JOURNAL OF AMERICAN COLLEGE HEALTH, VOL. 53, NO. 6
Relationships Between Physical Activity and the Proximity of Exercise Facilities and Home Exercise Equipment Used by Undergraduate University Students Julian A. Reed, EdD; D. Allen Phillips, EdD
Abstract. The authors used stratified random sampling procedures to investigate the relationships among physical activity (PA), the proximity of exercise facilities, and the quantity of home exercise equipment in a sample of 411 undergraduates. To examine the data they collected from the modified Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire and the Home Environment Questionnaire, the authors used correlational analyses and analysis of variance. Intensity and duration of PA showed a significant relationship to the proximity of exercise facilities. Intensity, frequency, and duration of PA were significantly related to the quantity of students’ home exercise equipment. Freshmen and sophomores engaged in PA closer to their residences and participated in 3 more exercise bouts per week than juniors and seniors. These findings suggest that proximity of the activity episode may have an effect on PA behavior of college students.
performance of certain behaviors and inhibit other behaviors.4 However, researchers have not thoroughly examined the physical environment or studied how it is related to PA.5,6 Learning more about how the environment influences college students’ PA could lead to development of appropriate interventions or to changes in the location of facilities on university campuses. Authors of several articles in the literature have identified proximity to exercise facilities as an environmental characteristic and a possible determinant of PA,5–7 including a limited number of studies that analyzed the associations between the location of exercise facilities and activity patterns in adults. Suggestions from the data imply that convenient access to exercise facilities might encourage “nearby residents to be physically active and support ecological models of PA behavior.”6(p126) Proximity to exercise facilities, identified as an environmental characteristic, affects individual decisions to exercise.8 More than 30 years ago, Tersalinna and associates9 determined that proximity to a facility was the best predictor of volunteering for an exercise program. In supervised physical activity programs, researchers reported that individuals who lived close to the facility were less likely to drop out than participants from more distant points.10 In addition, Sallis and associates8 reported that another way an environment abundant with exercise facilities can encourage PA is by locating facilities close to one’s home. Authors of previous studies found that perceived inconvenience and travel problems were reasons for dropping out of activity programs.8,11 Travel time and traffic-related stress were reduced when participants walked to nearby facilities. Thus, physical proximity to an exercise facility may possibly reduce psychological and physical barriers to exercise.7 If proximity to exercise facilities influences an individual’s decision to exercise, it is logical to assume that the
Key Words: environment, exercise equipment, physical activity, university students
P
ublished studies have indicated that college students exhibit a variety of risky health behaviors, including the lack of regular physical activity (PA).1,2 As is true of many behaviors, PA is affected by a number of complex variables. To change an individual’s activity patterns, his or her behavior must be modified. Critics of theories and models of behavioral change point to the emphasis on individual behavior modification, rather than on sociocultural and physical environmental influences.3 To learn more about factors related to PA, researchers may decide to approach the problem from an ecological perspective and study the impact of individuals’ physical surroundings on their activity patterns. All human beings live in physical environments and are constantly exposed to inanimate objects that encourage the
Julian A. Reed is an assistant professor of health and exercise science at Furman University, Greenville, South Carolina, and D. Allen Phillips is a professor of physical education at the University of Northern Colorado, Greeley. 285
REED & PHILLIPS
presence of home exercise equipment may also affect exercise habits.12 An individual who has exercise equipment at home may be more likely to participate in regular PA. A study examining the relationships between the quantity of college students’ home exercise equipment as an environmental element and their PA patterns may have an impact on PA behavior and warrant further inquiry. Our purpose in conducting this study was (1) to analyze the relationships between the proximity of exercise initiation and levels of PA and (2) to study the relationships between PA and the quantity of students’ home exercise equipment. METHOD Participants The participants were 411 male and female undergraduate students enrolled at a research-intensive university. We used stratified sampling procedures to select a sample representative of the institution’s undergraduate enrollment. In fall 2001, the undergraduate enrollment totaled 9,339: 121 freshmen (29%); 99 sophomores (24%); 97 juniors (24%); and 94 seniors (23%). The university’s Institutional Research Department provided a random sample of undergraduate students. Randomly selecting individuals representing the different divisions of the university reduced the probability of studying a disproportionate number of participants from similar academic majors. The University Internal Review Board approved this study. Data Collection and Instruments We defined proximity of an exercise facility as the distance the facilities the students used were from their residence because previous studies have identified proximity as a variable that has an impact on activity patterns.6,7 We asked participants to provide their current location (nearest 2 cross streets) if they lived off campus. Those who lived on campus provided the name of the residence hall, fraternity, or sorority where they currently lived. Participants reported the exercise facilities they used and the name or precise location of each facility where they began their PA. We used a grid map to identify the exact locations of the participants’ residences and the exercise facilities they used. Determining precise measures for the distances between the respondents’ homes and the identified exercise facilities ensured the accuracy of our data collection. We used an overlay of concentric circles placed on the grid map to measure the distance from the individual’s residence to the identified exercise facilities. One inch on the grid map represented 1,200 feet. We summed the coordinates between the participants’ place of residence and exercise facility for a 7-day period. Summation was a calculation of the average distance to 1 or more facilities. If a participant reported being active at more than 1 facility during the 7-day period, a summation (totaled and divided by the number of facilities the student reported) related the coordinates between the participant’s residence and each exercise facility. 286
We defined frequency of physical activity as the number of occurrences of an exercise bout (ie, exercise session) over a 7-day period and measured it with the modified Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire,13 a self-administered 7-day recall survey designed to assess leisure-time PA in an average week. We modified the instrument by adding 3 activities to the strenuous exercise category and 1 activity to the moderate exercise category, which was consistent with the energy expenditure values of the other activities in these 2 categories. In addition, we modified the Godin questionnaire to assess duration of PA, as well as the location of the facilities where each participant initiated the activity. Our definition of intensity of physical activity was the sum of the metabolic equivalent (MET) values of the activities in which the participant engaged during the 7-day period, multiplied by the number of minutes per activity. This can be construed as how long (in minutes) the student in the sample participated at the different MET levels: 9, 5, and 3 METS for strenuous, moderate, and mild exercise, respectively (ie, 1 MET = rest/sitting; 3 = walking or putting away household items; 5 = activities that include moderate breathing; 8 = jogging at 6 miles per hour; 9 = running).13 We defined duration of physical activity as the number of minutes recorded per exercise bout over the 7-day period and measured it with the modified Godin questionnaire. Once each participant completed the questionnaire, we recorded the frequency of each exercise bout within each activity category. Multiplying the MET value for the activities identified in the strenuous, moderate, and mild exercise categories by the frequency for each category summed resulted in the total physical activity (TPA) score, along with the frequency and duration of PA. We asked the participants in this study to consider a 7-day period (1 week) to determine whether they performed any of the activities in the instrument during their free time and to identify how long (in minutes) they participated in the activities. Finally, we defined quantity of home exercise equipment as the different types of home exercise equipment each participant had, then used the Home Environment Exercise Questionnaire to measure the quantity of home exercise equipment. We modified the home environment questionnaire from the scale that Sallis and associates14 developed; it consists of 15 items that can be used for PA. We included some additional items that college students typically possess. Students’ responses to the home environment questionnaire identified the items that they had in their homes. Additional data collected with this instrument included the participants’ age, gender, athletic participation, and the number of semester credit hours completed. We excluded university-affiliated athletes from this study. Reliability and Validity of the Instruments A sample of 43 male and female undergraduate students participated in a pilot study to establish reliability and validity of the modified Godin questionnaire and the home environment questionnaire. We excluded respondents who participated in the pilot study from the final analyses. Each JOURNAL OF AMERICAN COLLEGE HEALTH
PROXIMITY OF EXERCISE FACILITIES
participant needed approximately 10 minutes to complete the 2 questionnaires. We established content validity by comparing the participants’ responses on the 2 questionnaires with the research questions. In addition, we compared the items in the 3 exercise categories on the Godin questionnaire13 with other validated instruments to ensure its validity. We also asked experts whether the activities in the strenuous, moderate, and mild activities were representative of 9, 5, and 3 MET activities, respectively. Extensive use of these 2 instruments by professionals at the highest level also contributed to their validity. We used a test–retest procedure to establish reliability. After the initial administration of the instruments, the researcher administered each instrument again to all 43 participants exactly 1 week after the original assessment. The reliability coefficient for the modified Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire resulted in r = .82, and the reliability coefficient for the Home Environment Exercise Questionnaire resulted in r = .85. RESULTS The data in Table 1 show the means and standard deviations for the following variables: TPA (MET Values x Frequency), intensity, frequency, duration, proximity, and quantity of university students’ home exercise equipment. We found that surveyed students initiated PA approximately two thirds of a mile from where they lived and completed an average of 10.5 bouts of exercise over a 7-day period. Women initiated PA slightly closer to their residence than
did male students. The female students participated in PA for 43.7 minutes per day and possessed an average of 4.61 pieces of exercise equipment. The male and female students possessed nearly the same amount of exercise equipment. Freshmen initiated PA much closer to their residences than did the sophomores, juniors, and seniors. We found few differences in the number of exercise bouts or minutes of weekly PA among the 4 classes. All 4 class levels reported similar values for average intensity over the 7-day period. The data revealed that 66.7% of the participants in this study engaged in PA less than two thirds of a mile from where they lived. Although proximity was not significantly correlated with frequency of PA, it is worth noting that 274 of the 411 participants engaged in PA close to their residence. Freshmen and sophomores participated in approximately 12 exercise bouts per week and initiated activity 1,668 and 3,669 feet, respectively, from their place of residence, whereas juniors and seniors engaged in approximately 9 exercise bouts per week and initiated activity 4,921 and 4,607 feet, respectively, from their place of residence. The data in Table 2 show a significant relationship between intensity and proximity of all students (r = .106, p < .05). The correlation between duration and proximity was statistically significant (r = .119, p < .05). It appears that as distance between place of residence and exercise facility increase, the duration and intensity of PA also increase. TPA scores and frequency of PA revealed no relation to the distance from their residence that participants initiated their leisure-time PA.
TABLE 1. Descriptive Data for Total Physical Activity (TPA), Intensity, Frequency, Duration, Proximity, and Quantity of Home Exercise Equipment, by Year in School and Gender (N = 411) Variable TPA (METs × frequency) M SD Intensity (METs × min) M SD Frequency [activity bouts (n)] M SD Duration (min/7 d) M SD Proximity (distance from home to exercise venue) M SD Quantity (number of equipment items) M SD
Freshman
71.52 36.79 2,430 1,997 11.5 6.16
Sophomore
75.33 51.53 2,436 1,797 11.85 8.48
Junior
57.71 41.11 2,083 2,116 9.11 5.88
Senior
64.04 41.79 2,224 2,053 9.43 6.35
Male
70.78 44.45 2,900 2,206 10.66 7.96
Female
65.81 42.57 2,003 1,806 10.48 6.25
Total
67.47 43.22 2,303 1,992 10.54 6.86
345 247
361 262
320 293
323 260
402 291
306 245
338 265
1,668 2,605
3,669 4,370
4,921 6,329
4,607 4,871
4,189 5,506
3,290 4,388
3,590 4,802
3.79 2.45
4.56 2.62
5.11 3.07
5.50 2.43
4.82 2.79
4.61 2.68
4.68 2.71
Note. MET = metabolic equivalent; TPA = total physical activity = MET values × frequency; Intensity = MET values × duration (minutes of intensity); Frequency = occurrence of an exercise bout; Duration = number of minutes/exercise bout; Proximity = distance between the location of exercise facilities and participant’s residence, in feet; Quantity = number of pieces of exercise equipment.
VOL 53, MAY/JUNE 2005
287
REED & PHILLIPS
TABLE 2. Relationships Between the Independent Variables and Proximity of Exercise Facilities and Quantity of Home Exercise Equipment Students Use, by Year in School and Gender Variable Total physical activity Proximity Quantity Intensity Proximity Quantity Frequency Proximity Quantity Duration Proximity Quantity
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Male
Female
Total
–.049 .287*
.057 .096
.078 .352*
.042 .108
–.151 .039
.110 .247*
.011 .176*
.208* .369*
.178 .160
.142 .304*
.030 .031
–.030 .009
.180* .332*
.106* .209*
.014 .135
.034 .321*
–.090 .116
–.195* .093
.047 .166*
–.059 .136*
.127 .136
.179 .355*
.043 .073
–.013 .091
.193* .310*
.119* .229*
–.110 .158 .204* .362*
*Correlation significant at α = .05.
Intensity and duration were significantly related to proximity among freshmen students (r = .208, r = .204, p < .05). For sophomores, juniors, and seniors, none of the independent variables was related (p > .05) to proximity. Year in school showed no association with the proximity of exercise facilities or exercise space, except for the freshmen students. For the female students, intensity and duration were significantly correlated (p < .05) with proximity. Frequency showed a significant negative correlation (r = –.195, p < .05) with proximity for male students, which suggested that as distance between place of residence and exercise facility decreased, the frequency of PA increased. All independent variables were significantly correlated (p < .05) with the amount of home exercise equipment that the female students used. However, for the male students, none of the variables was significantly related (p > .05) to quantity of home exercise equipment. TPA, intensity, and duration were significantly correlated (p < .05) with quantity of home exercise equipment for freshmen students. All of the independent variables showed a significant correlation (p < .05) with quantity of home exercise equipment for juniors. However, the quantity of home exercise equipment showed no significant correlation at the p > .05 level with any of the independent variables for sophomores and seniors. COMMENT When we applied analyses to reports from all 411 participants, we found that intensity and duration of PA increased as the proximity of exercise facilities increased. Exercise duration and intensity are closely related, and similar improvements in aerobic capacity increased with either a short-duration, high-intensity program or a long-duration, low-intensity program if the minimal threshold is exceeded for both duration and intensity.15 Thus, the important components of a daily exercise regimen include intensity and 288
duration. According to the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)16 guidelines, the most important factor in maintaining a healthy lifestyle is intensity of PA. Freshmen and sophomores showed the highest mean intensity and duration values. Although intensity and duration increased as proximity of exercise facilities increased, when we examined freshmen and sophomores independently we found that freshmen initiated PA 0.3 of a mile from their residences and the sophomores at 0.7 of a mile from where they lived. Juniors and seniors participated in approximately 9 exercise bouts per week and initiated PA 4,921 (.93 of a mile) and 4,607 feet (.87 of a mile), respectively, from their residences. These 2 values are considerably higher than the distances reported for freshmen and sophomores. Individuals who live close to their exercise facility may possibly be more inclined to exercise at a higher intensity and longer if perceived inconvenience does not influence their decisions. Jakicic and associates12 recognized that convenience or perception of exercise influences whether an individual adheres to an exercise program. Our examination of the sample by year in school revealed few significant relationships between intensity and duration of PA and the proximity of exercise facilities that the freshmen students used. The independent variables showed no significant correlations with the dependent variable for the other class levels. Suggestions from the data imply that proximity to exercise facilities might encourage freshmen and sophomores to engage in more exercise bouts over a 7day period. Because freshmen and sophomores often live on campus, their reasonably close proximity to exercise facilities is a factor that affects the frequency of PA over a 7-day period. Perceived inconvenience, travel problems, and larger differences in the mean distances from where students initiated PA suggested possible reasons why juniors and seniors parJOURNAL OF AMERICAN COLLEGE HEALTH
PROXIMITY OF EXERCISE FACILITIES
ticipated in approximately 3 fewer exercise bouts per week. Furthermore, that nearly all freshmen and approximately 30% of sophomores lived on campus, whereas fewer than 9% of all juniors and 5% of seniors were housed on campus, adds credence to this position. The descriptive data provided further findings that merit consideration. TPA, a variable we identified, achieved an adequate measure of intensity and frequency of PA with 1 value. The TPA values for freshmen and sophomores were related considerably more closely than the TPA values for juniors and seniors. The intensity values for freshmen and sophomores were also related more than the intensity values reported for juniors and seniors. Considering that freshmen and sophomores initiated PA closer to their residence than did juniors and seniors, these findings suggest that the variable of proximity of exercise facilities affected the frequency and intensity of PA during a 7-day period. These findings might indicate that convenience and accessibility influence the placement of exercise facilities on a university campus. Although the relationships between TPA, intensity, frequency, and duration of PA with quantity of home exercise equipment remained relatively low, those variables were more loosely related than the relationships reported between the independent variables and the proximity of the exercise facilities the university students used. When we examined all 411 participants, we found that as the amount of home exercise equipment increased, the TPA score, intensity, frequency, and duration of PA increased. An individual with exercise equipment at home is possibly more likely to participate in regular PA. “According to behavioral principles and the stimulus control model, an increase in the amount of exercise equipment in the home should cue an individual to exercise. One might hypothesize that these individuals would exercise more because of the greater number of exercise cues in their environment.”11(p365) Jakicic and associates12 examined men and women independently, and all of the independent variables showed a significant correlation with the quantity of the female students’ home exercise equipment. For men, none of the independent variables was significantly correlated with the amount of home exercise equipment they had. According to Henley,17 cultural pressures to attain lean body types and a youthful appearance appear stronger for women than for men. Thus, body-related concerns might signify a more predominant motive for women18 to possess and use home exercise equipment. However, Jakicic and associates12 reported that regular exercisers purchase more exercise equipment; this phenomenon, not the mere presence of home exercise equipment, has an impact on PA patterns. We found the quantity of home exercise equipment to be significantly related to TPA, frequency, intensity, and duration of PA. Hence, providing university students with increased opportunities to access home exercise equipment may increase their activity patterns. Findings from this study suggest that proximity of the activity episode may influence PA. Furthermore, the data imply that the amount of home exercise equipment suggests VOL 53, MAY/JUNE 2005
an additional environmental variable that influences PA levels of college students. Future researchers need to (1) examine the issue of accessibility as a potential environmental determinant or barrier to PA among college students, and (2) also investigate whether proximity to exercise facilities is an environmental variable that can increase activity patterns of sedentary college students. Researchers should also attempt to identify additional behavior locations in the university setting that encourage or discourage PA. In this study, we examined only 1 university setting. Researchers should also consider rural and urban universities to determine whether proximity to exercise facilities is an environmental factor affecting PA in those different populations. Future studies should also be designed to examine whether proximity to an exercise facility among different ethnic and cultural groups is an environmental influence on an individual’s decision to exercise. NOTE For comments and further information, please address correspondence to Julian A. Reed, EdD, Assistant Professor, Health and Exercise Science, Furman University, Greenville, South Carolina 29613 (e-mail:
[email protected]). REFERENCES 1. Dinger MK. Health-risk behaviors of high school and college females. J Phys Educ, Recreat, Dance. 2000;71:19–22. 2. Patrick K, Covin J, Fulop M, Calfas K, Lovato C. Health risk behaviors among California college students. J Am Coll Health. 1997;45:265–272. 3. McLeroy KR, Bibeau D, Steeckler A, Glanz K. An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Educ Q. 1988;15:351–377. 4. Baranowski T. Reciprocal determinism at the stages of behavior change: an integration of community, personal, and behavioral perspectives. Int Q Community Health Educ. 1990;10:297–327. 5. Sallis JF, Owen N. Ecological models. In: Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass; 1997:403–424. 6. Sallis JF, Owen N. Physical Activity and Behavioral Medicine. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage; 1999. 7. King AC, Jeffery RW, Fridinger F, et al. Environmental and policy approaches to cardiovascular disease prevention through physical activity: issues and opportunities. Health Educ Q. 1995;22:499–511. 8. Sallis JF, Hovell MF, Hofstetter CR, et al. Distance between homes and exercise facilities related to frequency of exercise among San Diego residents. Public Health Rep. 1990; 2:179–185. 9. Tersalinna P, Partanen T, Koskela A, Oja P. Characteristics affecting willingness of executives to participate in an activity program aimed at coronary heart disease prevention. J Sport Med. 1969;9:224–229. 10. Dishman RK. Compliance/adherence in health-related exercise. Health Psychol. 1982;1:237–267. 11. Dishman RK. Advances in Exercise Adherence. Champaign, Ill: Human Kinetics; 1994. 12. Jakicic JM, Wing RR, Butler BA, Jeffery RW. The relationship between presence of exercise equipment in the home and physical activity level. Am J Health Promot. 1997;11:363–365. 13. Godin G, Shephard RJ. A simple method to assess exercise behavior in the community. Can J Appl Sport Sci. 1985;10:141–146. 14. Sallis JF, Johnson MF, Calfas KJ, Caparosa S, Nichols JF. Assessing perceived physical environmental variables that may influence physical activity. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1997;68:345–351. 289
REED & PHILLIPS 15. Foss ML, Keteyian SJ. Fox’s Physiological Basis for Exercise and Sport. Boston, Mass: WCB McGraw-Hill; 1998. 16. American College of Sports Medicine. Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. 3rd ed. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Williams; 1998:441–442.
17. Henley H. Body Politics: Power, Sex and Nonverbal Communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1977. 18. Frederick CM, Ryan RM. Differences in motivation for sport and exercise and their relations with participation and mental health. J Sport Behav. 1993;16:124–146.
JACH GOING JACH GOING LIVE LIVE WITH MANUSCRIPT MANUSCRIPT CENTRAL! CENTRAL! WITH The Journal of American College Health is now receiving submissions only through Manuscript Central—an online manuscript peer-review processing system. This changes the way authors submit manuscripts to JACH and will expedite our peerreview process. To submit a manuscript, visit http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/heldref/jach. See our new Guidelines for Contributors on the inside back cover for our manuscript submission procedures. For further information about the program, please visit these Web sites:
✓http://www.scholarone.com/products_manuscriptcentral.html (link to
information about Manuscript Central on ScholarOne's Web site)
✓http://mcv3help.manuscriptcentral.com/stalkjddfesd/MC3Help.htm (link to
the user guide, which has information on how Manuscript Central works)
✓http://mcv3help.manuscriptcentral.com/intro/ (short video presentation about Manuscript Central)
290
JOURNAL OF AMERICAN COLLEGE HEALTH
