaging intervention for female exercisers seeking to improve both physical fitness and long-term participation. Incorporating diverse, socially interactive, and adaptable programs into training regimes can further enhance motivation, reduce common participation barriers, and support overall well-being. Future research should explore long-term effects, hybrid training approaches, and qualitative experiences to deepen understanding of motivational mechanisms, providing more comprehensive guidance for designing effective exercise programs tailored to women's needs.
Article Message
This study demonstrates that calisthenics training is significantly more effective than conventional resistance training in enhancing exercise motivation and adherence among overweight middle-aged women. The bodyweight-based, varied, and socially interactive nature of calisthenics better satisfies fundamental psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness, leading to stronger intrinsic motivation. These findings support implementing calisthenics as a practical, cost-effective strategy to promote long-term physical activity participation in women, addressing key barriers to exercise adherence. Fitness professionals should consider incorporating calisthenics into women's exercise programming to maximize sustained engagement and overall well-being.

Ethical Considerations
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch (Code: IR.IAU.KHUISF.REC.1403.356). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants. Data were anonymized and handled confidentially. Participants could withdraw at any time without penalty.
Authors' Contributions
Behnaz Pour Hemmat and Zahra Serjuei conceptualized the study. Data collection was conducted by both authors. Data analysis was performed by Behnaz Pour Hemmat and Zahra Serjuei. Manuscript drafting was carried out by both authors. Review and editing were undertaken by Behnaz Pour Hemmat and Zahra Serjuei. Literature review was conducted collaboratively. Project administration was led by Zahra Serjuei
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
We sincerely thank all participants and the sports facilities in Isfahan for their cooperation and support.

Keywords

Calisthenics

Resistance Training

Women

Motivation

Exercise Adherence

Subjects

1. Organization WH. Global action plan on physical activity 2018-2030: more active people for a healthier world: World Health Organization; 2019.

2. Ruivo R. Novo manual de avaliação e prescrição de exercício: Self; 2019.

3. Bicalho F, Leite L, Lavorato V. Fatores motivacionais para a prática de exercícios físicos em um studio de musculação e ginástica em Guiricema-MG. Ibero-American Journal of Health Science Research. 2025;5:2764–6165. https://doi.org/10.56183/iberojhr.v5i1.719

4. Perera M, Arambepola C, Gillison F, Peacock O, Thompson D. Perceived barriers and facilitators of physical activity in adults living in activity-friendly urban environments: a qualitative study in Sri Lanka. PloS one. 2022;17(6):e0268817. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268817

5. Teixeira PJ, Carraça EV, Markland D, Silva MN, Ryan RM. Exercise, physical activity, and self-determination theory: a systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2012;9(1):78. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-9-78

6. Naderian M, ZOU AV, Moshkelgosha E. Female's sport participation constraints and their relationship with motivation. 2009.

7. Weinberg RS, Gould D. Fundamentos da psicologia do esporte e do exercício: Artmed editora; 2016.

8. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology. 2000;25(1):54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020

9. Rodrigues F, Teixeira DS, Neiva HP, Cid L, Monteiro D. Understanding exercise adherence: The predictability of past experience and motivational determinants. Brain Sciences. 2020;10(2):98.

10. Teixeira DS, Marques M, Palmeira AL. Associations between affect, basic psychological needs and motivation in physical activity contexts: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología del ejercicio y el deporte. 2018;13(2):225–33.

11. Ntoumanis N, Ng JY, Prestwich A, Quested E, Hancox JE, Thøgersen-Ntoumani C, et al. A meta-analysis of self-determination theory-informed intervention studies in the health domain: effects on motivation, health behavior, physical, and psychological health. Health Psychology Review. 2021;15(2):214-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2020.1718529

12. Rodrigues F, Teixeira D, Macedo R, Neiva H, Cid L, Monteiro D. O papel do divertimento e das determinantes motivacionais na persistência da prática de exercício físico. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2021;26:5303–13. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-812320212611.3.01832020

13. Kekäläinen T, Kokko K, Tammelin T, Sipilä S, Walker S. Motivational characteristics and resistance training in older adults: A randomized controlled trial and 1‐year follow‐up. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports. 2018;28(11):2416–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.13236

14. Menezes APVN, Santana CLd, Oliveira CAd, Santos FAd, Silva JdJ, Souza JIdS. The relevance of physical activity and physical exercise in pandemic times: A look at health and quality of life. 2021. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i16.23907

15. Corrêa AG. A inclusão de alunos com deficiência nas aulas de educação física: um estudo de caso sobre o conhecimento e a prática dos educadores de um centro de ensino em período integral (CEPI) da cidade de São Luís de Montes Belos Goiás: Universidade Estadual de Goiás (Brazil); 2023.

16. Nogueira PM, de Carvalho GHF. Calistenia e qualidade de vida: uma revisão literária. Caderno Pedagógico. 2025;22(8):e16913–e. https://doi.org/10.54033/cadpedv22n8-026

17. Pulcinelli AJ, Oliveira IR. Efeito do exercício físico calistênico na função musculoesquelética de estudantes universitários. Brazilian Journal of Health Review. 2025;8(3):79524–e. https://doi.org/10.34119/bjhrv8n3-026

18. Brandino AVM, Oliveira VSd, Rocha ASC, Lima CRdS, Silva LSd. Promoção da Saúde Mental dos Universitários: em tempos de pandemia. 2021.

19. Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, Franklin BA, Lamonte MJ, Lee I-M, et al. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2011;43(7):1334–59. https://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0b013e318213fefb

20. Committee PAGA. Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report, 2008; US Department of Health and Human Services: Washington, DC, USA, 2008. A1–H14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2008.00136.x

21. Medicine ACoS. ACSM's guidelines for exercise testing and prescription: Lippincott williams & wilkins; 2013.

22. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2015.

