Walking distance by trip purpose and population subgroups

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 11-19

  Yang, Yong ^a   Diez Roux, Ana V ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HOUSEHOLD; INCOME; PREVALENCE; RECREATION; TRAVEL; UNITED STATES; URBAN POPULATION; WALKING;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; GOALS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PREVALENCE; TIME FACTORS; UNITED STATES; WALKING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84862641710     PISSN: 07493797     EISSN: 18732607     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.03.015     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Riva M, Gauvin L, Apparicio P, Brodeur J-M. Disentangling the relative influence of built and socioeconomic environments on walking: the contribution of areas homogenous along exposures of interest. Soc Sci Med 2009;69(9):1296-305.
2. Nagel C, Michael Y, Carlson N, Bosworth M. The relationship between neighborhood built environment and walking activity among older adults. Am J Epidemiol 2008;168:461-8.
3. Saelens BE, Handy SL. Built environment correlates of walking: a review. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008;40 (7S1):S550-S566.
4. Forsyth A, Oakes JM, Lee B, Schmitz KH. The built environment, walking, and physical activity: is the environment more important to some people than others? Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 2009;14(1):42-9.
5. Giles-Corti B, Donovan RJ. Relative influences of individual, social environmental, and physical environmental correlates of walking. Am J Public Health 2003;93(9):1583-9.
6. Moudon A, Lee C, Cheadle A, et al. Operational definitions of walkable neighborhood: theoretical and empirical insights. J Phys Act Health 2006;3(S1):S99-S117.
7. Sallis JF. Angels in the details: comment on "The relationship between destination proximity, destination mix and physical activity behaviors." Prev Med 2008;46(1):6-7.
8. Loukaitou-Sideris A. Is it safe to walk? Neighborhood safety and security considerations and their effects on walking. J Plann Literature 2006;20(3):219-32.
9. Bennett GG, McNeill LH, Wolin KY, Duncan DT, Puleo E, Emmons KM. Safe to walk? Neighborhood safety and physical activity among public housing residents. PLoS Med 2007;4(10):1599-606.
10. Atash F. Redesigning suburbia for walking and transit: emerging concepts. J Urban Plann Dev 1994;120(1):48-57.
11. Aultman-Hall L, Roorda M, Baetz B. Using GIS for evaluation of neighbourhoods pedestrian accessibility. J Urban Plann Dev 1997;123(1):10-7.
12. McCormack GR, Giles-Corti B, Bulsara M. The relationship between destination proximity, destination mix and physical activity behaviors. Prev Med 2008;46(1):33-40.
13. Hoehner C, Brennan Ramirez L, Elliot M. Perceived and objective environmental measures and physical activity among urban adults. Am J Prev Med 2005;28(2S2):105-16.
14. Pikora T, Bull F, Jamrozik J. Developing a reliable audit instrument to measure the physical environment for physical activity. Am J Prev Med 2002;23:187-94.
15. Krizek KJ. Neighborhood services, trip purpose, and tour-based travel. Transportation 2003;30(4):387-410.
16. Agrawal AW, Schimek P. Extent and correlates of walking in the USA. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 2007;12(8):548-63.
17. Buehler R, Pucher J, Merom D, Bauman A. Active travel in Germany and the U.S.: contributions of daily walking and cycling to physical activity. Am J Prev Med 2011;41(3):241-50.
18. Pucher J, Buehler R, Merom D, Bauman A. Walking and cycling in the U.S., 2001-2009: evidence from the national household travel surveys. Am J Public Health 2011:AJPH.2010.300067.
19. Agrawal AW, Schlossberg M, Irvin K. How far, by which route and why? A spatial analysis of pedestrian preference. J Urban Design 2008;13(1):81-98.
20. Iacono M, Krizek K, El-Geneidy A. Access to destinations: how close is close enough? Estimating accurate distance decay functions for multiple modes and different purposes. Twin Cities: Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, 2008.
21. Larsen J, El-Geneidy A, Yasmin F. Beyond the quarter mile: re-examining travel distances by active transportation. Can J Urban Res Can Plann Policy 2010;19(1S):70-88.
22. McCormack GR, Cerin E, Leslie E, Toit LD, Owen N. Objective versus perceived walking distances to destinations : correspondence and predictive validity. Environ Behav 2008;40(3):401-25.
23. Horning J, El-Geneidy A, Krizek KJ. Perceptions of walking distance to neighborhood retail and other public services. Proceedings of the 87th meeting of the Transportation Research Board; Washington DC, 2008.
24. Badland H, Schofield G, Schluter P. Objectively measured commute distance: associations with actual travel modes and perceptions to place of work or study in Auckland, New Zealand. J Phys Act Health 2007;4:80-6.
25. Colabianchi N, Dowda M, Pfeiffer K, Porter D, Almeida M, Pate R. Towards an understanding of salient neighborhood boundaries: adolescent reports of an easy walking distance and convenient driving distance. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2007;4(1):66.
26. Clifton K, Krizek KJ. The utility of the NHTS in understanding bicycle and pedestrian travel. Proceedings of the National Household Travel Survey Conference: Understanding our Nation's Travel; Washington DC, 2004.
27. Fortheringham AS. Spatial structure and distance-decay parameters. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 1981;71(3):425-36.
28. Elridge J, Jones J. Warped space: a geography of distance decay. Profess Geogr 1991;43(4):500-11.
29. Iacono M, Krizek K, El-Geneidy A. Measuring non-motorized accessibility: issues, alternatives, and execution. J Transp Geogr 2010;18:133-40.
30. Kimpel TJ, Dueker KJ, El-Geneidy AM. Using GIS to measure the effect of overlapping service areas on passenger boardings at bus stops. J Urban Regional Inform Syst Assoc 2007;19(1):5-11.
31. Zhao F, Chow L-F, Li M-T, Ubaka I, Gan A. Forecasting transit walk accessibility: regression model alternative to buffer. Transp Res Rec 2003;1835:34-41.
32. Krygsman S, Dijst M. Multimodal trips in the Netherlands: microlevel individual attributes and residential context. Transp Res Rec 2001(1753).
33. Fotheringham AS, O'Kelly ME. Spatial interaction models: formulations and applications. London: Kluwer, 1989.
34. De Vries JJ, Nijkamp P, Rietveld P. Exponential or power distance-decay for commuting? An alternative specification. Environ Plann A 2009;41(2):461-80.
35. Signorino G, Pasetto R, Gatto E, Mucciardi M, La Rocca M, Mudu P. Gravity models to classify commuting vs. resident workers. An application to the analysis of residential risk in a contaminated area. Int J Health Geogr 2011;10(1):11.
36. Liang K-Y, Zeger S. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 1986;73(1):13-22.
37. Witlox F. Evaluating the reliability of reported distance data in urban travel behaviour analysis. J Transp Geogr 2007;15(3):172-83.
38. BadlandHM,Schofield GM, Garrett N. Travel behavior and objectively measured urban design variables: associations for adults traveling to work. Health Place 2008;14(1):85-95.
39. Chen C, Gong H, Lawson C, Bialostozky E. Evaluating the feasibility of a passive travel survey collection in a complex urban environment: lessons learned from the New York City case study. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 2010;44(10):830-40.