A Narrative-Systematic Review of the Incompatibility of the Objective and Perceptual Components of the Physical Environment and Its Effect on Physical Activity (Walkability)

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

2 Department of Regional Planning, School of Urban Planning, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

10.22059/jhgr.2024.369485.1008657

Abstract

ABSTRACT
Most of the researches that study the link between the environmental components of neighborhoods and the physical activity of the residents, focus on one of the objective and perceptual criteria and sometimes use these criteria instead of each other. Each of them has different impacts on travel behavior and physical activity. This has led to a new trend in the literature, which is measuring the compatibility between these two objective and perceptual components to determine the manner and extent of the effect of each on the levels of outdoor physical activity. Nevertheless, few studies have been conducted in the country after two decades of extensive international efforts. So, the present research tries to open the way for researchers and clarify the methodological challenges and factors affecting the incongruity between objective and perceptual criteria. The data were accessed by search engines such as Google Scholar, Pop Med, Scopus, and Web of Science. According to criteria such as limiting the topic to physical activity and its relationship with subjective and objective components of information, 43 articles were selected for the review. The findings showed that there is partial to moderate agreement between the objective and perceptual criteria and the residents' positive mental perception when the objective walkability of a neighborhood unit is relatively low; it can be attributed to the deficiencies caused by the real environment on the amount of physical activity in compensate people. Based on the findings, disregarding the qualitative criteria of wisdom, ignoring the effect of individual, psychological, and social factors on the perceptual criteria, the effect of the socio-economic status and the level of people's expectations on the perceptual environment, the dominance of cross-sectional studies over the cohort were listed as the main challenges
Extended Abstract
Introduction
The presence of pedestrians in urban spaces has always been important as one of the criteria for the vitality and attractiveness of urban environments. However, in recent decades, with the decrease in physical activity and obesity becoming a global concern, pedestrianization of neighborhoods and urban environments has gained increasing importance as a way to solve this problem and improve the health of society. Therefore, countless research studies are trying to answer the question of how the characteristics and components of urban spaces can facilitate and strengthen active patterns and behaviors. In this regard, studies often focused on one of the objective and perceptual aspects of the environment. Systematic reviews and experimental studies showed that the incompatibility between the perceptual and objective environment is one reason that leads to contradictory findings from studies of the physical environment, physical activity, obesity, and related diseases. Thus, the current research seeks to create a clear and transparent path for entering this current from pedestrian and health literature into domestic research with a systematic narrative review of experimental studies conducted worldwide.
 
Methodology
The methodology of research is based on a narrative-systematic review approach. Google Scholar, Pop Med, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were used to find articles so that the words "pedestrian," "perceptual," "objective," "inconsistency," "adaptation and "Non-compliance" were searched in the title of articles, keywords, and abstract. Then, by reviewing these articles and repeating keywords, subsequent searches focused on words and concepts such as density, accessibility, mix of uses, and street connection and distance. In total, by removing similar articles from the databases, 352 articles were selected for initial review. Then, the irrelevant articles were removed by studying the title and abstract, and finally, 102 articles were selected for full review. After a complete review and according to criteria such as limiting the topic to physical activity and its relationship with mental and objective components, the information from 43 articles was used for this review. In order to analyze and review the selected articles, a checklist including goals and questions, methodology, results, and research limitations was prepared, and all the data and information of the articles were extracted based on this checklist.
 
Results and Discussion
Generally, the research results showed a low to moderate agreement between the variables of the perceptual and objective environment, and a few factors consistently have a level of agreement and compatibility. The selected studies can be divided into two groups according to objective criteria; one group only compared different types of objective characteristics of the research participants' neighborhood units, while the other group considered more detailed variables such as density, mix of uses, and street connectivity for objective pedestrian measurement. Studies that consider the effect of objective and perceptual walking on physical activity or walking find stronger effects on perceptual walking than on objective walking. However, both types of walking have significant effects. Some studies showed that the reason for the low conformity between the standards is the lack of sufficient development of the perceptual standards as the objective variables of measuring the environment of the neighborhood unit. Objective and perceptual criteria cannot be used interchangeably because they consider different sources of change in behavior. Cross-sectional studies prevent causation and temporal progression of effects (from the objective environment to perceptions to behavior). Although a randomized controlled trial is not possible in this field of research, quasi-experimental and long-term longitudinal studies are needed to clarify the extent and direction of the studied effects. One of the weak points of the studies was less attention to the place of physical activity. This causes the potential of places to do physical activity to be ignored; at home, near home or work, or anywhere. In addition, activities should be distinguished from each other. Some studies showed that the compatibility between residents' perception of pedestrian orientation and the pedestrian score is dependent on the change in geographical location. The pedestrianization of suburban retail corridors, which have a high concentration of businesses but have a mix of uses and weak pedestrian infrastructure, has been overestimated.
 
