Abstract
Undergraduate women (UW) face barriers to exercise, including low confidence and body image concerns. Peer mentorship may offset these challenges through relatable support. As part of a larger trial, six student mentors trained in coaching principles supported inactive UW (n = 15) through six weekly exercise sessions and interim messaging. Virtual conversations and postprogram mentor interviews were inductively analyzed to explore experiences. Mentors perceived that participants gained comfort with exercise and established routines, while mentors strengthened their mentorship skills. Differing expectations and inconsistent communication emerged as challenges. Findings suggest campus wellness professionals should consider peer-based mentorship to support exercise engagement.
Introduction
Despite the various benefits of exercise engagement, including enhanced sleep and mental health (Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology, 2021), engagement levels remain low among undergraduate students (Carballo-Fazanes et al., 2020). Social support has been identified as a key determinant of exercise behavior, with peer encouragement strengthening both confidence and participation (Li et al., 2023). Accordingly, interventions that embed supportive relationships may be especially effective for promoting behavior change in a postsecondary context (e.g., deJonge et al., 2021; Keeler et al., 2021; Sylvester et al., 2016).
Peer-mentorship programs (PMPs) offer one such approach (Peirson, 1993). In these programs, more experienced individuals (mentors), guide less experienced peers to promote knowledge sharing and engagement. In campus settings, paired exercise and peer support have been associated with higher perceived social support and engagement among undergraduate students (e.g., deJonge et al., 2021; Keeler et al., 2021; Sylvester et al., 2016). This approach may be particularly relevant for undergraduate women (UW), who typically engage in less exercise than their male counterparts and rely more heavily on social support to navigate gendered gym barriers (Fabiano & Pearson, 2025; Othman et al., 2022). However, gender-specific PMPs remain sparse (Yan et al., 2023). Further, although mentors play a pivotal role in supporting behavior change in PMPs, relatively little is known about their experiences delivering this support, particularly within virtual or hybrid program designs.
This qualitative study explored the experiences of mentors involved in The SHINE (Supporting Her In Navigating Exercise) Program, a campus-based PMP designed to support inactive UW students over a 6-week period. Specifically, this study explored mentors’ experiences of applying motivational interviewing- and communication-based strategies, and overall study involvement.
Literature Review
Peer Mentorship and Exercise Engagement Among Undergraduate Women
Peer mentorship programs are often used to promote supportive relationships and behavior change in campus settings. The efficacy of PMPs may be enhanced when mentors are older or hold a higher status than their mentees (Kabiri et al., 2022), and when mentors exhibit a positive attitude and strong desire to help others (Boyle et al., 201l). Additional benefits have been noted when mentor–mentee dyads share the same gender identity, particularly among women (Lin & Gao, 2023).
These features are important given the gendered nature of exercise participation. UW often report barriers related to confidence, comfort, and social support in exercise spaces, which may shape their willingness to participate in campus-based physical activity opportunities (Fabiano & Pearson, 2025; Othman et al., 2022). As such, same gender peer mentorship may offer a relatable strategy for helping UW navigate these barriers while building confidence and routines.
Motivational Interviewing and Supportive Communication in Peer Mentorship
As a framework for delivering individualized support, motivational interviewing (MI) is a collaborative counseling approach often used in behavior change interventions to elicit individuals’ values and motivations for change in various domains (Miller & Rollnick, 2023). Within PMPs, mentors are often trained in MI-informed strategies to guide participants toward behavior change during weekly sessions, with previous studies reporting improvements in exercise engagement (e.g., deJonge et al., 2021; Yan et al., 2023).
However, participants have also cited a need for support between sessions (Lee et al., 2020). Virtual messaging offers a time-efficient way to extend MI-informed support by reducing logistical barriers and strengthening connections between mentors and participants (Hargreaves et al., 2020; Uetova et al., 2024). Despite this potential, virtual messaging has not been widely integrated into exercise-based PMPs for UW. This is particularly relevant in the pandemic recovery era, as pandemic-related disruptions to in-person interactions highlighted the importance of social support for exercise engagement among UW (Fabiano & Pearson, 2025; Hailey et al., 2022).
Mentor Experiences in Exercise-Based Peer Mentorship Programs
Given mentors’ pivotal role in evoking behavior change and supporting exercise engagement in PMPs, understanding their experiences is crucial for strengthening future programs. However, very few two exercise-based PMPs involving university students have explored mentors’ experiences through post-program interviews. Of which, two of these studies reported gains in knowledge and self-awareness, alongside challenges in managing their roles and maintaining student engagement (Fried et al., 2018; Leenstra et al., 2019). Beyond these studies, limited information is available regarding mentors’ experiences in this context, particularly in relation to program design (deJonge et al., 2021; Goncalves et al., 2023; Keeler et al., 2021).
Research Gap, Context, and Study Purpose
Despite evidence highlighting the importance of social support in shaping UW exercise behaviors, several gaps persist. Most research has focused on structured, in-person mentorship, overlooking more flexible and time-efficient virtual forms of support that may promote engagement (Hargreaves et al., 2020; Shimoni et al., 2020; Uetova et al., 2024). The COVID-19 pandemic further underscored the relevance of such approaches, as many students relied on digital platforms to sustain social connection and exercise habits (Fabiano & Pearson, 2025). While PMPs show promise for fostering motivation, knowledge sharing, and skill development, little is known about how mentors experience delivering support through virtual or hybrid programs in the recovery era (e.g., Goncalves et al., 2023).
As part of a larger campus-based intervention, The SHINE Program, this descriptive study explored the experiences of mentors who were paired with inactive UW students over a 6-week period. To better understand mentors’ application of MI- and communication-based strategies, as well as their overall involvement in the program, data were drawn from one-on-one semi-structured interviews and transcripts of virtual conversations. It was hoped that the information gleaned would provide insight into effective supportive strategies in this context, along with key facilitators and challenges experienced.
Method
Study Overview
This qualitative study examined mentors’ experiences in an exercise-based PMP, aiming to capture the subjective and contextual aspects of mentorship that are often overlooked. Details on the broader SHINE program methodology have been published elsewhere (Fabiano et al., 2026). Additional information is available through the national clinical trial registry, NCT06823336.
Inclusion Criteria
Mentors were deemed eligible if they: (1) identified as women; (2) were senior students (e.g., third- or fourth-year undergraduate or graduate) at the host intuition; (3) were enrolled in a health-based discipline; (4) engaged in at least 150 minutes of gym-based activity per week; (5) wanted to help others become more active; (6) could attend a 2 hour workshop; (7) could assist two to three UW from January to April; (8) reported no health risks that would hinder exercise engagement; (9) could commute to the host institution weekly; (10) had reliable access to online technology (e.g., email and zoom); and (11) were fluent in English. Participants were considered eligible if they: (1) were full-time UW at the host institution; (2) reported one or fewer bouts of exercise per week (Milne et al., 2008); and (3) met criteria 8 to 11 above.
Sample Size
Drawing on previous PMPs (e.g., Fried et al., 2018; Keeler et al., 2021), a 2 to 3:1 participant-to-mentor ratio was adopted to promote quality interactions and consistent experiences (Yan et al., 2023). To strengthen internal validity, mentor enrollment was capped at 6 (Fried et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2020). For participants, a power analysis based on an 8-week PMP indicated 14 participants would be sufficient (Keeler et al., 2021). To account for attrition, nine additional participants were recruited for a total of 24, consistent with prior UW studies (Keeler et al., 2021; Goncalves et al., 2023).
Recruitment
Following ethical approval (#100315) recruitment occurred through purposive sampling methods through social media posts on institutional accounts, campus posters, and in-class presentations.
Program Procedures
Following recruitment, mentors completed a 2 hour preparatory workshop at the host institution, facilitated by an Associate Professor/Certified Professional Co-Active Coach. The workshop focused on four core areas: program procedures, MI strategies, exercise structuring, and communication policies (Fried et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2020), with short breaks between topics. Training format included slides, videos, discussions, and mock interactions to support skill development.
Sixty minutes were dedicated to MI, drawing on established frameworks such as OARS (Open questions, Affirmations, Reflections, Summarizing; Fried et al., 2018). This section was also adapted from a PMP training manual developed at Queen's University (Dineen & Condra, 2016).
