Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Is prosocial behaviour a missing link between green space quality and child health-related outcomes?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to investigate prosocial behaviour—those behaviours that benefit others or enhance relationships with others—as a mediator of the associations between green space quality and child health-related outcomes (physical activity, mental health, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL)).

Methods

This study involved data from 4983 children with 10-year follow-up (2004–2014) retrieved from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. Green space quality (the exposure), prosocial behaviour (the candidate mediator), and child health-related outcomes were assessed biennially based on caregiver reports. Causal mediation analysis was used, with four mediation models developed for each outcome.

Results

Mediation by prosocial behaviour appeared in the late childhood mediation model with higher mediation proportions reported compared to models of earlier and middle childhood. Prosocial behaviour had moderate mediation consistency for the association between green space quality and physical activity enjoyment, but no mediation was evident for other physical activity variables. Prosocial behaviour had low mediation consistency for child mental health (internalising and externalising subscales). Similarly, low mediation consistency of prosocial behaviour was also evident for all HRQOL variables, such as physical, emotional, social, school functioning, psychosocial health, and total quality of life (QOL).

Conclusion

Prosocial behaviour partially mediated the association between green space quality and child health-related outcomes (physical activity enjoyment, mental health, and HRQOL). Improving the quality of neighbourhood green space that supports the development of prosocial behaviour may result in better child health-related outcomes. Other physical activity variables might not specifically relate to social interactions, and therefore, no mediation by prosocial behaviour was apparent.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Data are available at https://dataverse.ada.edu.au/dataverse/ncld with the permission of the Department of Social Services.

References

  1. Hartley K, Ryan P, Brokamp C, Gillespie GL (2020) Effect of greenness on asthma in children: a systematic review. Public Health Nurs 37(3):453–460. https://doi.org/10.1111/phn.12701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lambert KA, Bowatte G, Tham R, Lodge C, Prendergast L, Heinrich J, Abramson MJ, Dharmage SC, Erbas B (2017) Residential greenness and allergic respiratory diseases in children and adolescents—a systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Res 159:212–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.08.002

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Vanaken GJ, Danckaerts M (2018) Impact of green space exposure on children’s and adolescents’ mental health: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122668

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. McCormick R (2017) Does access to green space impact the mental well-being of children: a systematic review. J Pediatr Nurs 37:3–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2017.08.027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Oswald TK, Rumbold AR, Kedzior SGE, Moore VM (2020) Psychological impacts of “screen time” and “green time” for children and adolescents: a systematic scoping review. PLoS ONE 15(9):e0237725. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237725

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim J-H, Lee C, Sohn W (2016) Urban natural environments, obesity, and health-related quality of life among Hispanic children living in inner-city neighborhoods. Int J Environ Res Public Health 13(1):121. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13010121

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. McCracken DS, Allen DA, Gow AJ (2016) Associations between urban greenspace and health-related quality of life in children. Prevent Med Rep 3:211–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.01.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Akpinar A (2017) Urban green spaces for children: a cross-sectional study of associations with distance, physical activity, screen time, general health, and overweight. Urban For Urban Green 25:66–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.05.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sanders T, Feng X, Fahey PP, Lonsdale C, Astell-Burt T (2015) The influence of neighbourhood green space on children’s physical activity and screen time: findings from the longitudinal study of Australian children. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 12(1):126. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0288-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Ward JS, Duncan JS, Jarden A, Stewart T (2016) The impact of children’s exposure to greenspace on physical activity, cognitive development, emotional wellbeing, and ability to appraise risk. Health Place 40:44–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.04.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wang P, Meng Y-Y, Lam V, Ponce N (2019) Green space and serious psychological distress among adults and teens: a population-based study in California. Health Place 56:184–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2019.02.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dzhambov A, Hartig T, Markevych I, Tilov B, Dimitrova D (2018) Urban residential greenspace and mental health in youth: different approaches to testing multiple pathways yield different conclusions. Environ Res 160:47–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.09.015

