Advertisement

International Journal of Public Health

, Volume 59, Issue 2, pp 221–230 | Cite as

Correlates of objectively measured physical activity in adults and older people: a cross-sectional study of population-based sample of adults and older people living in Norway

  • Bjørge Herman HansenEmail author
  • Yngvar Ommundsen
  • Ingar Holme
  • Elin Kolle
  • Sigmund Alfred Anderssen
Original Article

Abstract

Objectives

The aims of the study were to identify correlates of objectively measured physical activity and to determine whether the explanatory power of the correlates differed with sex, weight status or level of education.

Methods

Physical activity was assessed objectively in 3,867 participants, aged 20–85 years, for a consecutive 7 days using the ActiGraph GT1M activity monitor. Demographic and biological variables and levels of psychological, social environmental and physical environmental correlates were self-reported.

Results

The complete set of correlates explained 18.6 % (p < 0.001) of the variance in overall physical activity. Age and physical activity identity were the most important factors, explaining 4.8 and 3.2 % of the variance, respectively, whereas social environmental and physical environmental correlates did not significantly increase the amount of explained variance. Small interaction effects between demographic and biological variables and the correlates were observed.

Conclusions

Self-efficacy, perceived behavioural control and physical activity identity might be important targets for intervention. Intervention efforts aimed at influencing psychological correlates of physical activity may prove equally effective regardless of sex, weight status and level of education.