23. Oliveira BR, Deslandes AC, Santos TM. Differences in exercise intensity seems to influence the affective responses in self-selected and imposed exercise: a meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology. 2015;6:1105. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01105

24. Ekkekakis P, Backhouse SH, Gray C, Lind E. Walking is popular among adults but is it pleasant? A framework for clarifying the link between walking and affect as illustrated in two studies. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2008;9(3):246–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.04.004

25. Williams DM, Dunsiger S, Ciccolo JT, Lewis BA, Albrecht AE, Marcus BH. Acute affective response to a moderate-intensity exercise stimulus predicts physical activity participation 6 and 12 months later. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2008;9(3):231–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2007.04.002.

26. Moradi J, Bahrami A, Amir D. Motivation for participation in sports based on athletes in team and individual sports. Physical Culture and Sport. 2020;85(1):14–21. https://doi.org/10.2478/pcssr-2020-0002

27. Florian B. Development of strength motor quality in 15-16 year old students using calisthenics exercises. https://doi.org/10.4316/SAM.2023.0203

28. Cigerci AE, Genc H. The effect of calisthenics exercises on body composition in soccer players. Prog Nutr. 2020;22(1):94–102. .https://DOI: 10.23751/pn.v22i1-S.9797

29. Bayrakdar A, Demirhan B, Zorba E. The effect of calisthenics exercises of performed on stable and unstable ground on body fat percentage and performance in swimmers. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 2019;8(3):2979–92. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.541847

30. Tsourlou T, Gerodimos V, Kellis E, Stavropoulos N, Kellis S. The effects of a calisthenics and a light strength training program on lower limb muscle strength and body composition in mature women. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2003;17(3):590–8. https://doi:10.1519/1533-4287(2003)017<0590:teoaca>2.0.co;2

31. Hall FC, Noonan RJ. A qualitative study of how and why gym-based resistance training may benefit women's mental health and wellbeing. Performance Enhancement & Health. 2023;11(3):100254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peh.2023.100254

32. Zhang S, Huang J, Wang H. Influencing factors of women’s sports participation based on self-determination theory: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychology Research and Behavior Management. 2024:2953–69. .https://doi:10.2147/PRBM.S465903

33. Amiryan M, Hejazi Dinan P, Rahimian Mashhadi M. The effects of gender and sport type on achievement motivation and fear of failure of elite athlete in team-sport and individual-sport. Sport Psychology Studies. 2018;7(25):131–48. https://doi:10.22089/spsyj.2018.4722.1505

34. Moradikamareh M, Hamidi M, Jalali Farahani M, Sadjadi SN. Designing a model of women’s sports participation motivation based on three-part pattern. Sport Physiology & Management Investigations. 2021;13(3):89–103.

35. Brennan RJ. Imposed versus affect-based resistance training intensities on adherence, session affect, session perceived exertion, and intrinsic motivation measures during a six-week program in novice female lifters 2017. 2017.

36. Martinez Kercher VM, Watkins JM, Goss JM, Phillips LA, Roy BA, Blades K, et al. Psychological needs, self-efficacy, motivation, and resistance training outcomes in a 16-week barbell training program for adults. Frontiers in Psychology. 2024;15:1439431. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1439431

37. Shaw I, Shaw BS. Hemodynamic changes in normotensive overweight and obese individuals following home-based calisthenics training. African Journal for Physical Health Education, Recreation and Dance. 2014;20(sup-2):82–90.

38. Alcaraz PE, Perez-Gomez J, Chavarrias M, Blazevich AJ. Similarity in adaptations to high-resistance circuit vs. traditional strength training in resistance-trained men. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2011;25(9):2519–27. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0b013e3182023a51

39. Gholami M, Salehi N. The effect of eight weeks of resistance training with dumbbell and theraband on the body composition and muscular strength in the middleaged obese women: a clinical trial. 2018. (in Persian).

40. Shafizadeh M. The study of validity and reliability in the Participation Motivation Questionnaire and task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire among the secondary and high school students of Tehran. Research on Sport Science. 2007;4(14):15-31. (in persian).

41. Thomas E, Bianco A, Mancuso EP, Patti A, Tabacchi G, Paoli A, et al. The effects of a calisthenics training intervention on posture, strength and body composition. Isokinetics and Exercise Science. 2017;25(3):215–22. https://doi.org/10.3233/IES-170

42. Guerra LA, Dos Santos LRA, Pereira PE, Lauria VT, De Lima C, Evangelista AL, et al. A low-cost and time-efficient calisthenics strength training program improves fitness performance of children. Journal of physical education and sport. 2019;19:58–62. https://DOI:10.7752/jpes.2019.s1009

43. Kotarsky CJ, Christensen BK, Miller JS, Hackney KJ. Effect of progressive calisthenic push-up training on muscle strength and thickness. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2018;32(3):651–9.

44. dos Santos AAP, Gomes WNP, da Silva Santos R, Landim LAdSR. Calistenia: uma revisão. Research, Society and Development. 2020;9(10):e9679109371–e. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v9i10.9371

45. de Souza Santos D, de Oliveira TE, Pereira CA, Evangelista AL, Sales D, Bocalini RLR, et al. Does a calisthenics-based exercise program applied in school improve morphofunctional parameters in youth? Journal of Exercise Physiology Online. 2015;18(6):52–61.

46. Sakinah MH, Abd Malek NF, Khan AKT, Ishak A, Hashim HA, Chee KC. The effect of 12-week calisthenics exercise on physical fitness among obese female students. Physical Education Theory and Methodology. 2022;22(3s):S45–S50. https://doi.org/10.17309/tmfv.2022.3s.06