Conclusion
The current research aimed to answer the key questions related to the objective and perceptual criteria of the environment and physical activity with a relational-systematic review:
a) Is the effect of objective criteria and perceptual criteria on walking the same? b) Is the more the objective and perceptual criteria match each other, the higher the amount of walking or vice versa? c) What are the reasons for non-compliance between subjective and objective criteria?
First, the research results showed that the environment's objective and perceptual characteristics affect physical activity and walking. However, each has a different effect and cannot be used instead of the other. Second, the studies in this field try to create a synergy between the objective and perceptual environment by bringing people's mental perception closer to the reality of pedestrianized environments or areas with lower pedestrianization so that the amount of walking and physical activity increases. Finally, it seems that the reasons for non-compliance between objective and subjective standards can be distinguished into two groups. The following suggestions were proposed as a research agenda for further studies in this field. Considering the emphasis of studies on the importance of psychological factors (such as habits, perceptions and priorities) in the adjustment or mediation of objective and perceptual criteria, these variables may help to avoid unobserved variable errors and provide more explanations for some unusual results from the analyses.
Longitudinal research and follow-up of physical changes and their effect on walking are recommended in order to find out the causal relationships between effective individual components, such as people's mobility, and social components, such as the sense of local community during the time of residence and the perceptual criteria of the environment.
In addition, evaluating the effectiveness of multi-level strategies such as infrastructures and citizens' awareness of these opportunities through mass media or signs on the perception of walking and then walkability, can be another part of future research.
 
Funding
There is no funding support.
 
Authors’ Contribution
Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none.
 
Conflict of Interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.
 