Keywords

Actigraphy Physical activity Correlates of physical activity Epidemiology Public health 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all the test personnel at the ten institutions involved in the study, for their work during the data collection: Finnmark University College, Hedmark University College, NTNU Social Research AS, Sogn og Fjordane University College, University of Agder, University of Nordland, University of Stavanger, Telemark University College, Vestfold University College, and Norwegian School of Sport Sciences.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Ajzen I, Madden TJ (1986) Prediction of goal directed behavior: attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. J Exp Soc Psychol 22:453–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson DF, Cychosz CM (1995) Exploration of the relationship between exercise behavior and exercise identity. J Sport Behav 18:159–166Google Scholar
  3. Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. W.H. Freedman and Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Bandura A (2004) Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Educ Behav 31:143–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bauman AE, Sallis JF, Dzewaltowski DA, Owen N (2002) Toward a better understanding of the influences on physical activity: the role of determinants, correlates, causal variables, mediators, moderators, and confounders. Am J Prev Med 23:5–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bauman AE, Reis RS, Sallis JF, Wells JC, Loos RJ, Martin BW (2012) Correlates of physical activity: why are some people physically active and others not? Lancet 380:258–271PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Booth ML, Owen N, Bauman A, Clavisi O, Leslie E (2000) Social-cognitive and perceived environment influences associated with physical activity in older Australians. Prev Med 31:15–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bouchard C, Blair SN, Haskell WL (2012) Physical activity and health. Human Kinetics, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  9. Brownson RC, Eyler AA, King AC, Brown DR, Shyu YL, Sallis JF (2000) Patterns and correlates of physical activity among US women 40 years and older. Am J Public Health 90:264–270PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brownson RC, Baker EA, Housemann RA, Brennan LK, Bacak SJ (2001) Environmental and policy determinants of physical activity in the United States. Am J Public Health 91:1995–2003PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bryan A, Hutchison KE, Seals DR, Allen DL (2007) A transdisciplinary model integrating genetic, physiological, and psychological correlates of voluntary exercise. Health Psychol 26:30–39PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fuchs R, Schwarzer R (1994) Selbstwirksamheit zur sportlichen aktivität: reliabilität und validität eines neuen meßinstruments—Self-efficacy towards physical exercise: reliability and validity of a new instrument. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie 15:141–154Google Scholar
  13. Hagger MS, Chatzisarantis NLD, Biddle SJ (2002) A meta-analytic review of the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior in physical activity: predictive validity and the contribution of additional variables. J Sport Exerc Psychol 24:3–32Google Scholar
  14. Hagstromer M, Troiano RP, Sjostrom M, Berrigan D (2010) Levels and patterns of objectively assessed physical activity—a comparison between Sweden and the United States. Am J Epidemiol 171:1055–1064PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hall KS, McAuley E (2010) Individual, social environmental and physical environmental barriers to achieving 10,000 steps per day among older women. Health Educ Res 25:478–488PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hansen BH, Kolle E, Dyrstad SM, Holme I, Anderssen SA (2012) Accelerometer-determined physical activity in adults and older people. Med Sci Sports Exerc 44:266–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haskell WL, Lee IM, Pate RR, Powell KE, Blair SN, Franklin BA, Macera CA, Heath GW, Thompson PD, Bauman A (2007) Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation 116:1081–1093PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hill JO (2009) Can a small-changes approach help address the obesity epidemic? A report of the Joint Task Force of the American Society for Nutrition, Institute of Food Technologists, and International Food Information Council. Am J Clin Nutr 89:477–484PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jackson C, Smith RA, Conner M (2003) Applying an extended version of the theory of planned behaviour to physical activity. J Sports Sci 21:119–133PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnson MF, Nichols JF, Sallis JF, Calfas KJ, Hovell MF (1998) Interrelationships between physical activity and other health behaviors among University women and men. Prev Med 27:536–544PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. King AC, Castro C, Wilcox S, Eyler AA, Sallis JF, Brownson RC (2000) Personal and environmental factors associated with physical inactivity among different racial-ethnic groups of US middle-aged and older-aged women. Health Psychol 19:354–364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Levine JA, Schleusner SJ, Jensen MD (2000) Energy expenditure of nonexercise activity. Am J Clin Nutr 72:1451–1454PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Lorentzen C, Ommundsen Y, Jenum AK, Holme I (2007a) The “Romsas in Motion” community intervention: program exposure and psychosocial mediated relationships to change in stages of change in physical activity. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 4:15PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lorentzen CA, Ommundsen Y, Holme I (2007b) Psychosocial correlates of stages of change in physical activity in an adult community sample. Eur J Sports Sci 7:93–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Martinez-Gonzalez MA, Martinez JA, Hu FB, Gibney MJ, Kearney J (1999) Physical inactivity, sedentary lifestyle and obesity in the European Union. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 23:1192–1201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McClain JJ, Sisson SB, Tudor-Locke C (2007) Actigraph accelerometer interinstrument reliability during free-living in adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39:1509–1514PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McLeroy KR, Bibeau D, Steckler A, Glanz K (1988) An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Educ Q 15:351–377PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Norman P, Smith L (1995) The theory of planned behaviour and exercise: an investigation into the role of prior behaviour, behavioural intentions and attitude variability. Eur J Soc Psychol 25:403–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Plasqui G, Westerterp KR (2007) Physical activity assessment with accelerometers: an evaluation against doubly labeled water. Obesity (Silver Spring) 15:2371–2379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Saelens BE, Handy SL (2008) Built environment correlates of walking: a review. Med Sci Sports Exerc 40:S550–S566PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Black JB, Chen D (2003) Neighbourhood-based differences in physical activity: an environment scale evaluation. Am J Public Health 93:1552–1558PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sallis JF, Saelens BE (2000) Assessment of physical activity by self-report: status, limitations, and future directions. Res Q Exerc Sport 71:S1–S14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sallis JF, Haskell WL, Fortmann SP, Vranizan KM, Taylor CB, Solomon DS (1986) Predictors of adoption and maintenance of physical activity in a community sample. Prev Med 15:331–341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sallis JF, Grossman RM, Pinski RB, Patterson TL, Nader PR (1987) The development of scales to measure social support for diet and exercise behaviors. Prev Med 16:825–836PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sallis JF, Owen N, Fisher EB (2008) Ecological models of health behavior. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K (eds) Health behavior and health education. Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco, pp 465–486Google Scholar
  36. Seefeldt V, Malina RM, Clark MA (2002) Factors affecting levels of physical activity in adults. Sports Med 32:143–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sogaard AJ, Selmer R, Bjertness E, Thelle D (2004) The Oslo Health Study: the impact of self-selection in a large, population-based survey. Int J Equity Health 3:3PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stokols D, Allen J, Bellingham RL (1996) The social ecology of health promotion: implications for research and practice. Am J Health Promot 10:247–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Strandhagen E, Berg C, Lissner L, Nunez L, Rosengren A, Toren K, Thelle DS (2010) Selection bias in a population survey with registry linkage: potential effect on socioeconomic gradient in cardiovascular risk. Eur J Epidemiol 25:163–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Trost SG, Owen N, Bauman AE, Sallis JF, Brown W (2002) Correlates of adults’ participation in physical activity: review and update. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34:1996–2001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Van Holle V, Deforche B, Van CJ, Goubert L, Maes L, Van de Weghe N, De Bourdeauij I (2012) Relationship between the physical environment and different domains of physical activity in European adults: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 12:807PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Van Loon AJ, Tijhuis M, Picavet HS, Surtees PG, Ormel J (2003) Survey non-response in the Netherlands: effects on prevalence estimates and associations. Ann Epidemiol 13:105–110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wendel-Vos W, Droomers M, Kremers S, Brug J, van Lenthe F (2007) Potential environmental determinants of physical activity in adults: a systematic review. Obes Rev 8:425–440PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. World Health Organization. Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation (2000) Geneva. World Health Organization, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Swiss School of Public Health 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bjørge Herman Hansen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yngvar Ommundsen
    • 2
  • Ingar Holme
    • 1
  • Elin Kolle
    • 1
  • Sigmund Alfred Anderssen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Sports MedicineNorwegian School of Sport SciencesOsloNorway
  2. 2.Department of Coaching and PsychologyNorwegian School of Sport SciencesOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations