Christopher Comstock1, Kendra Kattelmann2, Marjorie Zastrow3, Lacey McCormack1, Erika Lindshield4, Yijing Li4, Nancy Muturi5, Koushik Adhikari6, Tandalayo Kidd4. 1. Health and Nutritional Sciences Department, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD. 2. Health and Nutritional Sciences Department, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD. Electronic address: kendra.kattelmann@sdstate.edu. 3. South Dakota State University Extension Services, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD. 4. Department of Human Nutrition, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS. 5. A.Q. Miller School of Journalism and Mass Communications, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS. 6. Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Assess environmental support of physical activity (PA) in rural areas and determine whether there is a correlation between the measured environment for PA and participant perceptions of the environment for PA. DESIGN: The PA environment was assessed using the Active Neighborhood Checklist (ANC) and the Physical Activity Resource Assessment (PARA). Youth behavior and perceptions related to PA and the local environment were assessed using 5 questions from previously validated tools. SETTING: Four rural low-income communities in South Dakota and Kansas. PARTICIPANTS: Sixth- through eighth-grade youth. VARIABLES MEASURED: Physical Activity Resource Assessment, ANC, behavior, and perception. ANALYSIS: The authors used ANOVA to determine whether there were differences in ANC, PARA, and Perception of the Environment scores among communities. Pearson correlations were used to assess associations between ANC and student perception of the environment and PARA and student perception of the environment. RESULTS: There were no differences in total ANC or total PARA among communities. Perception was weakly correlated with total ANC (multivariate coefficient, 0.016; P = .026; n = 308) but not total PARA. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Perception of PA in rural communities may not match objective measures. Future research should work toward refining and improving existing environmental audit tools and developing new, comprehensive, location-specific tools.
OBJECTIVE: Assess environmental support of physical activity (PA) in rural areas and determine whether there is a correlation between the measured environment for PA and participant perceptions of the environment for PA. DESIGN: The PA environment was assessed using the Active Neighborhood Checklist (ANC) and the Physical Activity Resource Assessment (PARA). Youth behavior and perceptions related to PA and the local environment were assessed using 5 questions from previously validated tools. SETTING: Four rural low-income communities in South Dakota and Kansas. PARTICIPANTS: Sixth- through eighth-grade youth. VARIABLES MEASURED: Physical Activity Resource Assessment, ANC, behavior, and perception. ANALYSIS: The authors used ANOVA to determine whether there were differences in ANC, PARA, and Perception of the Environment scores among communities. Pearson correlations were used to assess associations between ANC and student perception of the environment and PARA and student perception of the environment. RESULTS: There were no differences in total ANC or total PARA among communities. Perception was weakly correlated with total ANC (multivariate coefficient, 0.016; P = .026; n = 308) but not total PARA. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Perception of PA in rural communities may not match objective measures. Future research should work toward refining and improving existing environmental audit tools and developing new, comprehensive, location-specific tools.