BACKGROUND: Active travel such as walking and cycling has potential to increase physical activity levels in sedentary individuals. Motorised car travel is a sedentary behaviour that contributes to carbon emissions. There have been recent calls for technology that will improve our ability to measure these travel behaviours, and in particular evaluate modes and volumes of active versus sedentary travel. The purpose of this pilot study is to investigate the potential efficacy of a new electronic measurement device, a wearable digital camera called SenseCam, in travel research. METHODS: Participants (n = 20) were required to wear the SenseCam device for one full day of travel. The device automatically records approximately 3,600 time-stamped, first-person point-of-view images per day, without any action required by the wearer. Participants also completed a self-report travel diary over the same period for comparison, and were interviewed afterwards to assess user burden and experience. RESULTS: There were a total of 105 confirmed journeys in this pilot. The new SenseCam device recorded more journeys than the travel diary (99 vs. 94). Although the two measures demonstrated an acceptable correlation for journey duration (r = 0.92, p < 0.001) self-reported journey duration was over-reported (mean difference 154 s per journey; 95% CI = 89 to 218 s; 95% limits of agreement = 154 ± 598 s (-444 to 752 s)). The device also provided visual data that was used for directed interviews about sources of error. CONCLUSIONS: Direct observation of travel behaviour from time-stamped images shows considerable potential in the field of travel research. Journey duration derived from direct observation of travel behaviour from time-stamped images appears to suggest over-reporting of self-reported journey duration.
BACKGROUND: Active travel such as walking and cycling has potential to increase physical activity levels in sedentary individuals. Motorised car travel is a sedentary behaviour that contributes to carbon emissions. There have been recent calls for technology that will improve our ability to measure these travel behaviours, and in particular evaluate modes and volumes of active versus sedentary travel. The purpose of this pilot study is to investigate the potential efficacy of a new electronic measurement device, a wearable digital camera called SenseCam, in travel research. METHODS:Participants (n = 20) were required to wear the SenseCam device for one full day of travel. The device automatically records approximately 3,600 time-stamped, first-person point-of-view images per day, without any action required by the wearer. Participants also completed a self-report travel diary over the same period for comparison, and were interviewed afterwards to assess user burden and experience. RESULTS: There were a total of 105 confirmed journeys in this pilot. The new SenseCam device recorded more journeys than the travel diary (99 vs. 94). Although the two measures demonstrated an acceptable correlation for journey duration (r = 0.92, p < 0.001) self-reported journey duration was over-reported (mean difference 154 s per journey; 95% CI = 89 to 218 s; 95% limits of agreement = 154 ± 598 s (-444 to 752 s)). The device also provided visual data that was used for directed interviews about sources of error. CONCLUSIONS: Direct observation of travel behaviour from time-stamped images shows considerable potential in the field of travel research. Journey duration derived from direct observation of travel behaviour from time-stamped images appears to suggest over-reporting of self-reported journey duration.
Authors: William L Haskell; I-Min Lee; Russell R Pate; Kenneth E Powell; Steven N Blair; Barry A Franklin; Caroline A Macera; Gregory W Heath; Paul D Thompson; Adrian Bauman Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Richard P Troiano; David Berrigan; Kevin W Dodd; Louise C Mâsse; Timothy Tilert; Margaret McDowell Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Andrew P Jones; Emma G Coombes; Simon J Griffin; Esther Mf van Sluijs Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2009-07-17 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Daniel Castro; Steven Hickson; Vinay Bettadapura; Edison Thomaz; Gregory Abowd; Henrik Christensen; Irfan Essa Journal: Proc Int Symp Wearable Comput Date: 2015-08
Authors: Alyse Davies; Virginia Chan; Adrian Bauman; Louise Signal; Cameron Hosking; Luke Gemming; Margaret Allman-Farinelli Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2020-09-04 Impact factor: 5.614
Authors: Jordan A Carlson; Marta M Jankowska; Kristin Meseck; Suneeta Godbole; Loki Natarajan; Fredric Raab; Barry Demchak; Kevin Patrick; Jacqueline Kerr Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Yan Kestens; Alexandre Lebel; Basile Chaix; Christelle Clary; Mark Daniel; Robert Pampalon; Marius Theriault; S V P Subramanian Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-08-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Andrew J Atkin; Trish Gorely; Stacy A Clemes; Thomas Yates; Charlotte Edwardson; Soren Brage; Jo Salmon; Simon J Marshall; Stuart J H Biddle Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Paul Kelly; Aiden R Doherty; Alex Hamilton; Anne Matthews; Alan M Batterham; Michael Nelson; Charlie Foster; Gill Cowburn Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Aiden R Doherty; Paul Kelly; Jacqueline Kerr; Simon Marshall; Melody Oliver; Hannah Badland; Alexander Hamilton; Charlie Foster Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2013-02-13 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Melody Oliver; Aiden R Doherty; Paul Kelly; Hannah M Badland; Suzanne Mavoa; Janine Shepherd; Jacqueline Kerr; Simon Marshall; Alexander Hamilton; Charlie Foster Journal: Int J Health Geogr Date: 2013-04-10 Impact factor: 3.918
Authors: Jacqueline Kerr; James F Sallis; Brian E Saelens; Kelli L Cain; Terry L Conway; Lawrence D Frank; Abby C King Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2012-07-30 Impact factor: 6.457