Acknowledgments
 We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Adkins, A., Barillas-Longoria, G., Martínez, D. N., & Ingram, M. (2019). Differences in social and physical dimensions of perceived walkability in Mexican American and non-hispanic white walking environments in Tucson, Arizona. Journal of Transport & Health, 14, 100585.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2019.100585
  2. Alidoust, S., Bosman, C., & Holden, G. (2018). Talking while walking: an investigation of perceived neighbourhood walkability and its implications for the social life of older people. Journal of housing and the built environment, 33, 133-150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-017-9558-1
  3. Arvidsson, D., Kawakami, N., Ohlsson, H., & Sundquist, K. (2012). Physical activity and concordance between objective and perceived walkability. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 44(2), 280-287. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31822a9289
  4. Azadi Ghatar, S., Meshkini, A., Roknoldin Eftekhari, A., Mostafavi, E., Ahadnejad Reveshty, M., & Maleki, P. (2020). Modelling the spatial association of lung cancer with built environmental factors in neighborhoods of Tehran Metropolitan. Human Geography Research, 52(4), 1153-1176. DOI: 10.22059/jhgr.2017.209711.1007255 [In Persian]
  5. Bailey, E. J., Malecki, K. C., Engelman, C. D., Walsh, M. C., Bersch, A. J., Martinez-Donate, A. P.,... Nieto, F. J. (2014). Predictors of discordance between perceived and objective neighborhood data. Annals of epidemiology, 24(3), 214-221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2013.12.007
  6. Baldock, K. L., Paquet, C., Howard, N. J., Coffee, N. T., Taylor, A. W., & Daniel, M. (2019). Correlates of discordance between perceived and objective distances to local fruit and vegetable retailers. International journal of environmental research and public health, 16(7), 1262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071262
  7. Ball, K., Jeffery, R. W., Crawford, D. A., Roberts, R. J., Salmon, J., & Timperio, A. F. (2008). Mismatch between perceived and objective measures of physical activity environments. Preventive medicine, 47(3), 294-298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.05.001
  8. Bauman, A. E., Reis, R. S., Sallis, J. F., Wells, J. C., Loos, R. J., Martin, B. W., & Group, L. P. A. S. W. (2012). Correlates of physical activity: why are some people physically active and others not?. The lancet, 380(9838), 258-271. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60735-1
  9. Bereitschaft, B. (2018). Walk Score® versus residents’ perceptions of walkability in Omaha, NE. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 11(4), 412-435. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2018.1484795
  10. Berry, N. M., Coffee, N. T., Nolan, R., Dollman, J., & Sugiyama, T. (2017). Neighbourhood environmental attributes associated with walking in south Australian adults: differences between urban and rural areas. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(9), 965. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14090965
  11. Bödeker, M. (2018). Walking and walkability in pre-set and self-defined neighborhoods: A mental mapping study in older adults. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(7), 1363. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071363
  12. Brown, B. B., & Jensen, W. A. (2020). Dog ownership and walking: Perceived and audited walkability and activity correlates. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(4), 1385. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17041385
  13. Brown, B. B., & Werner, C. M. (2011). The residents’ benefits and concerns before and after a new rail stop: do residents get what they expect?. Environment and Behavior, 43(6), 789-806. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916510392030
  14. Brownson, R. C., Hoehner, C. M., Day, K., Forsyth, A., & Sallis, J. F. (2009). Measuring the built environment for physical activity: state of the science. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 36(4), S99-S123. e112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2009.01.005
  15. Chan, E. T., Schwanen, T., & Banister, D. (2021). The role of perceived environment, neighbourhood characteristics, and attitudes in walking behaviour: Evidence from a rapidly developing city in China. Transportation, 48, 431-454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-019-10062-2
  16. Cho, G.-H., & Rodríguez, D. A. (2015). Neighborhood design, neighborhood location, and three types of walking: results from the Washington DC area. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 42(3), 526-540. https://doi.org/10.1068/b130222p
  17. Clarke, P., & Nieuwenhuijsen, E. R. (2009). Environments for healthy ageing: A critical review. Maturitas, 64(1), 14-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2009.07.011
  18. Crawford, D., Cleland, V., Timperio, A., Salmon, J., Andrianopoulos, N., Roberts, R.,... Ball, K. (2010). The longitudinal influence of home and neighbourhood environments on children's body mass index and physical activity over 5 years: the CLAN study. International Journal of Obesity, 34, 1177–1187. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2010.57
  19. De Vos, J., Lättman, K., Van der Vlugt, A.-L., Welsch, J., & Otsuka, N. (2023). Determinants and effects of perceived walkability: a literature review, conceptual model and research agenda. Transport Reviews, 43(2), 303-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2022.2101072