The next 40 minutes addressed mentor roles and responsibilities, program expectations, and the fundamentals of structuring warm-ups, cool-downs, and introductory cardiovascular and resistance training sessions, with attention to overload and recovery principles (Lee et al., 2020).
The workshop concluded with 20 minutes of practical guidance on mentorship and GroupMe use. GroupMe served as the virtual messaging platform through which mentors provided support beyond the exercise sessions. Mentors were encouraged to engage in approximately 30 minutes of virtual conversation per week (about two brief interactions) to discuss participants’ exercise experiences, as deemed effective in similar studies (Fried et al., 2018; deJonge et al., 2021). Confidentiality procedures were also reviewed to support professionalism.
Data Generation
Mentors completed a demographic questionnaire assessing age, birth country, program, year of study, ethnicity, and self-perceived fitness and exercise knowledge levels on a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 = below average, 5 = average, and 10 = above average.
Immediately following the program, mentors participated in 30 to 45 minute one-on-one semistructured interview with the lead author to explore their program experiences. Interview questions were adapted from previous research (Fried et al., 2018; Leenstra et al., 2019), and included: “How did your expectations of mentorship compare to your actual experience?” and “How satisfied were you with your ability to implement MI techniques?”
Throughout the program, mentor-participant GroupMe conversations were archived. Upon completion, messages were reviewed to identify conversation topics and communication patterns, following procedures used in prior PMP research (Fried et al., 2018).
Data Analysis
Demographic data and communication frequency were analyzed using descriptive statistics in SPSS. Qualitative data from virtual messages and postprogram interviews were analyzed using inductive content analysis (Bingham, 2023). The first author repeatedly reviewed transcripts to identify concepts aligned with study objectives, thereby strengthening data familiarity and supporting consistent theme identification. Data were then coded and categorized, with themes retained if reported by ≥50% of participants (Koralesky et al., 2025). Three researchers [MF, ESP, AAW] independently analyzed the data and reconvened to compare interpretations, reducing bias. Credibility was further supported through audit trails, peer debriefing, and reflexivity (Bingham, 2023).
Findings
Sample Characteristics
Mentors
Eight interested individuals completed the screening survey; two did not meet the criteria because they were unable to attend the workshop. The six selected mentors completed the workshop and were paired with two to three participants. Mentors' ages spanned from 22 to 28 years old (mean [M] = 24.5, standard deviation [SD] = 3.1), five (83%) had a formal education in kinesiology, and all reported above-average fitness (M = 8.8, SD = 7.3) and exercise knowledge levels (M = 8.00, SD = 0.84; Table 1).
Mentor Demographic Data.
Note. *Indicates an undergraduate, **as masters, and ***as doctoral programs.
Mentor Interviews and Communication Data
Mentor interview data were merged with mentor-participant virtual messages to provide a comprehensive overview of engagement patterns and program experiences, and to corroborate emergent themes. Three key themes were identified: engagement challenges, facilitators of engagement, and personal growth, reflecting behavior change. Findings reflect both mentors’ experiences and their perspectives of participants’ experiences (Figure 1).
Themes and subthemes.
Mentors’ Engagement Challenges
Varying Expectations
All mentors reported that some participants initially held expectations that did not align with the program's nonprescriptive mentorship approach. As stated by mentor 2, “[My participants] wanted me to create workouts and tell them exactly what to do…which felt more like personal training than mentoring.” Participants often expected structured guidance and explicit instructions, rather than the flexible, support-focused approach intended. This mismatch caused confusion and required mentors to clarify their roles early in the program.
Mentor 4 reflected, I think sometimes [my participants]…wanted me to tell them what to do when… I wasn’t there to do that…. so I tried to take a step back and say ‘Oh, I'm just here to… be with you’ but you kind of have to do your own thing. So that was a little bit challenging.
Mentors emphasized that addressing these expectations upfront was essential for effective communication and participant engagement.
Delayed Responses
Participants’ inconsistent virtual communication often disrupted exercise scheduling. For example, mentor 2 described sending a message such as, “Hey [Participant]! How did your workout go on Saturday?” and receiving no reply for several days before following up to suggest another session: “Hey [Participant]! I’m going to the gym tomorrow morning, around 9:10–10:00 am! Any chance you can make it?” All mentors recalled that most participants were often slow to respond, making scheduling and consistent engagement challenging. Two participants frequently canceled sessions at the last minute, adding to these difficulties. Four mentors also noted technical issues with GroupMe, particularly not always receiving notifications. As mentor 1 shared, It was hard to keep track of the notifications and… answer within a timely manner. Because [the notifications] wouldn't always pop up on my phone in the same way that a text message would.
Some mentors also noted that participants did not routinely check the application because it was not part of their usual communication “rotation,” further contributing to delayed responses.
Lack of Flexibility
Mentor-participant virtual communication mainly focused on coordinating exercise sessions, which often required multiple attempts to find mutually convenient times, particularly when sessions needed to be rescheduled. For instance, mentor 2 described a participant who messaged 2 days before a planned session to say, “I am sorry I took a shift on Thursday from 9-4, forgetting about [our planned session]. [I can meet] either after 4:00 pm or on Friday after 2:00pm or Thursday morning too, at 7am.” In response, mentors began confirming availability several days in advance. Although mentors typically gave advance notice when rescheduling, participants often provided minimal or no notice. Mentor 5 summarized this imbalance: I genuinely couldn’t make this day. Then they’d [say], ‘Well, I can’t make the rest.’ And I'd [say], ‘Okay, let me give you the last thirty minutes of my day to cram it.’ [I would] accommodate [participants], but there's no accommodations for me.
Mentors’ Facilitators to Program Engagement
Motivational Interview Training
All mentors reported that the preprogram MI workshop helped shape their interactions with participants. Two mentors explicitly noted revisiting the materials throughout the program to reinforce techniques and stay aligned with MI principles. Mentor 3 reflected, “It was really helpful to have the [workshop] at the start. That was really, really helpful…I did refer to [the workshop material] quite a few times as I went on.”
The training provided a practical framework for structuring conversations, asking reflective questions, and guiding participants in exploring their motivations and barriers to exercise engagement. Mentor 1 illustrated this in a message to their participant: Now that it's been a few weeks, how do you feel?! I recall that your goal is to get stronger and be able to lift your own body weight. How has your progress been towards that goal? From my perspective, I can see how you are becoming more and more comfortable and confident in the gym setting. You’ve been consistent, showing up when you say you’re going to, and you come with a smile on your face every time. I’ve really enjoyed being your mentor so far, good stuff girly!
Convenient Location
Mentors highlighted that the program's convenient on-campus design made participation easier alongside their own academic and personal commitments. As mentor 3 stated, “Just being on campus, that was helpful. If [the program] were anywhere else, I think I would have had a hard time getting there. But having the facilities right there was pretty neat.”
All mentors noted how the on-campus sessions reduced travel barriers and allowed them to oversee multiple participants while already on site. The weekly 30 minute paired exercise sessions were manageable and easy to integrate into their schedules. Mentor 4 explained, “It was only half an hour that we had to meet up each time, so that was just enough time to [workout], which is pretty easy [to schedule].” Mentors felt that this structure promoted consistent engagement, while still allowing flexibility when rescheduling was needed.
Tailored Coaching
Mentors emphasized the value of tailored support, describing how they adjusted their involvement to match each participant's needs. Some provided more hands-on guidance, while others stepped back once participants gained confidence, remaining available for support. Mentor 1 shared: Every participant was very different…They knew that if they had a question or anything like that, they could…tap me on the shoulder, get my attention. Some asked more questions about…form or advice on their split…Others wanted a lot more autonomy.
All mentors recalled how this participant-led peer-support approach fostered skill acquisition, autonomy, engagement, and motivation, while accommodating diverse abilities and goals. Mentor 6 similarly described, I would… keep an eye [on my participants] while they were going to their machine. And then if they looked like they didn’t really… know how to use it, I would just be like, ‘Hey, do you need a hand with that?’
Mentors’ Personal Growth
Greater Self-Awareness
Mentors described the program as highly valuable for their personal growth. By the end, all mentors reported increased confidence applying MI skills in practical contexts, including guiding exercise sessions and responding to participants’ needs. Mentor 6 expressed: I think it was empowering for myself to [be a mentor] because there's been so many other women that have done that for me… I think also my own confidence increased…Maybe I do know more than I thought I did.
These experiences enhanced mentors’ ability to foster engagement, adapt to participants’ needs, and create a supportive environment. Mentors also recognized that program involvement enhanced their self-awareness which reinforced their strengths and interests, and helped them consider how these skills may apply in future careers. Mentor 3 shared: Hearing her kind words…Made me reflect on what kind of person I want to be, and how I want to continue helping people, and in any way that I can. It was a really nice, wholehearted, and warm experience to know I made a positive impact on someone.
Mentors’ Perceived Challenges to Participant Engagement
Low Gym Confidence
Mentors commonly identified low gym confidence as an early barrier to participant engagement. While some participants had prior gym experience, most initially felt uncertain navigating the gym independently. Mentor 4 explained: I think…the different areas of the gym [were intimidating]. My one [participant] always [said] ‘Oh, I want to go try… the free weights downstairs…I wouldn’t go do that by myself, but now I'm with you, I'll go.’ My one participant would mention every once in a while, ‘I wish there was a women's only section.’ I think a women's only area would help a lot. If it had one area where there's a couple of treadmills, a couple squat racks, weights, and just like other machines, I think that would help because then it’d be a one-stop shop.
Competing Demands
All mentors reported that participants faced barriers to engagement due to competing demands, including school, work, and personal responsibilities. These obligations limited availability, especially during busy periods like reading week and finals. For example, mentor 5 received the following message: “Hi [Mentor 5]! Do you think it's possible for us to change the date for this week's workout? I have a test on Friday and another one on Saturday, so I have to study tomorrow.”
Despite these challenges, mentors felt participants remained motivated, though academic and personal demands sometimes reduced their time and energy for exercise. As mentor 3 reflected: The participants were very dedicated to their academics, so… balancing both workouts and their school, that's hard for them… They still made it to the gym, and I tried to encourage that and [say] ‘Oh, you’re doing a great job. You’re here. That's good!’
Mentors’ Perceived Facilitators to Participant Engagement
Social Support
All mentors described social support as a key facilitator of participants’ engagement and motivation. They believed their presence in the gym fostered accountability, especially early in the program. As described by mentor 2: [My participants] had some knowledge of being in the gym and being physically active, but didn’t know how to use a lot of machines and wanted just somebody…to be there…And like help answer any questions. So, I would help guide the workouts and show her how to use the machines.
Mentors observed that participant-initiated conversations were often longer and more detailed than mentor-initiated conversations. Over time, mentors learned that shorter, targeted, open- or closed-ended questions tended to elicit richer responses than broader prompts.
Attainable Goals
Recognizing the importance of flexibility, mentors consistently reported that the program's attainable parameters were essential for sustaining participant engagement. Mentors felt participants valued individualized pacing, flexible scheduling, and realistic guidelines, which supported motivation and routine formation. Mentor 4 reflected: I think it [the program] was laid out really well, where it wasn’t… too much for them… Then, because [the exercise sessions] were scheduled three times a week, they kind of got into a routine, it seemed…Like, that was helpful. I think like the length of the study too, six weeks was like a perfect amount of time. Thirty-minutes was a good [exercise duration]…[Participants] weren’t overwhelmed and were able to slot [exercise sessions] in before or after classes.
Mentors’ Perceived Participant Growth
Increased Self-Efficacy
All mentors noted that participants appeared to increase their exercise self-efficacy throughout the program. As time went on, mentors observed that participants grew more confident navigating the gym and required less guidance. Mentor 6 observed, “At the beginning, [my participant] was just getting familiar with the machines… but then by the end she was just…doing her own thing and looked pretty confident.” For some participants, this growth was reflected in their willingness to explore unfamiliar areas of the gym, try a wider range of machines, and physically occupy more space. Mentor 1 explained: [My participants] initially wanted to do… everything that they could in the [quietest gym]… But then by the end, they were willing to go to… [the busier gyms]…That's also where most of the men tend to accumulate.
Communication Tracking
A quantitative analysis of GroupMe messages evaluated of mentor–participant communication behaviors through measures of message frequency and total message count.
Intervention participants sent fewer messages (M = 4.85, SD = 3.33) than mentors (M = 5.31, SD = 2.91). Message frequency was highest in week 1 (M = 6.38, SD = 2.53) and declined by week 6 (M = 4.36, SD = 3.35). Across both groups, the average response delay was 18.67 hours (SD = 5.08). Participants 12 and 13 withdrew in week 5 and therefore had no communication data for week 6 (Tables 2 and 3).
Participants’ Communication Habits.
Mentors’ Communication Habits.
Discussion
This descriptive study explored mentors’ experiences in a 6-week PMP using postprogram semistructured interviews and mentor-participant text messages. Given the limited research on exercise-based PMPs in the pandemic recovery era, particularly from mentors’ perspectives, these findings offer a meaningful contribution to the literature. Overall, mentors viewed the program as valuable, noting improvements in their communication, mentorship skills, and confidence applying MI strategies to support participants. They also faced challenges coordinating with participants amid fluctuating school and work schedules, which sometimes delayed responses and complicated virtual communication. Despite these barriers, mentors reported strengthened mentorship skills and observed participants becoming more confident as they engaged in movement over time.
Attainable Program Design
Feasible Structure
Mentors consistently emphasized the program's convenient structure as a key facilitator of engagement. This aligns with Othman et al. (2022), who qualitatively explored the physical activity preferences of female undergraduate students (n = 26) and noted a preference for flexible sessions of 10 to 30 min, one to two times per week. In SHINE, participant reported similar engagement barriers, but managed to incorporate brief exercise bouts, occasionally rescheduling around academic demands, especially because of the on-campus exercise component. This echoes findings by Snyder et al. (2017), who assessed exercise motivation in college students (n = 24) and found that exercise engagement increases when facilities are perceived as accessible and conveniently located. Thus, SHINE's mid-sized campus likely supported participation by promoting consistent attendance and helping students become familiar with the gym, aligning with prior studies highlighting the ecological validity of on-campus interventions (e.g., Jeftic et al., 2023; Keeler et al., 2021). Collectively, these findings suggest that flexible, brief, and accessible sessions can support sustained engagement, despite competing academic and personal demands. Such designs are important for campus-based programs, especially those seeking to accommodate students diverse and changing workloads each semester.
Motivational Interviewing Workshop
In the interviews, mentors repeatedly highlighted their appreciation for the workshop, particularly the MI components. This mirrors findings from a year-long PMP conducted by Fried et al. (2018), in which mentors (n = 30) supporting university students’ health behaviors reported that training in mentorship, interpersonal communication, and conflict resolution strengthened their mentorship abilities and participant engagement. In SHINE, mentors described referring back to the MI workshop materials to ensure their actions aligned with the coaching framework. This supports evidence from Smith and Petosa (2016), whose systematic review found that clear role definitions and structured training improved participant-mentor relationships and encouraged physical activity. Taken together, mentors’ accounts suggest that structured MI training can enhance communication skills, confidence, and engagement, emphasizing the value of well-designed training in PMPs, especially in an exercise context.
Mentorship
Tailored Coaching
Mentors adapted their support to meet participants’ individual needs, as reflected in interviews and text exchanges. Similar patterns emerged in other PMP research promoting students’ physical activity, where postprogram mentor interviews (n = 8) indicated that workshops and hands-on learning improved their understanding of participants’ experiences (Leenstra et al., 2019).
In SHINE, mentors drew on their MI training to tailor support through skills such as active listening and open-ended questioning, while exploring participants’ motivations and goals (Miller & Rollnick, 2023). Relatedly, a 10-week PMP for inactive university students (n = 10) involving weekly mentor-supported exercise enhanced participants’ autonomy through increased freedom and skill in choosing activity type, timing, intensity, and meeting days (Keeler et al., 2021). In sum, these findings align with self-determination theory, which links autonomy-supportive tailored coaching with greater motivation and adherence (Deci & Ryan, 1980), and with the GREAT (Give, Reach Out, Encourage, Advise, Train) mentorship framework, which emphasizes guidance that promotes independence and confidence (Davis et al., 2023). Overall, structured yet flexible, PMPs may enhance students’ ownership over exercise engagement, particularly when social support emphasizes tailoring and autonomy promotion (Li et al., 2023; Sylvester et al., 2016; Wanwan & Khairani, 2025).
Varied Expectations
Mentors reported that participants’ early expectations sometimes differed from the program's intended focus. As in other university-based PMPs (e.g., Fried et al., 2018; Yan et al., 2023), SHINE mentors prioritized MI-based guidance over a directive approach. Fried et al. (2018), for example, noted that some participants expected individualized personal training, rather than broader health behavior support.
In SHINE, the preference for a more prescriptive model may reflect pandemic-related confidence gaps, reduced self-efficacy, and increased reliance on social support (Fabiano & Pearson, 2025; Hailey et al., 2022). Pandemic disruptions limited skill development for many students, forcing a shift from organized sport to independent exercise without guidance, and potentially hindering exercise self-efficacy and knowledge in the recovery era (Fabiano & Pearson, 2025). In this context, social support may be central to UW's exercise habits, with peers playing a vital role (Hailey et al., 2022). Mentors’ perspectives therefore suggest that early expectation setting is important, especially when participants may be seeking more directive support than a mentorship model is intended to provide.
Behavior Change
Virtual Communication
Mentors recalled that messaging offered a time-efficient way to provide guidance, as participants often sought workout support and shared progress virtually. This aligns with a 6-week PMP in which university students (n = 68) reported achieving goals more efficiently when they felt supported and comfortable seeking help (deJonge et al., 2021). In SHINE, however, virtual communication was sometimes delayed or brief due to busy schedules or unfamiliarity with the platform. This echoed findings from Uetova et al. (2024) and Hargreaves et al. (2020), who found that limited preprogram exposure to digital platforms hindered engagement.
To address low communication, mentors proactively sent follow-up messages consistent with nudging strategies that have improved adherence in other contexts (e.g., Shimoni et al., 2020). Participant-initiated conversations in SHINE were often longer and more detailed, particularly when participants expressed a sense of accomplishment or requested guidance. A similar pattern was reported by Milligan et al. (2021) in a text-based intervention for patients with tuberculosis (n = 21), where patient-initiated messages tended to be longer and more personal, while nurse-led messages were mainly reminders or check-ins. In campus-based programming, virtual communication may support behavior change by enhancing access to social support, particularly when delivered by student mentors.
Quantitatively, communication trends were consistent across the 6 weeks, with higher message volume at the program's start. This aligns with Joo et al. (2018), who conducted an 8-week PMP for older adults (n = 23) and found that more frequent early messages were driven by rapport building. In SHINE, mentors consistently sent more messages than participants, reflecting their role in sustaining engagement, similar to a 12-week digital mental health intervention where mentors sent nearly twice as many messages (Bernstein et al., 2024). Although message volume declined over time, response delays remained longer than in prior digital behavior-change studies, where response times ranged from 1 to 10 hours (Brabyn et al., 2014; Naughton et al., 2016). Collectively, these data suggest that mentor-initiated messages were important for maintaining contact, whereas participant-initiated communication appeared useful for deeper reflection, skill development, and sustained behavior change.
Exercise Engagement
Mentors observed noticeable improvements in participants’ exercise habits throughout the program. This reflects findings from a 6-week exercise-based PMP where undergraduate mentors (n = 22) supported elementary students and, in postprogram interviews, noted progress in participants’ fitness and enjoyment of exercise, attributing these changes to one-on-one engagement (Kabiri et al., 2022).
In SHINE, participants also identified academic workloads as occasional barriers to exercise motivation, consistent with prior research (Chim et al., 2020; Terzi et al., 2024). Nonetheless, mentorship has been shown to make exercise more purposeful and sustainable, especially for new exercisers (Wanwan & Khairani, 2025). Additionally, SHINE mentors reported that participants’ gym confidence increased over time, which they linked to guidance and support. This aligns with deJonge et al. (2021), whose 6-week campus-based exercise program paired 30 minute MI sessions with one mentor-led exercise session each week and highlighted improved competence through feedback and shared learning. Such evidence suggests that PMPs can enhance skill mastery, confidence, and exercise engagement, especially among UW (e.g., Fabiano & Pearson, 2025; Yan et al., 2023). Relatedly, SHINE mentors also noted that participants initially avoided unfamiliar equipment due to low confidence, a barrier that appeared more pronounced than in earlier programs, and may reflect broader knowledge gaps among recovery-era UW. Overall, PMPs appear to foster competence, confidence, and sustained engagement in this population, suggesting their relevance for campus-wellness initiatives seeking to promote exercise among UW, and potentially other groups.
Mentorship Skills
The SHINE mentors reported psychological growth from supporting participants’ exercise engagement. Similar growth and self-reflection were observed by Fried et al. (2018), where mentors described improvements in communication and listening skills, along with greater awareness of their capacity to support others. These skills likely developed, at least in part, through the MI workshop, as MI is designed to empower others through targeted listening and communication techniques (Miller & Rollnick, 2023).
Consistent with Leenstra et al. (2019), mentors in the present study described fulfillment in their helping role, noting that they could make a meaningful difference, serve as trusted sources of support, and contribute to participants’ growth and well-being. Mentors also reflected that the program reinforced their confidence in pursuing helping professions. Likewise, Kabiri et al. (2022) reported that undergraduate mentors were motivated by a desire to help others and promote health, gaining fulfillment as positive role models. These findings indicate that PMPs may benefit not only participants, but also mentors by promoting personal and professional growth, confidence, and a sense of purpose in supporting others. This underscores the broader value of PMPs in fostering a supportive environment for campus-based health promotion efforts.
Future Recommendations
Future initiatives should continue using PMPs to promote exercise among UW. The flexible SHINE program format appeared to benefit students by enhancing exercise knowledge while accommodating academic schedules. However, some participants expected a more structured training model. Thus, a pre-program workshop for participants focused on exercise structuring may help establish higher baseline knowledge and clarify program expectations beyond what virtual resources can provide.
To enhance support, programs may benefit from incorporating more paired exercise sessions at the start, then gradually reducing in-person mentor involvement as participants gain independence. Virtual communication, though time-efficient, was not always seamless. Utilizing more familiar platforms (e.g., WhatsApp, Messenger, and iMessage) and embedding simple nudges or reminders may enhance responsiveness and engagement. Identifying ways to enhance participants’ autonomous virtual communication may also strengthen rapport, social support, and behavior change.
Strengths
Unique features of SHINE program included short exercise sessions, flexible scheduling, individual and paired exercise sessions, and on-campus fitness facilities. These elements were perceived as facilitators to engagement, especially as participants and mentors were students with varying schedules.
To the best of the researcher team's knowledge, this is the first PMP intervention delivered in the pandemic recovery era that used qualitative data to capture mentors’ experiences. These findings offer valuable insight into UW's varying needs in the recovery era and strategies to enhance future programming.
Limitations
While paired exercise sessions facilitated social connection, researchers had limited insight into what occurred within sessions, as virtual communication was not always fully utilized. Understanding session content may illustrate how dyads interacted and inform future interventions. Text-message reviews offered some understanding of relationships and support but were limited when participants responded infrequently or after delays. Future work could incorporate content analyses, structured debriefing logs, or brief postsession reflections to better understand the nature and context of mentor–participant interactions.
Conclusion
The SHINE Program aimed to explore mentors’ experiences in a campus-based exercise PMP. Findings suggest mentors supported participants through MI-informed strategies and adapted to their needs, facilitated by the program's flexible, on-campus format. Virtual messaging helped coordinate sessions, although engagement was sometimes limited delayed participant responses and notification issues. Post-program, mentors reported experiencing enhanced confidence and mentorship skills.
Overall, these findings may help university campuses better support mentors in implementing exercise programs and assist students in developing regular exercise habits. Given limited access to tailored exercise support, particularly for UW facing social and psychological barriers, SHINE offers a feasible, low-barrier model that may promote motivation, wellbeing, and scalable student wellness initiatives.
Footnotes
Author Contributions
The study was conceived by MF and ESP and co-designed by ARM and JKG. The interviews were carried out by MF. The data analysis was carried out by MF and ESP, and supported by AAW. MF wrote the manuscript and received edits from the co-authors.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Masters Graduate Research Scholarship (195012) and St. Josephs Care Groups Applied Health Research Award.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.