Zachary J Christman1, Maureen Wilson-Genderson2, Allison Heid3, Rachel Pruchno3. 1. Department of Geography, Planning, and Sustainability, Rowan University, Glassboro, New Jersey. 2. Temple University School of Public Health, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 3. New Jersey Institute for Successful Aging, Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Characteristics of a neighborhood's built environment affect the walking behavior of older people, yet studies typically rely on small nonrepresentative samples that use either subjective reports or aggregate indicators from administrative sources to represent neighborhood characteristics. Our analyses examine the usefulness of a novel method for observing neighborhoods-virtual observations-and assess the extent to which virtual-based observations predict walking among older adults. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using Google Street View, we observed the neighborhoods of 2,224 older people and examined how characteristics of the neighborhood built environments are associated with the amount of time older people spend walking for leisure and purpose. RESULTS: Multilevel model analyses revealed that sidewalk characteristics had significant associations with both walking for purpose and leisure. Land use, including the presence of multifamily dwellings, commercial businesses, and parking lots were positively associated with walking for purpose and single-family detached homes were negatively associated with walking for purpose, but none of these characteristics were associated with leisure walking. Gardens/flowers were associated with walking for leisure but not purpose. Garbage/litter was not associated with either type of walking behavior. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Virtual observations are a useful method that provides meaningful information about neighborhoods. Findings demonstrate how neighborhood characteristics assessed virtually differentially impact walking for leisure and purpose among older adults and are interpreted within a social-ecological model.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Characteristics of a neighborhood's built environment affect the walking behavior of older people, yet studies typically rely on small nonrepresentative samples that use either subjective reports or aggregate indicators from administrative sources to represent neighborhood characteristics. Our analyses examine the usefulness of a novel method for observing neighborhoods-virtual observations-and assess the extent to which virtual-based observations predict walking among older adults. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using Google Street View, we observed the neighborhoods of 2,224 older people and examined how characteristics of the neighborhood built environments are associated with the amount of time older people spend walking for leisure and purpose. RESULTS: Multilevel model analyses revealed that sidewalk characteristics had significant associations with both walking for purpose and leisure. Land use, including the presence of multifamily dwellings, commercial businesses, and parking lots were positively associated with walking for purpose and single-family detached homes were negatively associated with walking for purpose, but none of these characteristics were associated with leisure walking. Gardens/flowers were associated with walking for leisure but not purpose. Garbage/litter was not associated with either type of walking behavior. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Virtual observations are a useful method that provides meaningful information about neighborhoods. Findings demonstrate how neighborhood characteristics assessed virtually differentially impact walking for leisure and purpose among older adults and are interpreted within a social-ecological model.
Authors: Atiya Mahmood; Habib Chaudhury; Yvonne L Michael; Michael Campo; Kara Hay; Ann Sarte Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2012-02-08 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: James F Sallis; Robert B Cervero; William Ascher; Karla A Henderson; M Katherine Kraft; Jacqueline Kerr Journal: Annu Rev Public Health Date: 2006 Impact factor: 21.981
Authors: Amanda Rzotkiewicz; Amber L Pearson; Benjamin V Dougherty; Ashton Shortridge; Nick Wilson Journal: Health Place Date: 2018-07-14 Impact factor: 4.078
Authors: Jeffrey S Wilson; Cheryl M Kelly; Mario Schootman; Elizabeth A Baker; Aniruddha Banerjee; Morgan Clennin; Douglas K Miller Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Ester Cerin; Andrea Nathan; Jelle van Cauwenberg; David W Barnett; Anthony Barnett Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Mikael Anne Greenwood-Hickman; Rod Walker; John Bellettiere; Andrea Z LaCroix; Boeun Kim; David Wing; KatieRose Richmire; Paul K Crane; Eric B Larson; Dori E Rosenberg Journal: J Aging Phys Act Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 1.961
Authors: Nestor Asiamah; Frank Frimpong Opuni; Faith Muhonja; Emelia Danquah; Simon Mawulorm Agyemang; Irene Agyemang; Akinlolu Omisore; Henry Kofi Mensah; Sylvester Hatsu; Rita Sarkodie Baffoe; Eric Eku; Christiana Afriyie Manu Journal: Health Promot Int Date: 2022-04-29 Impact factor: 3.734