OBJECTIVE AND PARTICIPANTS: At 2 Arizona State University (ASU) campuses, the authors measured student activity and distance walked on campus, as well as student-reported walkability around the student union. METHODS: Students from ASU-Polytechnic (n = 20, 33% male) and ASU-Tempe (n = 20, 60% male) recorded distance walked on campus and wore physical activity monitors for 5 days. RESULTS: Polytechnic students spent an average of 36.9 minutes in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity each week; Tempe students spent 69.5 minutes (p < .001). At Polytechnic, students walked an average of 7,674 steps per weekday; at Tempe, 11,294 steps (p = .003). Female students at Polytechnic walked an average of 1.3 km/d; at Tempe, 4.3 km/d (p < .001). At Polytechnic, men walked an average of 1.4 km/d; at Tempe, 3.1 km/d (p = .03). Tempe students rated campus walk-ability as very good, whereas Polytechnic students rated it fair (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Students at both campuses met activity recommendations; noted differences may be attributed to the built environment's contribution to walkability.
OBJECTIVE AND PARTICIPANTS: At 2 Arizona State University (ASU) campuses, the authors measured student activity and distance walked on campus, as well as student-reported walkability around the student union. METHODS: Students from ASU-Polytechnic (n = 20, 33% male) and ASU-Tempe (n = 20, 60% male) recorded distance walked on campus and wore physical activity monitors for 5 days. RESULTS: Polytechnic students spent an average of 36.9 minutes in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity each week; Tempe students spent 69.5 minutes (p < .001). At Polytechnic, students walked an average of 7,674 steps per weekday; at Tempe, 11,294 steps (p = .003). Female students at Polytechnic walked an average of 1.3 km/d; at Tempe, 4.3 km/d (p < .001). At Polytechnic, men walked an average of 1.4 km/d; at Tempe, 3.1 km/d (p = .03). Tempe students rated campus walk-ability as very good, whereas Polytechnic students rated it fair (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Students at both campuses met activity recommendations; noted differences may be attributed to the built environment's contribution to walkability.
Authors: David E Conroy; Jaclyn P Maher; Steriani Elavsky; Amanda L Hyde; Shawna E Doerksen Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2013-03-11 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Caitlin P Bailey; Shanti Sharma; Christina D Economos; Erin Hennessy; Caitlin Simon; Daniel P Hatfield Journal: Obes Sci Pract Date: 2020-09-23