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Richardson EA, Pearce J, Shortt NK, Mitchell R (2017) The role of public and private natural space in children’s social, emotional and behavioural development in Scotland: a longitudinal study. Environ Res 158:729–736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.07.038

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. McEachan RRC, Yang TC, Roberts H, Pickett KE, Arseneau-Powell D, Gidlow CJ, Wright J, Nieuwenhuijsen M (2018) Availability, use of, and satisfaction with green space, and children’s mental wellbeing at age 4 years in a multicultural, deprived, urban area: results from the Born in Bradford cohort study. Lancet Planet Health 2(6):e244–e254. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2542-5196(18)30119-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bates CR, Bohnert AM, Gerstein DE (2018) Green schoolyards in low-income urban neighborhoods: natural spaces for positive youth development outcomes. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00805

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Andrusaityte S, Grazuleviciene R, Dedele A, Balseviciene B (2019) The effect of residential greenness and city park visiting habits on preschool Children’s mental and general health in Lithuania: a cross-sectional study. Int J Hyg Environ Health 223(1):142–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2019.09.009

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hay DF (1994) Prosocial development. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 35(1):29–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1994.tb01132.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hammond SI, Waugh W, Satlof-Bedrick E, Brownell CA (2015) Prosocial behavior during childhood and cultural variations. In: Wright JD (ed) International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 228–232

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Wittek R, Bekkers R (2015) Altruism and prosocial behavior, sociology of. In: Wright JD (ed) International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 579–583

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Hay DF, Cook KV (2007) The transformation of prosocial behavior from infancy to childhood. Socioemotional development in the toddler years: Transitions and transformations. Guilford Press, New York, pp 100–131

    Google Scholar 

  21. Abrams D, Van de Vyver J, Pelletier J, Cameron L (2015) Children’s prosocial behavioural intentions towards outgroup members. Br J Dev Psychol 33(3):277–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12085

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Putra IGNE, Astell-Burt T, Cliff DP, Vella SA, John EE, Feng X (2020) The relationship between green space and prosocial behaviour among children and adolescents: a systematic review. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00859

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Feng X, Astell-Burt T (2017) Do greener areas promote more equitable child health? Health Place 46:267–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2017.05.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Feng X, Astell-Burt T (2017) Residential green space quantity and quality and child well-being: a longitudinal study. Am J Prev Med 53(5):616–624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2017.06.035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kalish M, Banco L, Burke G, Lapidus G (2010) Outdoor play: a survey of parent’s perceptions of their child’s safety. J Trauma 69(4 Suppl):S218-222. https://doi.org/10.1097/ta.0b013e3181f1eaf0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Datar A, Nicosia N, Shier V (2013) Parent perceptions of neighborhood safety and children’s physical activity, sedentary behavior, and obesity: evidence from a national longitudinal study. Am J Epidemiol 177(10):1065–1073. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kws353

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Putra IGNE, Astell-Burt T, Cliff DP, Vella SA, Feng X (2021) Association between green space quality and prosocial behaviour: a 10-year multilevel longitudinal analysis of Australian children. Environ Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.110334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Putra IGNE, Astell-Burt T, Cliff DP, Vella SA, Feng X (2021) Association between caregiver perceived green space quality and the development of prosocial behaviour from childhood to adolescence: latent class trajectory and multilevel longitudinal analyses of Australian children over 10 years. J Environ Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Eime RM, Young JA, Harvey JT, Charity MJ, Payne WR (2013) A systematic review of the psychological and social benefits of participation in sport for children and adolescents: informing development of a conceptual model of health through sport. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 10(1):98. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-10-98

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Beets MW, Vogel R, Forlaw L, Pitetti KH, Cardinal BJ (2006) Social support and youth physical activity: the role of provider and type. Am J Health Behav 30(3):278–289. https://doi.org/10.5555/ajhb.2006.30.3.278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Salvy S-J, Roemmich JN, Bowker JC, Romero ND, Stadler PJ, Epstein LH (2008) Effect of peers and friends on youth physical activity and motivation to be physically active. J Pediatr Psychol 34(2):217–225. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsn071

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Zhang T, Solmon MA, Gao Z, Kosma M (2012) Promoting school students’ physical activity: a social ecological perspective. J Appl Sport Psychol 24(1):92–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2011.627083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Voorhees CC, Murray D, Welk G, Birnbaum A, Ribisl KM, Johnson CC, Pfeiffer KA, Saksvig B, Jobe JB (2005) The role of peer social network factors and physical activity in adolescent girls. Am J Health Behav 29(2):183–190. https://doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.29.2.9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Garcia JM, Sirard JR, Deutsch NL, Weltman A (2016) The influence of friends and psychosocial factors on physical activity and screen time behavior in adolescents: a mixed-methods analysis. J Behav Med 39(4):610–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-016-9738-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Fraser M, Munoz S-A, MacRury S (2019) What motivates participants to adhere to green exercise? Int J Environ Res Public Health 16(10):1832. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16101832

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Crane J, Temple V (2015) A systematic review of dropout from organized sport among children and youth. Eur Phys Educ Rev 21(1):114–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336x14555294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. García-Carrión R, Villarejo-Carballido B, Villardón-Gallego L (2019) Children and adolescents mental health: a systematic review of interaction-based interventions in schools and communities. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00918

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Fabes RA, Hanish LD, Martin CL, Moss A, Reesing A (2012) The effects of young children’s affiliations with prosocial peers on subsequent emotionality in peer interactions. Br J Dev Psychol 30(Pt 4):569–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02073.x

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Aknin LB, Hamlin JK, Dunn EW (2012) Giving leads to happiness in young children. PLoS ONE 7(6):e39211–e39211. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0039211

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Aknin LB, Broesch T, Hamlin JK, Van de Vondervoort JW (2015) Prosocial behavior leads to happiness in a small-scale rural society. J Exp Psychol Gen 144(4):788–795. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Flouri E, Sarmadi Z (2016) Prosocial behavior and childhood trajectories of internalizing and externalizing problems: the role of neighborhood and school contexts. Dev Psychol 52(2):253–258. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000076

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Flynn E, Ehrenreich SE, Beron KJ, Underwood MK (2015) Prosocial behavior: long-term trajectories and psychosocial outcomes. Soc Dev 24(3):462–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Carona C, Vitorino C, Alves-Nogueira AC, Moreira H, Canavarro MC, Silva N (2020) Nice kids, healthy kids? Prosocial behavior, psychological problems and quality of life in children, preadolescents, and adolescents with and without chronic health conditions. Central Eur J Pediatr. https://doi.org/10.5457/p2005-114.276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Frontini R, Crespo C, Carona C, Canavarro MC (2012) Health-related quality of life and its correlates in children with cerebral palsy: an exploratory study. J Dev Phys Disabil 24(2):181–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-011-9265-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Larsen M, Goemans A, Baste V, Wilderjans TF, Lehmann S (2020) Predictors of quality of life among youths in foster care — a 5-year prospective follow-up study. Qual Life Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02641-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Australian Institute of Family Studies (2005) The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children: An Australian Government Initiative: Sample Design. LSAC Technical Paper No. 1. Australian Government, Canberra

  47. Australian Institute of Family Studies (2018) The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children: An Australian Government Initiative. Data User Guide. Australian Government. https://growingupinaustralia.gov.au/data-and-documentation/data-user-guide

  48. Feng X, Astell-Burt T (2017) The relationship between neighbourhood green space and child mental wellbeing depends upon whom you ask: multilevel evidence from 3083 children aged 12–13 years. Int J Environ Res Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14030235

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Putra IGNE, Astell-Burt T, Cliff DP, Vella SA, Feng X (2021) Do physical activity, social interaction, and mental health mediate the association between green space quality and child prosocial behaviour? Urban For Urban Green. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Goodman (1997) The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: a research note. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 38(5):581–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Goodman A, Goodman R (2009) Strengths and difficulties questionnaire as a dimensional measure of child mental health. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 48(4):400–403. https://doi.org/10.1097/CHI.0b013e3181985068

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Hall CL, Guo B, Valentine AZ, Groom MJ, Daley D, Sayal K, Hollis C (2019) The validity of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) for children with ADHD symptoms. PLoS ONE 14(6):e0218518–e0218518. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218518

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Croft S, Stride C, Maughan B, Rowe R (2015) Validity of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire in preschool-aged children. Pediatrics 135(5):e1210–e1219. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-2920

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Williamson A, Redman S, Dadds M, Daniels J, D’Este C, Raphael B, Eades S, Skinner T (2010) Acceptability of an emotional and behavioural screening tool for children in aboriginal community controlled health services in urban NSW. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 44(10):894–900. https://doi.org/10.3109/00048674.2010.489505

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Australian Institute of Family Studies (2007) Children’s time use in the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children: Data quality and analytical issues in the 4-year cohort LSAC Technical Paper No. 4. Australian Government, Canberra

  56. Australian Institute of Family Studies (2014) Longitudinal analysis of LSAC time diary data: considerations for data users. LSAC Technical Paper No. 11. Australian Government, Canberra

  57. Varni JW, Seid M, Knight TS, Uzark K, Szer IS (2002) The PedsQLTM 40 generic core scales: sensitivity, responsiveness, and impact on clinical decision-making. J Behave Med 25(2):175–193. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014836921812

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Varni JW, Burwinkle TM, Seid M, Skarr D (2003) The PedsQLTM* 4.0 as a pediatric population health measure: feasibility, reliability, and validity. Ambul Pediatr 3(6):329–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Department of Health and Aged Care (2001) Measuring remoteness: accessibility/remoteness index of Australia (ARIA). New Series Number 14. Department of Health and Aged Care, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  60. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006) Socio‐Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA)–Technical Paper

  61. Rasbash J, Stelle F, Browne WJ, Goldstein H (2017) A User’s Guide to MLwiN: Version 3.01. Centre for Multilevel Modelling. University of Bristol, UK

    Google Scholar 

  62. Browne WJ, Goldstein H, Rasbash J (2001) Multiple membership multiple classification (MMMC) models. Stat Model 1(2):103–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/1471082X0100100202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Richiardi L, Bellocco R, Zugna D (2013) Mediation analysis in epidemiology: methods, interpretation and bias. Int J Epidemiol 42(5):1511–1519. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyt127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Liu S-H, Ulbricht CM, Chrysanthopoulou SA, Lapane KL (2016) Implementation and reporting of causal mediation analysis in 2015: a systematic review in epidemiological studies. BMC Res Notes 9(1):354. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-2163-7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Dendup T, Feng X, O’Shaughnessy PY, Astell-Burt T (2021) Role of perceived neighbourhood crime in the longitudinal association between perceived built environment and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a moderated mediation analysis. J Epidemiol Community Health 75(2):120–127. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2020-214175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Straatmann VS, Lai E, Law C, Whitehead M, Strandberg-Larsen K, Taylor-Robinson D (2020) How do early-life adverse childhood experiences mediate the relationship between childhood socioeconomic conditions and adolescent health outcomes in the UK? J Epidemiol Community Health 74(11):969–975. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2020-213817

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Hossin MZ, Koupil I, Falkstedt D (2019) Early life socioeconomic position and mortality from cardiovascular diseases: an application of causal mediation analysis in the Stockholm Public Health Cohort. BMJ Open 9(6):e026258–e026258. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026258

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Vella SA, Gardner LA, Kemp B, Swann C (2018) Health-related quality of life as a longitudinal mediator of the relationship between participation in organised sports and adiposity among young people. Prevent Med Rep 12:66–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2018.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Walters GD (2020) Positive peers—the neglected stepchildren of social influence theories of crime. J Abnorm Child Psychol 48(5):719–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-020-00630-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Chung A, Peeters A, Gearon E, Backholer K (2018) Contribution of discretionary food and drink consumption to socio-economic inequalities in children’s weight: prospective study of Australian children. Int J Epidemiol 47(3):820–828. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyy020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Valente MJ, Rijnhart JJM, Smyth HL, Muniz FB, MacKinnon DP (2020) Causal mediation programs in R, Mplus, SAS, SPSS, and Stata. Struct Equ Modeling. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2020.1777133

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Chen H, Sun H, Dai J (2017) Peer support and adolescents’ physical activity: the mediating roles of self-efficacy and enjoyment. J Pediatr Psychol 42(5):569–577. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsw103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Fitzgerald A, Fitzgerald N, Aherne C (2012) Do peers matter? A review of peer and/or friends’ influence on physical activity among American adolescents. J Adolesc 35(4):941–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.01.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Leventhal KS, Gillham J, DeMaria L, Andrew G, Peabody J, Leventhal S (2015) Building psychosocial assets and wellbeing among adolescent girls: a randomized controlled trial. J Adolesc 45:284–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2015.09.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Eisenberg N, Spinrad TL, Knafo-Noam A (2015) Prosocial development. In: Lerner RM (ed) Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science. Wiley, pp 1–47

    Google Scholar 

  76. Choudhury S, Blakemore S-J, Charman T (2006) Social cognitive development during adolescence. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 1(3):165–174. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsl024

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Sanders RA (2013) Adolescent psychosocial, social, and cognitive development. Pediatr Rev 34(8):354. https://doi.org/10.1542/pir.34-8-354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Schisterman EF, Cole SR, Platt RW (2009) Overadjustment bias and unnecessary adjustment in epidemiologic studies. Epidemiology 20(4):488–495. https://doi.org/10.1097/ede.0b013e3181a819a1

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper uses unit record data from Growing Up in Australia, the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. The study is conducted in partnership with the Department of Social Services (DSS), the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS), and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). The findings and views reported in this paper are those of the authors and should not be attributed to DSS, AIFS or the ABS.

Funding

This work was supported by the Hort Frontiers Green Cities Fund, part of the Hort Frontiers strategic partnership initiative developed by Hort Innovation, with co-investment from the University of Wollongong (UOW) Faculty of Social Sciences, the UOW Global Challenges initiative and contributions from the Australian Government (project number #GC15005). Thomas Astell-Burt was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Boosting Dementia Research Leader Fellowship (#1140317). Xiaoqi Feng was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Career Development Fellowship (#1148792). All aspects related to the conduct of this study including the views stated and the decision to publish the findings are that of the authors only.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Population Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), School of Health and Society, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Building 29, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia

    I Gusti Ngurah Edi Putra, Thomas Astell-Burt & Xiaoqi Feng

  2. Menzies Centre for Health Policy, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Thomas Astell-Burt & Xiaoqi Feng

  3. Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Environmental Health, Beijing, China

    Thomas Astell-Burt & Xiaoqi Feng

  4. School of Population Medicine and Public Health, Peking Union Medical College, The Chinese Academy for Medical Sciences and Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

    Thomas Astell-Burt

  5. School of Education, Early Start, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia

    Dylan P. Cliff

  6. Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia

    Dylan P. Cliff & Stewart A. Vella

  7. School of Psychology, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia

    Stewart A. Vella

  8. School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Xiaoqi Feng

Authors
  1. I Gusti Ngurah Edi Putra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Astell-Burt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dylan P. Cliff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stewart A. Vella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xiaoqi Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization IGNEP, TA-B; methodology IGNEP, formal analysis and investigation IGNEP; writing—original draft preparation IGNEP; writing—review and editing IGNEP, TA-B, DPC, SAV, XF; funding acquisition TA-B, XF; supervision TA-B, DPC, SAV, XF.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Astell-Burt.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This study used data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC). The LSAC’s methodology and data collection have obtained ethics approval from the Australian Institute of Family Studies Ethics Committee. This present study has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee, the University of Wollongong (No. 2019/433).

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 17 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Putra, I.G.N.E., Astell-Burt, T., Cliff, D.P. et al. Is prosocial behaviour a missing link between green space quality and child health-related outcomes?. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 57, 775–789 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-021-02186-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-021-02186-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation