東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Analysis of environments related to ...

Sisson, Susan Beckwith.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Analysis of environments related to cycling on a university campus.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Analysis of environments related to cycling on a university campus./
Author:	Sisson, Susan Beckwith.
Description:	106 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-03, Section: A, page: 0852.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International67-03A.
Subject:	Education, Health. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3210215
ISBN:	9780542590849

Analysis of environments related to cycling on a university campus.
Sisson, Susan Beckwith.

Analysis of environments related to cycling on a university campus. - 106 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-03, Section: A, page: 0852.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Arizona State University, 2006.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate environmental influences on cycling behaviors of students attending a large urban university and to compare cyclists (C) and motorists (M) (auto, motorcycle, carpool, bus) on objectively determined distance lived from campus, objective physical activity (PA), and trip mode share. Convenience sample of students (n=97) living within five miles of campus (regardless of commuting mode) completed the online survey. Addresses of a subsample of students (C=28 vs. M=40) were geocoded ArcGIS 9.0 and distance from residence to campus was calculated. The subsample (C=34days vs. M=35days) wore an accelerometer (to determine minutes in moderate to vigorous PA or MVPA and steps/day) and completed a travel log (C=47days vs. M=44days) (minutes/trip mode, trip mode share) for two on-campus days. Frequencies were calculated on survey responses. Differences between cyclists and motorists were compared as survey frequencies and trip mode share using Chi Square and geocoded addresses and minutes/trip mode using Mann-Whitney U-test. Both days of direct data were amalgamated to one, so n represents days of data rather than number of participants. Two additional variables were calculated to better understand active commuting: minutes of cycling commuting (from travel log) +MVPA; walking+cycling minutes (also from travel log). PA variables were compared using independent t-test. Of the sample, 35.7% cycled and 47.9% used motorized means. The most frequent responses for determinants for motorists were: time (68.1%), distance lived (55.3%) and off-campus need for car (51.1%). For cyclists they were: distance from campus (88.2%), exercise (88.2%), and money (82.4%). Groups were significantly different for: survey analysis (p<0.05); distance lived from campus (miles) (C=0.3+/-0.6 vs. M=0.9+/-1.1; p<.000); steps/day (C=11051+/-4295 vs. M=9174+/-3319; p=0.046); minutes MVPA+bicycle commuting (C=85.7+37.0 vs. M=50.3+/-23.8; p<0.001); minutes motorized travel (C=22.6+/-26.3 vs. M=60.6+/-32.1; p<0.001), minutes bicycle travel (C=45.4+/-27.0 vs. M=2.8+/-7.4; p<0.001); minutes walking travel (C=11.3+/-12.8 vs. M=24.1+/-20.9; p=0.003); minutes active commuting (C=56.7+/-29.2 vs. M=26.9+/-19.9; p<.001). In conclusion, physical and economic determinants appear to be more important than sociocultural. Cyclists lived closer to campus, accumulated more minutes of activity (29 minutes/day), spent less time sedentary in motorized transportation (38 minutes/day), and spent more time in active transportation.

ISBN: 9780542590849Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017668
Education, Health.

Analysis of environments related to cycling on a university campus.
LDR:03483nmm 2200289 4500 001 1834918
005 20071129070333.5
008 130610s2006 eng d
020 $a 9780542590849
035 $a (UMI)AAI3210215
035 $a AAI3210215
040 $a UMI $c UMI
100 1 $a Sisson, Susan Beckwith. $3 1923554
245 1 0 $a Analysis of environments related to cycling on a university campus.
300 $a 106 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-03, Section: A, page: 0852.
500 $a Adviser: Catrine Tudor-Locke.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Arizona State University, 2006.
520 $a The purpose of this study was to evaluate environmental influences on cycling behaviors of students attending a large urban university and to compare cyclists (C) and motorists (M) (auto, motorcycle, carpool, bus) on objectively determined distance lived from campus, objective physical activity (PA), and trip mode share. Convenience sample of students (n=97) living within five miles of campus (regardless of commuting mode) completed the online survey. Addresses of a subsample of students (C=28 vs. M=40) were geocoded ArcGIS 9.0 and distance from residence to campus was calculated. The subsample (C=34days vs. M=35days) wore an accelerometer (to determine minutes in moderate to vigorous PA or MVPA and steps/day) and completed a travel log (C=47days vs. M=44days) (minutes/trip mode, trip mode share) for two on-campus days. Frequencies were calculated on survey responses. Differences between cyclists and motorists were compared as survey frequencies and trip mode share using Chi Square and geocoded addresses and minutes/trip mode using Mann-Whitney U-test. Both days of direct data were amalgamated to one, so n represents days of data rather than number of participants. Two additional variables were calculated to better understand active commuting: minutes of cycling commuting (from travel log) +MVPA; walking+cycling minutes (also from travel log). PA variables were compared using independent t-test. Of the sample, 35.7% cycled and 47.9% used motorized means. The most frequent responses for determinants for motorists were: time (68.1%), distance lived (55.3%) and off-campus need for car (51.1%). For cyclists they were: distance from campus (88.2%), exercise (88.2%), and money (82.4%). Groups were significantly different for: survey analysis (p<0.05); distance lived from campus (miles) (C=0.3+/-0.6 vs. M=0.9+/-1.1; p<.000); steps/day (C=11051+/-4295 vs. M=9174+/-3319; p=0.046); minutes MVPA+bicycle commuting (C=85.7+37.0 vs. M=50.3+/-23.8; p<0.001); minutes motorized travel (C=22.6+/-26.3 vs. M=60.6+/-32.1; p<0.001), minutes bicycle travel (C=45.4+/-27.0 vs. M=2.8+/-7.4; p<0.001); minutes walking travel (C=11.3+/-12.8 vs. M=24.1+/-20.9; p=0.003); minutes active commuting (C=56.7+/-29.2 vs. M=26.9+/-19.9; p<.001). In conclusion, physical and economic determinants appear to be more important than sociocultural. Cyclists lived closer to campus, accumulated more minutes of activity (29 minutes/day), spent less time sedentary in motorized transportation (38 minutes/day), and spent more time in active transportation.
590 $a School code: 0010.
650 4 $a Education, Health. $3 1017668
650 4 $a Transportation. $3 555912
650 4 $a Recreation. $3 535376
690 $a 0680
690 $a 0709
690 $a 0814
710 2 0 $a Arizona State University. $3 1017445
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 67-03A.
790 1 0 $a Tudor-Locke, Catrine, $e advisor
790 $a 0010
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2006
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3210215