  20. Ferdinand, A., Sen, B., Rahurkar, S., Engler, S., & Menachemi, N. (2012). The relationship between built environments and physical activity: a systematic review. American Journal of Public Health, 102(10), 7-13. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300740
  21. Gan, Z., Yang, M., Zeng, Q., & Timmermans, H. J. (2021). Associations between built environment, perceived walkability/bikeability and metro transfer patterns. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 153, 171-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2021.09.007
  22. Gebel, K., Bauman, A. E., Sugiyama, T., & Owen, N. (2011). Mismatch between perceived and objectively assessed neighborhood walkability attributes: prospective relationships with walking and weight gain. Health & Place, 17(2), 519-524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.12.008
  23. Gebel, K., Bauman, A., & Owen, N. (2009). Correlates of non-concordance between perceived and objective measures of walkability. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 37(2), 228-238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-009-9098-3
  24. Giles-Corti, B., & Donovan, R. J. (2002). Socioeconomic status differences in recreational physical activity levels and real and perceived access to a supportive physical environment. Preventive Medicine, 35(6), 601-611. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2002.1115
  25. Gómez, J. E., Johnson, B. A., Selva, M., & Sallis, J. F. (2004). Violent crime and outdoor physical activity among inner-city youth. Preventive Medicine, 39(5), 876-881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.03.019
  26. Hakimian, P., & Lak, A. (2016). Adaptation and reliability of neighborhood environment walkability scale (NEWS) for Iran: A questionnaire for assessing environmental correlates of physical activity. Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 30, 427. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5307622/
  27. Hanibuchi, T., Nakaya, T., Yonejima, M., & Honjo, K. (2015). Perceived and objective measures of neighborhood walkability and physical activity among adults in Japan: a multilevel analysis of a nationally representative sample. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(10), 13350-13364. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph121013350
  28. Hinckson, E., Cerin, E., Mavoa, S., Smith, M., Badland, H., Stewart, T.,... Schofield, G. (2017). Associations of the perceived and objective neighborhood environment with physical activity and sedentary time in New Zealand adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 14(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0597-5
  29. Hsieh, H.-S., & Chuang, M.-T. (2021). Association of perceived environment walkability with purposive and discursive walking for urban design strategies. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 14(1), 1099-1127. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2021.1869
  30. Jack, E., & McCormack, G. R. (2014). The associations between objectively-determined and self-reported urban form characteristics and neighborhood-based walking in adults. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 11(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-11-71
  31. Jensen, W. A., Brown, B. B., Smith, K. R., Brewer, S. C., Amburgey, J. W., & McIff, B. (2017). Active transportation on a complete street: Perceived and audited walkability correlates. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(9), 1014. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14091014
  32. Jilcott, S. B., Evenson, K. R., Laraia, B. A., & Ammerman, A. S. (2007). Peer Reviewed: Association between Physical Activity and Proximity to Physical Activity Resources among Low-Income, Midlife Women. Preventing Chronic Disease, 4(1), 1-16. http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2007/jan/06_0049.htm
  33. Jun, H.-J., & Hur, M. (2015). The relationship between walkability and neighborhood social environment: The importance of physical and perceived walkability. Applied Geography, 62, 115-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.04.014
  34. Kent, J. L., Ma, L., & Mulley, C. (2017). The objective and perceived built environment: What matters for happiness?. Cities & Health, 1(1), 59-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/23748834.2017.1371456
  35. Khatami, S. M., Shahabi Shahmiri, M., Akbari, Z., & Rooshenas, S. (2022). Relationship between Objective and Perceived Criteria of Walkability and Walking Rate with Body Mass Index; Case Study: City of Babol. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 14(37), 165-181. Doi:10.22034/aaud.2022.252643.2334 [In Persian].
  36. Koohsari, M. J., Badland, H., Sugiyama, T., Mavoa, S., Christian, H., & Giles-Corti, B. (2015). Mismatch between perceived and objectively measured land use mix and street connectivity: associations with neighborhood walking. Journal of Urban Health, 92(2), 242-252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-014-9928-x
  37. Koohsari, M. J., McCormack, G. R., Shibata, A., Ishii, K., Yasunaga, A., Nakaya, T., & Oka, K. (2021). The relationship between walk score® and perceived walkability in ultrahigh density areas. Preventive Medicine Reports, 23, 101393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101393
  38. Koohsari, M. J., Sugiyama, T., Hanibuchi, T., Shibata, A., Ishii, K., Liao, Y., & Oka, K. (2018). Validity of Walk Score® as a measure of neighborhood walkability in Japan. Preventive Medicine Reports, 9, 114-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.01.001
  39. Lackey, K. J., & Kaczynski, A. T. (2009). Correspondence of perceived vs. objective proximity to parks and their relationship to park-based physical activity. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 6(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-6-53
  40. Leslie, E., Sugiyama, T., Ierodiaconou, D., & Kremer, P. (2010). Perceived and objectively measured greenness of neighbourhoods: Are they measuring the same thing?. Landscape and Urban Planning, 95(1-2), 28-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.11.002
  41. Linares-Espinós, E., Hernández, V., Domínguez-Escrig, J., Fernández-Pello, S., Hevia, V., Mayor, J.,... Ribal, M. (2018). Methodology of a systematic review. Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition), 42(8), 499-506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acuroe.2018.07.002
  42. Lo, B. K., Graham, M. L., Folta, S. C., Paul, L. C., Strogatz, D., Nelson, M. E.,... Higgins, M. (2019). Examining the associations between walk score, perceived built environment, and physical activity behaviors among women participating in a community-randomized lifestyle change intervention trial: strong hearts, healthy communities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(5), 849. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16050849
  43. Loh, V. H., Veitch, J., Salmon, J., Cerin, E., Mavoa, S., Villanueva, K., & Timperio, A. (2020). Environmental mismatch: do associations between the built environment and physical activity among youth depend on concordance with perceptions?. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(4), 1309. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041309
  44. Lotfi, S & Koohsari, M. J. (2011). Neighborhood Walkability in a City within a Developing Country. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 137(4), 402-408. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000085
  45. Ma, L., & Dill, J. (2017). Do people's perceptions of neighborhood bikeability match" reality"?. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 10(1), 291-308. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2015.796
  46. Macdonald, L., Kearns, A., & Ellaway, A. (2013). Do residents’ perceptions of being well-placed and objective presence of local amenities match? A case study in West Central Scotland, UK. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-454
  47. Maddison, R., Jiang, Y., Vander Hoorn, S., Mhurchu, C. N., Exeter, D., & Utter, J. (2010). Perceived versus actual distance to local physical-activity facilities: does it really matter?. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 7(3), 323-332. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.7.3.323
  48. Marquet, O., & Hipp, A. J. (2019). Worksite Built Environment and Objectively Measured Physical Activity While at Work. Journal of Environmental Health, 81(7), 20-27.
  49. McCormack, G. R., Cerin, E., Leslie, E., Du Toit, L., & Owen, N. (2008). Objective versus perceived walking distances to destinations: correspondence and predictive validity. Environment and Behavior, 40(3), 1-425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916507300560
  50. McGinn, A. P., Evenson, K. R., Herring, A. H., Huston, S. L., & Rodriguez, D. A. (2007). Exploring associations between physical activity and perceived and objective measures of the built environment. Journal of Urban Health, 84, 162-184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-006-9136-4
  51. McGinn, A. P., Evenson, K. R., Herring, A. H., Huston, S. L., & Rodriguez, D. A. (2008). The association of perceived and objectively measured crime with physical activity: a cross-sectional analysis. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 5(1), 117-131. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.5.1.117
  52. Menardo, E., De Dominicis, S., & Pasini, M. (2022). Exploring perceived and objective measures of the neighborhood environment and associations with physical activity among adults: A review and a meta-analytic structural equation model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(5), 2575.
  53. Moradpour, N., Hataminejad, H., & Mohamadi, N. (2018). Effects of Parquetry Construction on Pedestrian Experiences (Case Study: Valiasr Street, Tehran). Human Geography Research, 50(4), 993-1010. Doi: 10.22059/jhgr.2017.141474.1007155[In Persian]
  54. Orstad, S. L., McDonough, M. H., Stapleton, S., Altincekic, C., & Troped, P. J. (2017). A systematic review of agreement between perceived and objective neighborhood environment measures and associations with physical activity outcomes. Environment and Behavior, 49(8),904-932. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916516670982
  55. Perchoux, C., Chaix, B., Brondeel, R., & Kestens, Y. (2016). Residential buffer, perceived neighborhood, and individual activity space: New refinements in the definition of exposure areas–The RECORD Cohort Study. Health & Place, 40, 116-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.05.004
  56. Pietilä, M., Neuvonen, M., Borodulin, K., Korpela, K., Sievänen, T., & Tyrväinen, L. (2015). Relationships between exposure to urban green spaces, physical activity and self-rated health. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 10, 44-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2015.06.006
  57. Portegijs, E., Keskinen, K. E., Tsai, L.-T., Rantanen, T., & Rantakokko, M. (2017). Physical limitations, walkability, perceived environmental facilitators and physical activity of older adults in Finland. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(3), 333. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14030333
  58. Qureshi, S., Shaikh, J. M., & Memon, S. A. (2018). Residents's subjective assessment of walkability attributes in objectively assessed neighbourhoods. Mehran University Research Journal of Engineering & Technology, 37(3), 673-680. DOI: 10.22581/muet1982.1803.20
  59. Rantakokko, M., Iwarsson, S., Portegijs, E., Viljanen, A., & Rantanen, T. (2015). Associations between environmental characteristics and life-space mobility in community-dwelling older people. Journal of Aging and Health, 27(4), 606-621. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264314555328
  60. Saelens, B. E., & Handy, S. L. (2008). Built environment correlates of walking: a review. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 40(7 Suppl), S550. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31817c67a4
  61. Shields, R., Gomes da Silva, E. J., Lima e Lima, T., & Osorio, N. (2023). Walkability: a review of trends. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 16(1), 19-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2021.1936601
  62. Silveira, S. L., & Motl, R. W. (2020). Abbreviated Neighborhood Environment Walkability scale in persons with multiple sclerosis: Initial validation of score inferences. Journal of Transport & Health, 19, 100952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2020.100952
  63. Stappers, N., Schipperijn, J., Kremers, S., Bekker, M., Jansen, M., De Vries, N., & Van Kann, D. (2021). Combining accelerometry and GPS to assess neighborhood-based physical activity: Associations with perceived neighborhood walkability. Environment and Behavior, 53(7), 732-752. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916520906485
  64. Strath, S. J., Greenwald, M. J., Isaacs, R., Hart, T. L., Lenz, E. K., Dondzila, C. J., & Swartz, A. M. (2012). Measured and perceived environmental characteristics are related to accelerometer defined physical activity in older adults. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-9-40
  65. Tilt, J. H., Unfried, T. M., & Roca, B. (2007). Using objective and subjective measures of neighborhood greenness and accessible destinations for understanding walking trips and BMI in Seattle, Washington. American Journal of Health Promotion, 21(4_suppl), 371-379. https://doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-21.4s.371
  66. Toker, Z. (2015). Walking beyond the Socioeconomic Status in an objectively and perceptually walkable pedestrian environment. Urban Studies R esearch, 19874, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/919874
  67. Troped, P. J., Saunders, R. P., Pate, R. R., Reininger, B., Ureda, J. R., & Thompson, S. J. (2001). Associations between self-reported and objective physical environmental factors and use of a community rail-trail. Preventive Medicine, 32(2), 191-200. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2000.0788
  68. Turnbull, D., Chugh, R., & Luck, J. (2023). Systematic-narrative hybrid literature review: A strategy for integrating a concise methodology into a manuscript. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 7(1), 100381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2022.100381
  69. Vale, D. S., & Pereira, M. (2016). Influence on pedestrian commuting behavior of the built environment surrounding destinations: A structural equations modeling approach. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 10(8), 730-741. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2016.1144836
  70. Van der Vlugt, A.-L., Curl, A., & Scheiner, J. (2022). The influence of travel attitudes on perceived walking accessibility and walking behaviour. Travel Behaviour & Society, 27, 47-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2021.11.002
  71. Van Dyck, D., De Meester, F., Cardon, G., Deforche, B., & De Bourdeaudhuij, I. (2013). Physical environmental attributes and active transportation in Belgium: what about adults and adolescents living in the same neighborhoods?. American journal of health promotion, 27(5), 330-338. https://doi.org/10.4278/ajhp.120316-QUAN-146
  72. Van Lenthe, F. J., & Kamphuis, C. B. (2011). Mismatched perceptions of neighbourhood walkability: Need for interventions?. Health & place, 17(6), 1294-1295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2011.07.001
  73. Vilhelmson, B. (1999). Daily mobility and the use of time for different activities. The case of Sweden. Geo Journal, 48(3), 177-185. DOI: 10.1023/A:1007075524340
  74. Whitaker, K. M., Xiao, Q., Gabriel, K. P., Larsen, P. G., Jacobs Jr, D. R., Sidney, S.,... Kershaw, K. (2019). Perceived and objective characteristics of the neighborhood environment are associated with accelerometer-measured sedentary time and physical activity, the CARDIA Study. Preventive Medicine, 123, 242-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.03.039
  75. Zeng, F., & Shen, Z. (2020). Study on the impact of historic district built environment and its influence on residents’ walking trips: A case study of Zhangzhou ancient city’s historic district. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(12), 4367.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124367
Human Geography Research
Volume 57, Issue 2
August 2025
Pages 105-120

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics