Limits...
The environment and physical activity: The influence of psychosocial, perceived and built environmental factors.

Maddison R, Hoorn SV, Jiang Y, Mhurchu CN, Exeter D, Dorey E, Bullen C, Utter J, Schaaf D, Turley M - Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act (2009)

Bottom Line: The model explained 13% of time spent in moderate and vigorous physical activity (Actigraph).Unique and individual contribution was made by intention.Implications of these findings are discussed.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Clinical Trials Research Unit, School of Population Health, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland. r.maddison@ctru.auckland.ac.nz.

ABSTRACT

Unlabelled: : This study sought to integrate perceived and built environmental and individual factors into the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) model to better understand adolescents' physical activity.

Methods: Participants (n = 110) aged 12 to 17 years (M = 14.6 +/- 1.55) were recruited from two large metropolitan high schools in Auckland, New Zealand, were included in the analysis. Participants completed measures of the revised TPB and the perceived environment. Individual factors such as ethnicity and level of deprivation were also collected. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) software was used to measure the physical environment (walkability, access to physical activity facilities). Physical activity was assessed using the ActiGraph accelerometer and the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Adolescents (PAQ-A). Data from the various sources were combined to develop an integrated model integrated for statistical analysis using structural equation modeling.

Results: The TPB model variables (intention and perceived behavioral control) explained 43% of the variance of PAQ-A. Unique and individual contributions were made by intention and PBC and home ownership of home equipment. The model explained 13% of time spent in moderate and vigorous physical activity (Actigraph). Unique and individual contribution was made by intention.

Conclusion: Social cognitive variables were better predictors of both subjective and objective physical activity compared to perceived environmental and built environment factors. Implications of these findings are discussed.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Integrated model to predict moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Note: All effects are standardized. Bold lines indicated statistically significant relationships (p < 0.05).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2683167&req=5

Figure 2: Integrated model to predict moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Note: All effects are standardized. Bold lines indicated statistically significant relationships (p < 0.05).

Mentions: A second model (Figure 2) was tested with objective physical activity (accelerometer) as the dependant variable (time spent in MVPA). The model again resulted in a modest fit of the data [Χ2 (29) = 78.04; p < 0.0001; CFI = .70; RMSEA = .12], with approximately 13% of the response variance of objective physical activity explained. Intention (standardized effect = .30) and PBC (standardized effect = .17; p = 0.09) had the strongest direct effects on objective PA. None of the perceived or built environment variables were directly related to accelerometer measured PA.


The environment and physical activity: The influence of psychosocial, perceived and built environmental factors.

Maddison R, Hoorn SV, Jiang Y, Mhurchu CN, Exeter D, Dorey E, Bullen C, Utter J, Schaaf D, Turley M - Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act (2009)

Integrated model to predict moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Note: All effects are standardized. Bold lines indicated statistically significant relationships (p < 0.05).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2683167&req=5

Figure 2: Integrated model to predict moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Note: All effects are standardized. Bold lines indicated statistically significant relationships (p < 0.05).
Mentions: A second model (Figure 2) was tested with objective physical activity (accelerometer) as the dependant variable (time spent in MVPA). The model again resulted in a modest fit of the data [Χ2 (29) = 78.04; p < 0.0001; CFI = .70; RMSEA = .12], with approximately 13% of the response variance of objective physical activity explained. Intention (standardized effect = .30) and PBC (standardized effect = .17; p = 0.09) had the strongest direct effects on objective PA. None of the perceived or built environment variables were directly related to accelerometer measured PA.

Bottom Line: The model explained 13% of time spent in moderate and vigorous physical activity (Actigraph).Unique and individual contribution was made by intention.Implications of these findings are discussed.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Clinical Trials Research Unit, School of Population Health, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland. r.maddison@ctru.auckland.ac.nz.

ABSTRACT

Unlabelled: : This study sought to integrate perceived and built environmental and individual factors into the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) model to better understand adolescents' physical activity.

Methods: Participants (n = 110) aged 12 to 17 years (M = 14.6 +/- 1.55) were recruited from two large metropolitan high schools in Auckland, New Zealand, were included in the analysis. Participants completed measures of the revised TPB and the perceived environment. Individual factors such as ethnicity and level of deprivation were also collected. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) software was used to measure the physical environment (walkability, access to physical activity facilities). Physical activity was assessed using the ActiGraph accelerometer and the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Adolescents (PAQ-A). Data from the various sources were combined to develop an integrated model integrated for statistical analysis using structural equation modeling.

Results: The TPB model variables (intention and perceived behavioral control) explained 43% of the variance of PAQ-A. Unique and individual contributions were made by intention and PBC and home ownership of home equipment. The model explained 13% of time spent in moderate and vigorous physical activity (Actigraph). Unique and individual contribution was made by intention.

Conclusion: Social cognitive variables were better predictors of both subjective and objective physical activity compared to perceived environmental and built environment factors. Implications of these findings are discussed.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus