Skip to main content

The Relationship of Physical Activity and the Built Environment within the Context of Self-Determination Theory

Annals of Behavioral Medicine volume 42, pages 188–196 (2011)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Evidence is emerging of the combined effects of psychosocial and environmental determinants on exercise.

Purpose

This study aims to examine the moderating effects of convenience, facilities at places of worship, access, crime/safety, and neighborhood characteristics on the relationship between exercise and psychosocial needs satisfaction (autonomy, competence, and relatedness).

Methods

Adults from four cities enrolling in a weight loss program (N = 477; 72.1% White, BMI = 32.21 ± 7.67) completed questionnaires on current exercise levels, perceptions of the environment for exercise, and autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

Results

There were significant interaction effects for neighborhood characteristics with all three psychological needs satisfaction, and for convenience with competence and relatedness, such that the relationship between psychosocial needs satisfaction and exercise is stronger for participants with better perceptions of convenience and neighborhood characteristics.

Conclusions

Results indicate that the relationship between exercise and autonomy, competence, and relatedness is different for low and high perceptions of convenience to places for exercise and neighborhood characteristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Sallis JF. Measuring physical activity environments: A brief history. Am J Prev Med 2009 April;36(4 Suppl):S86-S92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. McLeroy KR, Bibeau D, Steckler A, Glanz K. An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Educ Q 1988;15(4):351–77.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sallis JF, Cervero RB, Ascher W, Henderson KA, Kraft MK, Kerr J. An ecological approach to creating active living communities. Annu Rev Public Health 2006;27:297–322.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Humpel N, Owen N, Leslie E. Environmental factors associated with adults' participation in physical activity: A review. Am J Prev Med 2002;22(3):188–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sallis JF, Saelens BE, Frank LD et al. Neighborhood built environment and income: Examining multiple health outcomes. Soc Sci Med 2009 April;68(7):1285–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Merom D, Bauman A, Phongsavan P et al. Can a motivational intervention overcome an unsupportive environment for walking—findings from the Step-by-Step Study. Ann Behav Med 2009 October;38(2):137–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ferney SL, Marshall AL, Eakin EG, Owen N. Randomized trial of a neighborhood environment-focused physical activity website intervention. Prev Med 2009 February;48(2):144–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McNeill LH, Wyrwich KW, Brownson RC, Clark EM, Kreuter MW. Individual, social environmental, and physical environmental influences on physical activity among black and white adults: A structural equation analysis. Ann Behav Med 2006;31(1):36–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Giles-Corti B, Donovan RJ. Relative influences of individual, social environmental, and physical environmental correlates of walking. Am J Public Health 2003;93:1583–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dowda M, Dishman RK, Porter D, Saunders RP, Pate RR. Commercial facilities, social cognitive variables, and physical activity of 12th grade girls. Ann Behav Med 2009 February;37(1):77–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Task Force on Community Preventive Services (2002) Recommendations to increase physical activity in communities. Am J Prev Med; 22(4S):67–72.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Edmunds J, Ntoumanis N, Duda JL. A test of self-determination theory in the exercise domain. J Appl Soc Psycho 2006;36(9):2240–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ntoumanis N. A prospective study of participation in optional school physical education using a self-determination theory framework. J Educ Psychol 2005;97(3):444–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wilson PM, Mack DE, Grattan KP. Understanding motivation for exercise: A self-determination theory perspective. Can Psychol 2008;49(3):250–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Edmunds J, Ntoumanis N, Duda JL. Adherence and well-being in overweight and obese patients referred to an exercise on prescription scheme: A self-determination theory perspective. Psychol Sport Exerc 2007;8:722–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wilson PM, Rodgers WM, Blanchard CM, Gessell J. The relationship between psychological needs, self-determined motivation, exercise attitudes, and physical fitness. J Appl Soc Psycho 2003;33(11):2373–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jolly K, Duda JL, Daley A et al. Evaluation of a standard provision versus an autonomy promotive exercise referral programme: Rationale and study design. BMC Public Health 2009 June 8;9(1):176.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemp Educ Psychol 2000;25:54–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Edmunds J, Ntoumanis N, Duda JL. Testing a self-determination theory-based teaching style intervention in the exercise domain. Eur J Soc Psychol 2008;38:375–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Brownson RC, Hoehner CM, Day K, Forsyth A, Sallis JF. Measuring the built environment for physical activity: State of the science. Am J Prev Med 2009 April;36(4 Suppl):S99-123.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Spence JC, Lee RE. Toward a comprehensive model of physical activity. Psychol Sport Exerc 2003;4:7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Gay J, Smith J. Validity of a scale assessing the built environment for physical activity. Am J Health Behav 2010;34(4):420–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Godin G, Shephard RJ. A simple method to assess exercise behavior in the community. Can J Sport Sci 1985;10(3):141–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Godin G, Shephard RJ. Godin leisure-time exercise questionnaire. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1997;29(6 Supplement):S36-S38.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Rogers LQ, Courneya KS, Robbins KT et al. Physical activity and quality of life in head and neck cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer 2006;14(10):1012–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Jacobs DR, Ainsworth BE, Hartman TJ, Leon AS. A simultaneous evaluation of ten commonly used physical activity questionnaires. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1993;25:81–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Motl RW, McAuley E, Snook EM, Scott JA. Validity of physical activity measures in ambulatory individuals with multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil 2006 September 30;28(18):1151–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Vlachopoulos SP, Michailidou S. Development and initial validation of a measure of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in exercise: The basic psychological needs in exercise scale. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci 2006;10(3):179–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951;16(3):297–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Evenson KR, McGinn AP. Test-retest reliability of a questionnaire to assess physical environmental factors pertaining to physical activity. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2005;2(7).

  31. Sallis JF, Johnson MF, Calfas KJ, Caparosa S, Nichols JF. Assessing perceived physical environmental variables that may influence physical activity. Res Q Exerc Sport 1997;68(4):345–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Gay JL, Evenson KR, Smith J. Developing measures on the perceptions of the built environment for physical activity: A confirmatory analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2010;7(72).

  33. SurveyMonkey.com [computer program]. Portland, OR: SurveyMonkey.com; 2008.

  34. Preacher KJ, Curran PJ, Bauer DJ. Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. J Educ Behav Stat 2006; 31(3):437–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Preacher KJ, Curran PJ, Bauer DJ. Simple Intercepts, Simple Slopes, and Regions of Significance in MLR 2-Way Interactions. http://www.people.ku.edu/∼preacher/interact/mlr2.htm 2006; Available at: URL: http://www.people.ku.edu/∼preacher/interact/mlr2.htm.

  36. Peddle CJ, Plotnikoff RC, Wild TC, Au HJ, Courneya KS. Medical, demographic, and psychosocial correlates of exercise in colorectal cancer survivors: An application of self-determination theory. Support Care Cancer 2008 January;16(1):9–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Giles-Corti B, Donovan RJ. The relative influence of individual, social and physical environment determinants of physical activity. Soc Sci Med 2002;54:1793–812.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Cerin E, Leslie E, Owen N, Bauman A. An Australian version of the neighborhood environment walkability scale: Validity evidence. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci 2008;12:31–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wilcox S, Bopp M, Oberrecht L, Kammermann SK, McElmurray CT. Psychosocial and perceived environmental correlates of physical activity in rural and older African American and white women. J Geronotol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2003;58B(6):329–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Trost SG, Owen N, Bauman A, Sallis JF, Brown W. Correlates of adults’ participation in physical activity: Review and update. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002;34(12):1996–2001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Gattshall ML, Shoup JA, Marshall JA, Crane LA, Estabrooks PA. Validation of a survey instrument to assess home environments for physical activity and healthy eating in overweight children. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2008;5:3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. King WC, Brach JS, Belle S, Killingsworth R, Fenton M, Kriska AM. The relationship between convenience of destinations and walking levels in older women. Am J Health Promot 2003 September;18(1):74–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Parks SE, Housemann RA, Brownson RC. Differential correlates of physical activity in urban and rural adults of various socioeconomic backgrounds in the United States. J Epidemiol Community Health 2003;57:29–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Powell KE, Martin LM, Chowdhury PP. Places to walk: Convenience and regular physical activity. Am J Public Health 2003;93(9):1519–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Johnson-Kozlow M, Sallis JF, Gilpin EA, Rock CL, Pierce JP. Comparative validation of the IPAQ and the 7-Day PAR among women diagnosed with breast cancer. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2006;3:7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. McGinn AP, Evenson KR, Herring AH, Huston SL, Rodriguez DA. Exploring associations between physical activity and perceived and objective measures of the built environment. J Urban Health 2007 March;84(2):162–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Tilt JH, Unfried TM, Roca B. Using objective and subjective measures of neighborhood greenness and accessible destinations for understanding walking trips and BMI in Seattle, Washington. Am J Health Promot 2007;21(4 Supplement):371–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Cheung GW, Lau RS. Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables. Organizational Research Methods 2008;11(2):296–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. McCormack G, Giles-Corti B, Lange A, Smith T, Martin K, Pikora TJ. An update of recent evidence of the relationship between objective and self-report measures of the physical environment and physical activity behaviours. J Sci Med Sport 2004 April;7(1 Suppl):81–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Wendel-Vos W, Droomers M, Kremers S, Brug J, van Lenthe F. Potential environmental determinants of physical activity in adults: A systematic review. Obes Rev 2007 September;8(5):425–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jennifer L. Gay Ph.D.

    Present address: Assistant Professor – Health Promotion and Behavior College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Ramsey Center, Room 329, 330 River Road, Athens, GA, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Health Promotion & Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas School of Public Health, Brownsville Regional Campus, 80 Fort Brown, SPH Bldg., N1.202C, Brownsville, TX, 78520, USA

    Jennifer L. Gay Ph.D.

  2. Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA

    Ruth P. Saunders Ph.D.

  3. Department of Exercise Science, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA

    Marsha Dowda Dr.P.H.

Authors
  1. Jennifer L. Gay Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ruth P. Saunders Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marsha Dowda Dr.P.H.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer L. Gay Ph.D..

About this article

Cite this article

Gay, J.L., Saunders, R.P. & Dowda, M. The Relationship of Physical Activity and the Built Environment within the Context of Self-Determination Theory. ann. behav. med. 42, 188–196 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-011-9292-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-011-9292-y

Keywords

  • Physical activity
  • Adults
  • Access
  • Convenience
  • Need satisfaction