Unexcused absence from physical education in elementary school. On the role of autonomous motivation and body image factors

Physical education (PE) is an essential school subject due to its potential to promote well-being and health in all children. Yet, PE stands out among other subjects in terms of truancy. This study is one of the first to examine if unexcused absence from PE is associated with early adolescents' body image and autonomous motivation towards PE. A total of 526 Swedish 6th graders (Mage = 12.28, SD = 0.31) reported the frequency of unexcused absence from PE and answered questions about aesthetic and functional body image, social physique anxiety, and autonomous motivation. Findings showed that unexcused absence from PE was associated with less autonomous motivation and higher social physique anxiety. Participants who had never been absent reported higher functional body image investment and satisfaction. Analyses showed that whereas the aesthetic aspects of body image were associated with decreased autonomous motivation toward PE, functional aspects predicted higher autonomous motivation. The study sheds novel light on the links between absence from PE, body image, and autonomous motivation. As absence may have real-life practical effects for school achievement, health, and well-being, the findings demonstrate the importance of mitigating social physique anxiety and promoting an inclusive and body positive PE context early on. © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).


Introduction
Physical education (PE) is an essential school subject within contemporary society due to its potential to promote physical, psychological, and social well-being in children.Although PE is a mandatory school subject in many countries across the globe, the status of PE varies, and so does the allocated curriculum time and the teaching qualifications for PE teachers (Hardman (n.d.)).In Sweden, the cultural context for this study, PE is obligatory for all students from compulsory school to high school.The curriculum for compulsory school emphasizes the importance of positive experiences in PE for students' development of a healthy lifestyle across the life span (the Swedish National Agency for Education, 2022).
However, students' perceptions of PE are polarized.For some students, PE is one of the most enjoyable school subjects.At the same time, PE is also one of the most disliked subjects (Larsson, 2016), and many report having negative experiences of PE (Cairney et al., 2012;Taylor et al., 2014;Vasconcellos et al., 2020).PE also stands out among other school subjects in terms of absenteeism (Sälzer & Heine, 2016;Whitney & Liu, 2017), and truancy often seems to start with PE (Larsson, 2016).Among German 15-year-olds who participated in the international PISA study, about 15 % reported having skipped PE at least once (Sälzer & Heine, 2016).Fewer students, between 6 % and 7 %, had skipped the theoretically oriented subjects.Similar trends have been found in other countries, including the U.S., Norway, and Sweden (Lagestad, Welde, Rånes & Myhre, 2017; The Swedish Schools Inspectorate, 2018; Whitney & Liu, 2017).Despite the relatively high absenteeism levels for PE, which might have negative consequences in terms of both learning and current and future physical activity (Jaakkola et al., 2019;Ladwig et al., 2018;Telama, Yang, Viikari, Välimäki, Wanne & Raitakari, 2005; Yli-Piipari, Barkoukis, Jaakkola & Liukkonen, 2013), studies aiming to understand why some students choose to skip PE are sparse, particularly among younger students.
Setting the framework for the current study, we note that decreasing engagement in PE and increased absenteeism co-occur with developmental changes associated with adolescence, including pubertal development and changes in body image.Body image refers to cognitions, behaviors, and feelings relating to physical appearance and physical functioning (Grogan, 2007).One operationalization of the body image construct considers the value or saliency attributed to appearance/functioning (cognition), investment in appearance/ functioning (behavior), and satisfaction with appearance/ functioning (feelings) (Abbott & Barber, 2010;2011).Appearance investment may include always attempting to look good, whereas investment in the functional body image domain may include engaging in physical activity as often as possible.Appearance satisfaction includes the degree of satisfaction with one's body and appearance, whereas functional satisfaction includes being satisfied with physical abilities.In adolescence, the incorporation of a changing physical self into one's sense of identity and forming a positive body image are key developmental tasks, as implied by Erikson's (1968) idea of a (healthy) sense of identity as feeling at home in one's body (see also Nelson, Kling, Wängqvist, Frisén & Syed, 2018).However, in the transition between late childhood and early adolescence, many young people enter a period of increased preoccupation with appearance and body image concerns (e.g., body dissatisfaction and appearance anxiety) (Nelson et al., 2018).
Developmental changes in body image are moderated by gender, with studies consistently showing that early adolescent girls experience steeper decreases in body satisfaction and higher levels of body image concerns compared to boys (Frisén et al., 2015;Nelson et al., 2018).Studies also indicate that changes in body image are associated with pubertal timing.For girls, the pubertal increases in adipose tissue, muscle mass, and height run counter to the thin female body ideal, whereas significant increases in muscle mass and height move boys closer to male standards of the ideal body (Stice, 2003).Consequently, it has been argued that pubertal development may amplify body image differences between girls and boys, and that children who perceive themselves as being "out of sync" (p.63) compared with their peers (the so-called maturational deviance hypothesis, see e.g., Stice, 2003) are at greater risk of developing body image concerns (Skoog, 2023).
Studies seem to confirm this notion, and the evidence is especially strong for early maturing adolescents (Ullsperger & Nikolas, 2017), even though those who perceive themselves as being late in development relative to their peers have also been reported to be at greater risk of body image concerns (de Guzman & Nishina, 2014).Moreover, some studies have linked pubertal development to declining physical activity levels among both early maturing girls and boys (Davison, Werder, Trost, Baker & Birch, 2007;Finne, Bucksch, Lampert & Kolip, 2011), which in Davison et al.'s study was linked to girls' weight-and shape-related fears and low self-worth.This suggests that relative pubertal timing may be intertwined with body image in terms of fostering declined motivation toward physical activity (Davison et al., 2007;Finne et al., 2011).To the best of our knowledge, the question of whether pubertal timing and body image have an impact on early adolescents' proclivity to disengage from and motivation toward PE in school has not yet been examined.

Theoretical underpinnings -autonomous motivation, body image, and physical activity
Children's and adolescents' motivation to participate in PE has often been viewed through the lens of self-determination theory (SDT) (Ryan & Deci, 2000;2017;Ntoumanis, 2001;Vasconcellos et al., 2020).SDT conceptualizes motivation as situated on a continuum ranging from controlled to autonomous motivation (or from external to intrinsic forms of motivation).Intrinsic or autonomous motivation refers to activities that are done by a person for the sheer satisfaction or enjoyment of the activity in itself (Deci & Ryan, 2017).The other side of the motivational continuum is described as extrinsic or controlled, which characterizes behaviors that are done for reasons that are more or less externally imposed.
In line with SDT, extrinsic motivation is subdivided into four types of motivational regulation, ranging from most extrinsic to least.External regulation pertains to situations when a behavior is performed to gain a reward or avoid punishment (e.g., when someone tells you that you must do something, otherwise you will get a bad grade).Introjected regulation is expressed in situations when the reason for a behavior has been partially internalized, and is driven by social emotions such as pride, guilt, shame, and self-esteem (e.g., when a behavior is driven by the fear of being shamed for coming last in a competition).A more autonomous form of extrinsic motivation is identified regulation, which drives behavior through the engagement generated by personal identification (e.g., when a student participates in PE because of the notion that he or she is, or wants to be, an active person and should behave as such).The fourth kind of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation, which concerns behavior that is integrated with a person's sense of self and is perceived as valuable and consistent with his or her life as a whole (e.g., when someone does something because it simply feels like the right thing to do, "for me, as a person").Lastly, a sixth type of (non-) regulation is amotivation, which marks situations where a person lacks engagement and the intention to act (e.g., when a student skips PE because "there's no point") (Ryan & Deci, 2020;Ryan & Deci, 2017).A wealth of research has shown that autonomous motivation is positively linked to healthy behavior (i.e., engagement in PE, and physical activity more generally), whereas extrinsic motivation and amotivation are linked to negative outcomes, for example a lower likelihood of initiating physical inactivity and incorporating physical activity into one's lifestyle (Jaakkola, Yli-Piipari, Barkoukis & Liukkonen, 2017;Podlog et al., 2015;Vasconcellos et al., 2020).
Previous studies of adolescent and adult samples have linked body image concerns to lower autonomous motivation toward physical activity, extrinsic exercise motives (e.g., exercising solely for appearance-related reasons), less enjoyment of physical activity, and exercise avoidance (Carmona et al., 2015;Ingledew & Sullivan, 2002;Markland & Ingledew, 2007;Sabiston, Pila, Vani & Thogersen-Ntoumani, 2019).It has also been argued that body image concerns can affect academic achievement, as the social anxiety associated with body image concerns may lead to fear of failure, avoidance, and absenteeism (Lodewyk et al., 2009;Yanover & Thompson, 2008).In the context of physical activity, the interpersonal fear of one's physique being evaluated (i.e., social physique anxiety) may act as a barrier to participation (Brunet & Sabiston, 2009;Cox et al., 2013).This notion has been tested and somewhat supported in adult samples (Hausenblas et al., 2004), and studies including adolescent girls (Crocker, Sabiston, Kowalski, McDonough & Kowalski, 2006;Niven, Fawkner, Knowles, Henretty & Stephenson, 2009).In Niven et al.'s study, the authors found no support for social physique anxiety as a significant predictor of decreased physical activity, but they did show that early maturing girls reported higher social physique anxiety.
Whereas much research to date has focused on the aesthetic domains of body image (e.g., satisfaction with physical appearance, appearance anxiety), the body image construct also entails selfevaluations of body functionality.Body functionality encompasses everything that the body can do or is capable of (Alleva & Tylka, 2021).Although conceptualizations of body functionality stress that the construct is broad and includes aspects such as internal physical processes, bodily senses, self-care and communication with others, self-evaluations of one's physical capacities may be an extra important aspect of body functionality within the context of PE.In one conceptualization, Abbott and Barber (2010) defined the functional aspects of body image as involving satisfaction with physical functioning, feeling physically competent, and valuing one's physical health.Focusing on body functionality, rather than physical appearance, has been stressed as an important component of positive body image, which in turn is related to different health-related behaviors including physical activity (Frisén & Holmqvist, 2010;Tylka & Wood-Barcalow, 2015).In their study of 12-to 16-year-olds, Abbott and Barber (2010) showed that girls reported lower functional values, behavioral investment, and satisfaction than boys.Using the same measure of functional body image as Abbott and Barber, Allen, Telford, Richard, and Olive (2019) have also shown that children who held more positive attitudes toward PE reported a more positive sense of their physical capabilities.It should be noted that the study was cross-sectional, which precludes conclusions about the directionality of effects.Taken together, the findings from these various studies converge to show that we need to incorporate measures of both aesthetic and functional body image when investigating adolescents' participation in and motivation toward physical activity and PE.

Aim of the present study
To our knowledge, no previous study has investigated the interplay between body image factors and motivation in relation to absenteeism in a PE context.The present study was hence designed to investigate body image and motivation toward PE among early adolescents who report unexcused absenteeism from PE in middle school.The specific aim was to evaluate whether and how early adolescents' proclivity for unexcused absence from PE is related to motivational and body image-related factors, including both aesthetic and functional aspects.Given the established gendered nature of body image (Grogan, 2007) and evidence suggesting that pubertal timing plays an important role for both physical activity and body image (Jaf et al., 2021;Stice, 2003), gender and relative pubertal timing will be considered when addressing each of the below hypotheses.The following three hypotheses were investigated: 1. Middle school students who report unexcused absence from PE will display less autonomous forms of motivation toward PE. 2. Middle school students who report unexcused absence from PE will report more body image concerns in both aesthetic and functional body image domains, as well as greater social physique anxiety.3. Body image concerns and social physique anxiety are significant predictors of middle school students' lower autonomous motivation toward PE.

Participants and procedures
The data in this study were collected as part of a project named BEEP (Body image, Engagement and Enjoyment in Physical Education), conducted at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden.The sample consisted of 538 grade 6 students (mean age = 12.28 years, SD = 0.31) at thirteen middle schools in mid-west Sweden.The schools were selected from a list of schools that was compiled to give an approximate and collective reflection of the average demographic profile in Sweden for students in compulsory school (age 7-16), in terms of parents' education (60 % of parents have completed a post-high school education), ethnic background (26 % of children are born outside Sweden or have two parents born outside Sweden), and gender (49 % girls).Invitations were initially distributed to principals at 35 schools.For the feasibility of the project, schools were also selected due to their geographical location being within traveling distance.Recruitment of schools were terminated when we could conclude that we would reach the pre-set goal of including about 500 participants in the study.In all, 13 schools were included in the project.An a priori power calculation using G*Power (version 3.1.9.7) showed that the sample size would be adequate to test the hypotheses (80 % power, medium effect size, a =0.05) (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang & Buchner, 2007).Cohen's general guidelines were used to determine the effect size (Cohen, 1988).
Of the participants in the study, 48.3 % were girls, 49.4 % were boys, and 1.7 % (n = 9) identified as neither girl nor boy.Ninety-two percent of the children were born in Sweden, 11.2 % reported that they had one parent who was not born in Sweden, and 11.5 % reported having two parents who were not born in Sweden.Parents/ legal guardians provided their informed consent before data collection was initiated.The students were informed by their teacher about the study one week ahead of the data collection, and again by the research team on the day of the data collection.Students provided informed consent at the time of data collection.Data were collected using a digital questionnaire.Ethical approval for the study was granted by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority.

Measurements
Key constructs that were measured in the questionnaire were students' participation in and experiences of PE classes, their motivation to participate in PE, and body image.

Non-excused PE absence
Students' non-excused absence from PE was measured using a single item, stating: "Approximately how many times did you skip PE during the last semester (i.e., in 5th grade), even though you could have participated?"This question was designed for this study.Participants answered the question by selecting one of five alternatives: (1) None, (2) Once, (3) A few times, (4) Many times, and ( 5) Very many times.The question focused on the previous semester (spring term of grade 5), since the questionnaire was administered at the beginning of the fall semester in grade 6 and therefore it was not meaningful to ask for unexcused absence during this short time interval.For subsequent analyses, participants' answers were dichotomized: (1) never having skipped PE [response alternative 1], and (2) having skipped PE once or more often [response alternatives 2-5].

Motivation in PE
In the Revised Perceived Locus of Causality in Physical Education (PLOC-R; Vlachopoulos, Katartzi, Kontou, Moustaka & Goudas, 2011) scale, 19 items are used to measure students' motivation to participate in PE from a self-determination theory perspective.The scale has been shown to be a valid and reliable measure of motivation in PE among youth aged 12-13 (Vlachopoulos et al., 2011).Four items measure amotivation (e.g., "I take part in PE, but I really don't know why"), three items measure external regulation (e.g., "I take part in PE because in this way I will not get a low grade"), four items measure introjected regulation (e.g., "I take part in PE because I would feel bad if the teacher thought that I am not good at PE"), four items measure identified regulation (e.g., "I take part in PE because it is important to me to do well in PE"), and four items measure intrinsic motivation (e.g., "I take part in PE because it is enjoyable").Each item is measured on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = "Strongly disagree"; 7 = "Strongly agree").All subscales had good to excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.86-0.93),except for the external motivation subscale, which had a low but acceptable alpha of .69.A mean score was calculated for each subscale.Items were translated to Swedish by a certified English teacher.Translated items were then examined by the researchers to ensure that the translations were consistent with the content and wording of the original items.
Besides summing subscales, participants' scores on each subscale were also used to calculate a relative autonomy index (RAI) (also known as a self-determination index), reflecting the degree to which participants' behavior is autonomously regulated (Vlachopoulos et al., 2011).The index was calculated by giving intrinsic motivation a weight of +2, identified motivation +1, introjected motivation −1, external motivation −2, and amotivation −3, and accordingly ranges from −39-15, with higher scores representing more autonomously regulated motivation when participating in PE.It might be noted that using the RAI has been criticized since the multidimensionality of motivation is not accounted for (Howard et al., 2020).An important assumption of the RAI is also that self-determination can be viewed on a continuum, ranging from negative (amotivation) to positive (intrinsic).However, some studies indicate that the dimensions are not always sequentially ordered, for example, identified motivation may be more important than intrinsic motivation for exercise behavior (Ng et al., 2012).Despite these potential limitations with the RAI, we decided to use the RAI as an index variable reflecting a motivational continuum in one of the present analyses.

Social physique anxiety
The unidimensional Social Physique Anxiety Scale (SPAS) (Hart et al., 1989) was used to measure participants' social physique anxiety.Social physique anxiety has been defined by Hart et al. (1989) as "a subtype of social anxiety that occurs as a result of the prospect of interpersonal evaluation involving one's physique".In this study, we used the seven-item Swedish version of SPAS (Lindwall, 2004) for use among adolescent samples.As our sample consisted of 12-yearold children, we chose to make minor adaptations to the items to make them better suited for and more easily understood by children.For instance, the item that originally reads "I wish I wasn't so uptight about my physique or figure" was changed to the corresponding Swedish phrase for "I wish I weren't so worried about my body".Similarly, the item "Unattractive features of my physique or figure make me nervous in certain social settings" was changed to the corresponding Swedish phrase for "I feel nervous about my body when I am with other people".The adaptations were inspired by the children's version of SPAS by Fender-Scarr et al. (2003;cited in Stadulis, Neal-Barnett, MacCracken & Fender-Scarr, 2014).All items were measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("Fully disagree") to 5 ("Fully agree"), including a middle alternative ("In between").In the current study, Cronbach's α for SPAS was .88,indicating good internal consistency.A mean SPAS score was calculated based on each item in the scale.

Aesthetic and functional body image
The embodied image scale (EIS) (Abbott & Barber, 2010) is a multidimensional measure of body image that aims to measure both the aesthetic aspect and the functional aspect of body image.These two dimensions are in turn subdivided into cognitive (value), behavioral (investment), and affective (satisfaction) facets of aesthetic or functional body image.The scale is measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("Not at all true for me") to 5 ("Very true for me") and includes items such as "I am very happy with my performance in physical activities" (functional-satisfaction) and "How good I feel about my body depends a lot on whether people consider me good-looking" (aesthetic-value).The scale was translated to Swedish by a certified English teacher.The translated items were examined by the researchers to ensure that the translations were consistent with the content and wording of the original items.The scale has been shown to be a valid and reliable measure of body image among 12-to 17-year-olds (Abbott & Barber, 2010;Allen et al., 2019).However, focusing on the functional aspect of the scale, Allen et al. (2019) found that the cognitive (value) subscale scored at the lower end of what can be considered acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.59).In this study, our data confirmed previous findings, showing Cronbach's α values ranging from .59 to .93 for the subscales (aesthetic-satisfaction α = 0.93; aesthetic-investment α = 0.86; aesthetic-cognitive α = 0.59; functional-satisfaction α = 0.89; functional-investment α = 0.79; functional-cognitive α = 0.60).Because of the low Cronbach's alphas on the cognitive subscales in the present sample, we decided to omit these two subscales from further analyses.A mean score was calculated for each subscale.

Perceived pubertal timing
Self-reported pubertal timing was measured using a global question designed by Berg-Kelly and Erdes (1997), "Considering your bodily development, how do you rate yourself compared with your classmates?" (stem question), with the response options (1) very early, (2) early, (3) similar to most of your classmates, (4) late, and (5) very late.This question has shown excellent agreement with professionals' (physicians and nurses) objective ratings of pubertal timing as measured by the Tanner scale (see Berg-Kelly & Erdes, 1997).For analyses, and in line with other studies, this question was recoded into three groups: (1) perceiving oneself as being later than classmates [response alternatives 1 and 2], (2) on time [response alternative 3], and (3) earlier than classmates [response alternatives 4 and 5].

Data analysis
Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28.0.1.0(142).Before analysis, missingness on key variables was analyzed.The analysis showed that missing values ranged between 2 % and 5 %.Little MCAR tests were non-significant, thus indicating that data were missing completely at random.Only students with complete data on the relevant measures were included in the subsequent analyses.Hence, and omitting the n = 9 participants that had indicated being neither girl nor boy, the number of girls in the present analyses were n = 255 and the number of boys were n = 262.Assumptions of normality, lack of outliers, and homogeneity of covariance matrices, and collinearity were also checked.Although it should be noted that MANOVA (which was used to test Hypothesis 1 and 2) is generally considered robust against the violation of assumptions, visual inspection of distributions and skewness statistics indicated that skewness could be a cause for concern.Therefore, all scale variables (i.e., motivation subscales, the RAI scale, and body image scales) were centered before analyses, using z-transformation.
Descriptive statistics are presented using mean, standard deviations, and proportions.To explore gender and pubertal timing differences across absenteeism groups, chi-square tests were used.Since only a small number (N = 9) participants identified as "other" gender, these were excluded from further analysis.To investigate differences in motivation due to unexcused absence from PE (Hypothesis 1), pubertal timing and gender, a 2 (gender: girls vs boys) x 3 (pubertal timing: early vs on time vs late) x 2 (unexcused absence: never vs once or more often) multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were used with the subscales of PLOC-R as the combined outcome variable.To investigate differences in body image due to unexcused absence from PE (Hypothesis 2), pubertal timing and gender, another 2 (gender: girls vs boys) x 3 (pubertal timing: early vs on time vs late) x 2 (unexcused absence: never vs once or more often) MANOVA were used with the body image measures as the combined outcome variable.
The effect of body image for autonomous motivation as measured by the RAI (dependent variable) was modeled using a hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis (Hypothesis 3), controlling for pubertal timing in the first step and entering the body image factors in the second step of the model (as predictors).Regression models were stratified by gender, as we could expect significant gender differences for body image variables.

Results
Most participants reported no unexcused absence from PE during the last school semester (see Table 1).Approximately one third of the participants reported unexcused absence from PE once or more often.There were no significant gender differences as indicated by a chi-square test (p = .22).This means that there were no gender differences in the extent to which boys and girls reported unexcused absence from PE.Late maturing girls (n = 63) were more likely than on time (n = 125) or early maturing girls (n = 65) to report unexcused absence once or more often (c 2 =7.54, df=2, 251, p = .023).For boys, no differences between absenteeism and pubertal timing groups were present (late n = 49, on time n = 129, early n = 78).Descriptive statistics for the motivational and body image subscales are presented in Tables 2 and 3.
An inspection of between-group differences showed that the main effect of gender accounted for introjected (p = .003,η2 = 0.019) and intrinsic motivation (p = .004,η2 = 0.019), with boys scoring significantly higher on these two subscales.The main effect of absenteeism accounted for all the motivational subscales (PLOC-R), with inspection of means indicating that adolescents who had been absent once or more often reporting significantly higher scores on amotivation (p < .001,η2 = 0.044), extrinsic (p < .001,η2 = 0.116), and introjected (p = .010,η2 = 0.014), motivation, but significantly lower scores on identified (p < .001,η2 = 0.033), and introjected (p < .001,η2 = 0.082) motivation.The main effect of pubertal timing accounted for amotivation (p < .001,η2 = 0.044), extrinsic (p = .005,η2 = 0.023), and introjected (p = .003,η2 = 0.025) motivation.Post hoc tests (Tukey's HSD) showed that adolescents who perceived themselves as developing later than classmates reported significantly higher amotivation compared to adolescents perceiving themselves as being early or on time (see Table 2).For extrinsic and introjected motivation, adolescents who perceived themselves to be either early or late scored significantly higher than those perceiving themselves as being on time.
The significant main effect of gender accounted for SPA and each of the functional and aesthetic body image subscales (EIS; see Table 3), with girls reporting higher SPA (p < .001,η2 = 0.160), higher aesthetic investment (p < .001,η2 = 0.030), and lower aesthetic satisfaction (p < .001,η2 = 0.035).Boys, on the other hand, reported higher functional satisfaction (p < .001,η2 = 0.031), and slightly higher functional investment (p = 020, η2 = 0.012.In terms of unexcused absenteeism, examination of between-group differences showed that the main effect accounted for aesthetic satisfaction, (p = .017,η2 = 0.013), SPA (p = .004,η2 = 0.018), and functional investment (p < .001,η2 = 0.073) and satisfaction (p < .001,η2 = 0.034).Regarding pubertal timing, the significant main effect accounted for aesthetic investment (p = .002,η2 = 0.028), and functional investment (p = .011,η2 = 0.020), with post hoc tests showing that adolescents who perceived themselves as earlier than their classmates report higher aesthetic investment, and those who perceive themselves to be later report lower functional investment than those perceiving themselves as being on time (see Table 3 for means and standard deviations).

Body image factors as predictors of autonomous motivation toward PE
Hypothesis 3 was tested using linear regression analyses.We controlled for pubertal timing in the first step of the model, as previous research indicates that pubertal timing interplays with body image and physical activity variables, and because the present data suggested some differences between pubertal timing groups.Due to the gendered nature of body image, the regression models were conducted separately for girls and boys.
For boys, whereas pubertal timing alone did not provide a unique contribution to the model (Step 1), entering the body image variables (Step 2) produced a significant model explaining approximately 31 % of the variance in RAI (Table 4).The strongest effect was found for functional behavioral investment, followed by aesthetic behavioral investment and social physique anxiety.Direction of effects indicated that functional investment predicted more autonomous motivation, whereas higher aesthetic investment and higher social physique anxiety predicted boys' lower levels of autonomous motivation.Functional and aesthetic satisfaction were unrelated to the outcome, as was perceived pubertal timing.
For girls, entering pubertal timing in the first step of the regression model did produce a significant model, and adding the body image variables increased the explained variance significantly (Table 5).The set of predictors explained about 54 % of the variance for girls.Besides aesthetic investment, all predictors provided a unique contribution to the model.The strongest effect was found for functional satisfaction, followed by functional investment, perceived pubertal timing, social physique anxiety, and aesthetic satisfaction.Higher functional investment and satisfaction predicted more autonomous motivation, whereas higher social physique anxiety and lower appearance satisfaction were associated with girls' lower autonomous motivation.The negative beta coefficient of pubertal timing showed that late maturing girls reported lower levels of autonomous motivation, even when controlling for body image factors.

Discussion
This is the first study to examine how both aesthetic and functional aspects of body image are linked to early adolescents' proclivity to skip PE and their motivation toward PE in school.In line with our hypotheses, unexcused absence was related to less autonomous forms of motivation and higher social physique anxiety.Early adolescents who reported never having been absent without a valid excuse had higher functional body image satisfaction and higher functional investment.Whereas the functional aspects of body image predicted more autonomous motivation, the aesthetic aspects of body image and higher social physique anxiety predicted less autonomous motivation.Novel findings relating to gender and perceived pubertal timing were also noted.Adolescents who perceived themselves to be "out of sync", that is either earlier or later in terms of pubertal maturation, differed from other adolescents with regards to some motivational and body image scales.Girls who perceived themselves to be late maturers were also more likely to report absence from PE.The findings of the present cross-sectional study provide novel insights into how body image factors may interact with motivation toward and disengagement from PE.The findings suggest that those who have been absent from PE report lower appearance satisfaction and higher social physique anxiety.The findings further suggest that early adolescents who have not been absent are more satisfied with their physical abilities and invested in their physical health, and these body image dimensions are in turn associated with higher scores on the relative autonomy index (RAI).The appearance body image dimensions were negatively related to the RAI, and although the findings were somewhat mixed, social physique anxiety emerged as a consistent predictor of lower autonomous motivation.Although these specific findings are novel, they correspond with previous literature indicating an intricate interplay between body image and external versus intrinsic forms of motivational regulations (e.g., Sabiston et al., 2019).In their study on 9-to 12-year-olds, Allen et al. (2019) showed significant associations between a more positive sense of the body's functional capabilities and PE enjoyment, but they did not include any measure of aesthetic body image.Thus, the present study adds to the knowledge currently accumulating about the role of both aesthetic and functional aspects of body image that may be uniquely involved in adolescents' motivation towards PE and early disengagement from the school subject.Since the current study is limited by its cross-sectional nature, the direction of the relationship between aesthetic and functional body image, unexcused absence, and motivation is uncertain.In other words, it is not clear whether a negative aesthetic or functional body image leads to more absence or less autonomous motivation in PE, or if less autonomous motivation in PE leads to more absence and a more negative body image.Most likely, these relationships are complex and bi-directional, and we call for future longitudinal studies to disentangle temporal effects.
Studies usually report significant gender differences in young people's body image (e.g., Karazia et al., 2017), and this study also indicates that girls' and boys' perceptions of their physical selves differ.This is mirrored in the consistent gender differences emerging for all body image measures, with 12-year-old girls reporting more appearance anxieties, being more invested in physical appearance and less satisfied with their bodies, whereas 12-year-old boys report being more invested in and satisfied with their physical functioning.Arguably, these findings point toward the disparities between the socializing experiences of young girls versus young boys (Grogan, 2007).Importantly, this study also points toward some gender similarities.First, there were no differences between girls and boys in terms of absentee rates, even though there was a slight tendency for girls to report higher introjected and lower intrinsic motivation compared to boys (Table 2).Both similarities and differences were noted regarding the body image variables as predictors of motivation.For both girls and boys, higher SPA predicted less autonomous motivation.Whereas girls' appearance satisfaction was negatively related to autonomous motivation, boys' appearance investment was similarly linked to autonomous motivation.These findings imply somewhat different mechanisms underlying girls' and boys' motivation toward PE, with appearance dissatisfaction being a potential barrier to girls' autonomous motivation and appearance investment being a more important factor for boys.Finally, functional behavioral investment seems to have a particularly strong association with boys' motivation.Although it should be noted that the predictors explained more variance in the outcome for girls, effect sizes were in the small to medium range for both genders.This implies that body image may play a critical role for early adolescents' motivation toward PE, which aligns with both theory and the wider body image literature (e.g., Hausenblas et al., 2004;Markland & Ingledew, 2007).
The present study further suggested that perceiving oneself as "out of sync" in terms of pubertal development may be a risk factor for higher appearance investment (early development) and lower functional (late pubertal development) investment.These findings could be contextualized within the PE context, which may evoke appearance comparisons due to the presence of peers, a felt need of wearing form-fitting clothes, and having to shower and change in front of classmates.Hence, adolescents who feel different from their classmates may start avoiding situations involving these situations and PE (functional investment as measured in the present study encompasses seeking out opportunities to be physically active).In addition, a novel finding was that girls who perceive themselves as being late maturers were more likely to report absence from PE.Other studies have shown that it is the early maturing adolescents who tend to become less physically active over adolescence (Davison et al., 2007), and whereas one study showed no effects between perceived pubertal timing and general physical activity for girls, late maturing boys were less prone to physical inactivity (Finne et al., 2011).Except for differences that may be due to variations in outcome variables across studies (i.e., focusing on absence from PE in this study, and physical activity more generally in other studies), we propose that the inconsistency between the present study's findings and those from other studies may be due to gender and age effects.As girls enter puberty approximately two years earlier than boys do (Skoog, 2023), it is possible that gendered effects of pubertal timing on physical inactivity/activity generally, and disengagement from PE more specifically, may be more prominent at later ages than 11 or 12.This study adds to the current knowledge by showing that both early and late pubertal timing is intertwined with early adolescents' body image, motivation toward PE, and speculatively, even to physical activity more broadly.
Several previous studies show that focusing on body functionality, rather than the appearance aspects of one's physical body, may be an important precursor to the development of positive body image (Frisén & Holmqvist, 2010;Tylka & Wood-Barcalow, 2015).As such, well-designed PE has a promising and inborn capacity to empower young people to feel confident about and accepting toward their physical self (Allen et al., 2019).Importantly, it should be stressed that this study is limited by the fact that it focuses on physical capabilities rather than the broader notion of body functionality as has been outlined by well-renowned scholars (see e.g., Alleva, et. al., 2021).A broader perspective on body functionality exercises so that all students, regardless their physical capacities, will be given the opportunity to reach PE learning outcomes.Hence, and at least from a policy point of view, we argue that the Swedish curriculum is well-aligned with a broader perspective on body functionality, which is not restricted to physical performance or able bodies.Yet, the everyday practices of Swedish PE may be different from policy, and we urge school professionals (e.g., PE teachers) to recognize the potentially positive effects that a broader perspective on body functionality (i.e., focusing on all aspects of what that the body can do or is capable of) could have for young people's developing body images and views of themselves.Importantly, school professionals also bear a great responsibility to combat appearance and weight-related teasing within the context of PE, as being teased over one's physical self may have detrimental effects and discourage adolescent from participating in PE (Li, Pukavina and Wright, 2012;Puhl and Luedicke, 2012).
Several limitations of the present study should be noted.One major limitation is the sole reliance on self-report data collected in a school context.This may have underestimated the number of early adolescents admitting to unexcused absence from PE.Although the self-report question asking participants about their pubertal development is well-used and validated for the age-group, other measures (e.g., Tanner scales) could also have been used.Also, the question asking about unexcused absenteeism asked participants to recall unexcused absence from the prior spring term instead of the current fall term.The reason for this approach was that data collection was initiated in the beginning of the fall term, and therefore it was not considered meaningful to ask about absence during the current term.However, it is possible that this retrospective approach may have under-or overestimated the prevalence of unexcused absence.In addition, the question only asked about frequency and not reasons for being absent.Consequently, deeper insight into why early adolescents choose to skip PE was precluded.As aforementioned, one motive could be to avoid body-or weight-related teasing (Li, Pukavina and Wright, 2012;Puhl and Luedicke, 2012).It should also be noted that the age of the participants, being 11-12 years old, limits their possibilities to be absent from PE.With an older sample (e.g., high school students), absentee rates would expectedly rise.
Another major limitation relates to the cross-sectional nature of the data, ruling out conclusions about bidirectional, reciprocal, and temporal effects between the study variables.Finally, the measure used to capture the functional aspects of body image has a somewhat limited scope, focusing primarily on physical ability in the context of sport or exercise.To the best of our knowledge, however, there were no validated measures capturing a broader perspective on adolescents' body functionality when the present study commenced.Future studies may want to remedy these shortcomings by bridging data from multiple informants (e.g., adolescents and their PE teachers) and by collecting follow-up data.Future studies may also benefit from using measures of body image functionality that align with the broader conceptualization of the construct as proposed by Alleva and Tylka (2021).We also call for studies that aim to further the understanding of early adolescents' motives behind being absent from PE, and how different motives correspond with individual experiences of PE in school.

Conclusions
The current study sheds novel light on a previously unexplored question.The study's findings demonstrate the importance of mitigating social physique anxiety and promoting an inclusive and body positive PE context for all adolescents.One promising avenue is to attempt to strengthen early adolescents' focus on their body functionality from a broad perspective, i.e. what their bodies are capable of doing beyond physical performance.From the viewpoint of the specific Swedish cultural context, this would align with the curriculum and learning outcomes of PE in compulsory school.By reaching out to all school children, PE -if well-designed -has a unique standing to create positive body image experiences for early adolescents who are amid many physical, social, and psychological changes.We further stress that the findings identified in this study clearly point toward the need for school professionals (e.g., PE teachers) to be mindful about the developmental processes and gendered norms that may shape early adolescents' perceptions of themselves and their experiences of PE at school.

Table 1
Descriptive statistics of study sample based on non-excused absenteeism groups.Note.N = 515 (girls n = 255, boys n = 262), n = 9 participants reporting being neither a boy nor a girl has been removed from analyses.Unstandardized Means, Standard Deviations (in Parentheses), and Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) with Motivation Subscales as the Combined Dependent Variable.
Note.Total number of girls n = 255-, total number of boys n = 262-.PLOC-R subscales range from 1 to 7. Higher scores indicate higher amotivation, external motivation, etcetera.Superscripts denote significant mean differences as indicated by MANOVA, a indicates a significantly higher mean.Tukey's Post Hoc tests were used for pubertal timing.*** p < .001,** p < .05,* p < .01.

Table 3
Unstandardized Means, Standard Deviations (in Parentheses), and Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) with Body Image Scales as the Combined Dependent Variable.Note.Total number of girls n = 255-, total number of boys n = 262-.Social physique anxiety ranges from 1 to 7, aesthetic and functional body image investment/satisfaction range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate higher social physique anxiety, satisfaction, and investment.Superscripts denote significant mean differences as indicated by MANOVA, a indicates a significantly higher mean.Tukey's Post Hoc tests were used for pubertal timing.*** p < .001,** p < .05,* p < .01.

Table 5
Hierarchical regression model (only step 2) for girls with relative autonomy (PLOC-R) as the outcome variable.SPAS=Social Physique Anxiety Scale.For simplicity, only full model (Step 2) is depicted.R 2 change Step 1 -Step 2 = 0.52, p < .001.encompasses everything that the body is capable of -in terms of physical capacities, health and healing, senses, creativity, social relationships, etcetera.Although the Swedish curriculum for PE in compulsory school (The Swedish National Agency for Education, 2022) states that students should develop certain physical skills (e.g., being able to swim and showing motor skills), it also states that students should learn about matters such as injury prevention (i.e., physical self-care), how physical activity makes you feel (i.e., being attuned to bodily sensations), and how social norms about gender and body functionality may be associated with participation in physical activity.Teachers are responsible for adapting activities and