Deborah A Cohen1, Stephanie Williamson2, Bing Han2. 1. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California; Kaiser Permanente, Research and Evaluation, Pasadena, California. Electronic address: deborah.a.cohen@kp.org. 2. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Urban neighborhood parks are designed to provide easy access to recreation and physical activity. We analyzed data from the first National Study of Neighborhood Parks, which assessed the characteristics and use of a representative sample of U.S. urban neighborhood parks. This article compares factors associated with active commuting (e.g., walking) to parks among men and women and park characteristics associated with observed moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) within neighborhood parks. METHODS: We used systematic direct observation to quantify parks visitors of all ages in 162 U.S. neighborhood parks in 25 cities in 2016 and surveyed a sample of adult visitors (877 women and 793 men). We used descriptive statistics to identify park facilities, amenities, and park management practices associated with park use. We also conducted multivariate regressions to identify factors most closely associated with observed park-based MVPA among all age groups and with self-reported levels of active commuting to parks among adults. RESULTS: Reasons to visit parks varied by gender, with women more likely than men to bring children (59% vs 42% for men; p < .001), and men more likely than women to go to parks to relax (38% vs 29%; p = .01). Bringing children to parks was associated with more motorized transport among women, but not among men. Active commuting to parks was associated with living closer to parks (β = -0.92; p < .0001), a greater frequency of park use (β = 0.99; p < .0001), and the park having a working drinking fountain (β = 0.62; p = .01), with no significant differences between men and women. Men and boys used park facilities very differently than women and girls. Men and boys engaged in the most MVPA in soccer fields, gyms, and skate parks, whereas for women and girls the top three sites were pools, playgrounds, and walking paths. CONCLUSIONS: Significant gender differences in why men and women visit parks and how parks are used likely reflect cultural determinants of gender roles. Our findings suggest that park management practices should be adjusted to mitigate the lower use of parks and lower levels of park-based MVPA among women and girls compared with men and boys.
INTRODUCTION: Urban neighborhood parks are designed to provide easy access to recreation and physical activity. We analyzed data from the first National Study of Neighborhood Parks, which assessed the characteristics and use of a representative sample of U.S. urban neighborhood parks. This article compares factors associated with active commuting (e.g., walking) to parks among men and women and park characteristics associated with observed moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) within neighborhood parks. METHODS: We used systematic direct observation to quantify parks visitors of all ages in 162 U.S. neighborhood parks in 25 cities in 2016 and surveyed a sample of adult visitors (877 women and 793 men). We used descriptive statistics to identify park facilities, amenities, and park management practices associated with park use. We also conducted multivariate regressions to identify factors most closely associated with observed park-based MVPA among all age groups and with self-reported levels of active commuting to parks among adults. RESULTS: Reasons to visit parks varied by gender, with women more likely than men to bring children (59% vs 42% for men; p < .001), and men more likely than women to go to parks to relax (38% vs 29%; p = .01). Bringing children to parks was associated with more motorized transport among women, but not among men. Active commuting to parks was associated with living closer to parks (β = -0.92; p < .0001), a greater frequency of park use (β = 0.99; p < .0001), and the park having a working drinking fountain (β = 0.62; p = .01), with no significant differences between men and women. Men and boys used park facilities very differently than women and girls. Men and boys engaged in the most MVPA in soccer fields, gyms, and skate parks, whereas for women and girls the top three sites were pools, playgrounds, and walking paths. CONCLUSIONS: Significant gender differences in why men and women visit parks and how parks are used likely reflect cultural determinants of gender roles. Our findings suggest that park management practices should be adjusted to mitigate the lower use of parks and lower levels of park-based MVPA among women and girls compared with men and boys.
Authors: D A Cohen; S Lapham; K R Evenson; S Williamson; D Golinelli; P Ward; A Hillier; T L McKenzie Journal: Public Health Date: 2013-03-17 Impact factor: 2.427
Authors: James F Sallis; Ester Cerin; Terry L Conway; Marc A Adams; Lawrence D Frank; Michael Pratt; Deborah Salvo; Jasper Schipperijn; Graham Smith; Kelli L Cain; Rachel Davey; Jacqueline Kerr; Poh-Chin Lai; Josef Mitáš; Rodrigo Reis; Olga L Sarmiento; Grant Schofield; Jens Troelsen; Delfien Van Dyck; Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij; Neville Owen Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-04-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Jenny Veitch; Gavin Abbott; Andrew T Kaczynski; Sonja A Wilhelm Stanis; Gina M Besenyi; Karen E Lamb Journal: Health Place Date: 2016-02-01 Impact factor: 4.078
Authors: Katrina L Piercy; Richard P Troiano; Rachel M Ballard; Susan A Carlson; Janet E Fulton; Deborah A Galuska; Stephanie M George; Richard D Olson Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Andrew T Kaczynski; Gina M Besenyi; Sonja A Wilhelm Stanis; Mohammad Javad Koohsari; Katherine B Oestman; Ryan Bergstrom; Luke R Potwarka; Rodrigo S Reis Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2014-12-06 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Andreia Teixeira; Ronaldo Gabriel; José Martinho; Graça Pinto; Luís Quaresma; Aurélio Faria; Irene Oliveira; Helena Moreira Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-11-14 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Amanda N Spitzer; Katrina Oselinsky; Rachel G Lucas-Thompson; Dan J Graham Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-08 Impact factor: 3.390