Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byPamela Harrell Modified over 8 years ago
1
David Rowe Physical Activity for Health Research Group University of Strathclyde
2
Brief rationale Description of the intervention Description of the study design and methods Results Active commuting and daily physical activity Intention and Habit Take-forward messages 2
3
3
4
Curricular intervention (6 weeks) Aimed at P5 (8-9 years old) Teachers’ resource handbook: Introductory activities Write and draw activities, target setting, etc. 13 Lesson plans e.g., the local environment, mapping skills, road safety, healthy lifestyles, etc. Variety of methods – class and small-group discussions, worksheets, practical tasks, take- home activities 4
5
Other resources: Classroom poster to record daily travel mode Pupil pack (used at home): Guides for parents “My travel challenge” Progress chart Fluorescent stickers 5
6
McKee et al. (2007) Quasi-experiment, two schools (n = 55) Distance walked and distance by car, measured via self-report (route mapping) Walking: Intervention 198 772 m/day Control 242 285 m/day Car: Intervention 2018 933 m/day Control 933 947m/day 6
7
SE-CAT study added: Objective measures of physical activity Stratified sample (high and low SES) Assess variety of theoretical model parameters (Barriers, Motivations, Self-Efficacy, Theory of Planned Behavior, Habit) Follow-up (maintenance) measures (5-mth, 12- mth) Assessment of parent perceptions Process evaluation (teacher chceklist) Pilot (McMinn et al., 2012, BMC Public Health) 7
8
Physical activity measures (main behavioral outcome) Total daily, morning commute, afternoon commute Route characteristics Actigraph GT1M, NL-1000, Trackstick (GPS) Travel diary (home journey) Mode Arrival time 8
9
Parent and child questionnaires Socioeconomic (car ownership, income, home ownership, home SIMD, etc.) Stage of Change Barriers, facilitators, benefits Self-efficacy Theory of Planned Behavior Attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, intention Habit Walking Car/bus 9
10
Active commuting/physical activity Actigraph-determined steps To school (a.m. commute), from school (p.m. commute), and total day Psychological predictors Theory of Planned Behavior components Habit (Walk, Car/Bus) 10
11
1)What are the immediate, medium- and long-term effects of the Travelling Green intervention on children’s active commuting? and on determinants of active commuting? 2)How does season of the year moderate the effect of the Travelling Green intervention on children’s active commuting? and on determinants of active commuting? 3)What are the personal and environmental determinants of active commuting in children and of their response to the intervention? 4)What is the role of habit in explaining children’s active commuting and their response to the intervention? 5)Moderating effect of SES 6)Role of parents 11
12
163 children (P5; 8-9 yr) in 5 schools Intervention schools (I; n = 79) Comparison schools (C; n = 84) Actigraph GT1M accelerometer steps during one school week 4 measurement points: Baseline (fall) Immediate post-intervention (winter) 5 months post-intervention (spring) 12 months post-intervention (fall). Travelling Green intervention delivered by teachers 12
13
InterventionComparisonTime Data collection Aug/Sept 2009 Data collection TG Oct/Nov 2009 March-May 2010 June 2010 Oct/Nov 2010 June 2011 McMinn et al. (2012) Preventive Medicine 13
14
14
15
15 Significant Group*Time interaction for a.m. commute steps (p <.05, η 2 =.02) The I and C groups diverged following the I group intervention for 5 months, and converged following the C group intervention d = 0.03 d = 0.25 d = 0.49 d = 0.17
16
16 Nonsignificant Group*Time interaction for p.m. commute steps (p >.05, η 2 =.00) Main effects tests indicated significantly higher (p Winter < Spring = Fall). d = 0.28 d = 0.19 d = 0.23 d = 0.20
17
17 Significant Group*Time interaction for daily steps (p <.001, η 2 =.05). For daily steps, the I and C groups diverged following the I group intervention for 5 months, and converged following the C group intervention. d = -0.37 d = 0.13 d = 0.30 d = 0.00
18
18
19
Attitude Subjective Norm Perceived Behavioral Control IntentionBehaviour Walking Habit Habit Murtagh et al. 2012, IJBNPA 19 (?)
20
20 Nonsignificant Group*Time interaction (p >.05, η 2 =.00) Main effects tests indicated significantly higher (p.05, η 2 =.01). d = 0.37 d = 0.41 d = 0.53 d = 0.40
21
21 Nonsignificant Group*Time interaction (p >.05, η 2 =.00) Main effects tests indicated significantly higher (p.05, η 2 =.01). d = 0.76d = 0.55d = 0.49 d = 0.59
22
22 Nonsignificant Group*Time interaction (p >.05, η 2 =.02) Main effects tests indicated significantly higher (p.05, η 2 =.02; Fall > Winter < Spring = Fall). d = 0.60 d = 0.59d = 0.56 d = 0.33
23
Children’s school travel and daily physical activity are subject to seasonal change Regardless of whether it is delivered in fall or spring, a 6-week school-based intervention can beneficially influence the morning school commute and daily physical activity of upper elementary school children A 6-week school-based intervention has limited short, medium or long-term effects on behavioral determinants of active travel (from the TPB Model and Habit theory) 23
24
24
25
Pilot, pilot, pilot Incentives – maybe the best $2 you ever spent Find a “champion” Person-power 25
26
26 From McMinn et al. 2012, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport Actual route Recorded route
27
More strategic use of incentives Comprehensive process evaluation Add qualitative elements Target parents more explicitly 90% identified that the parent/s was/were the primary decision-maker in commuting mode Introduce at a later age Focus on “breaking unhealthy habits” (car/bus) as much as forming new habits (walk) 27
28
28 HABIT Frequency Automaticity Identity
29
29
30
30 david.rowe@strath.ac.uk David McMinn, PhD Shemane Murtagh, PhD Dr. Norah Nelson http://www.se-cat.co.uk/ Part-funded by the Scottish Government and Sustrans
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.