Show simple item record

Comparing objective measures of environmental supports for pedestrian travel in adults

dc.contributor.authorShay, Elizabeth
dc.contributor.authorRodriguez, Daniel A
dc.contributor.authorCho, Gihyoug
dc.contributor.authorClifton, Kelly J
dc.contributor.authorEvenson, Kelly R
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-22T15:21:47Z
dc.date.available2021-11-22T15:21:47Z
dc.date.issued2009-11-19
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.13016/jsrm-6lly
dc.identifier.citationShay, E., Rodriguez, D.A., Cho, G. et al. Comparing objective measures of environmental supports for pedestrian travel in adults. Int J Health Geogr 8, 62 (2009).en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/28161
dc.description.abstractEvidence is growing that the built environment has the potential to influence walking--both positively and negatively. However, uncertainty remains on the best approaches to representing the pedestrian environment in order to discern associations between walking and the environment. Research into the relationship between environment and walking is complex; challenges include choice of measures (objective and subjective), quality and availability of data, and methods for managing quantitative data through aggregation and weighting. In particular, little research has examined how to aggregate built environment data to best represent the neighborhood environments expected to influence residents' behavior. This study examined associations between walking and local pedestrian supports (as measured with an environmental audit), comparing the results of models using three different methods to aggregate and weight pedestrian features. Using data collected in 2005-2006 for a sample of 251 adult residents of Montgomery County, MD, we examined associations between pedestrian facilities and walking behaviors (pedestrian trips and average daily steps). Adjusted negative binomial and ordinary least-squares regression models were used to compare three different data aggregation techniques (raw averages, length weighting, distance weighting) for measures of pedestrian facilities that included presence, condition, width and connectivity of sidewalks, and presence of crossing aids and crosswalks. Participants averaged 8.9 walk trips during the week; daily step counts averaged 7042. The three aggregation techniques revealed different associations between walk trips and the various pedestrian facilities. Crossing aids and good sidewalk conditions were associated with walk trips more than were other pedestrian facilities, while sidewalk facilities and features showed associations with steps not observed for crossing aids and crosswalks. Among three methods of aggregation examined, the method that accounted for distance from participant's home to the pedestrian facility (distance weighting) is promising; at the same time, it requires the most time and effort to calculate. This finding is consistent with the behavioral assumption that travelers may respond to environmental features closer to their residence more strongly than to more distant environmental qualities.en_US
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-8-62
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Natureen_US
dc.subjectDistance Weightingen_US
dc.subjectStep Counten_US
dc.subjectHigh Tertileen_US
dc.subjectAggregation Techniqueen_US
dc.subjectSidewalk Conditionen_US
dc.titleComparing objective measures of environmental supports for pedestrian travel in adultsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.relation.isAvailableAtDigital Repository at the University of Maryland
dc.relation.isAvailableAtUniversity of Maryland (College Park, Md)


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record