Table 2.
Bivariate associations of cycling to/from school ≥ 1 trip/week with individual, social and environmental variables
| Boys | Girls | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cycles ≥ 1 trip/week | Cycles ≥ 1 trip/week | ||||
| Variables | Item ReliabilityΦ |
% No (n = 394) | % Yes (n = 179) | % No (n = 533) |
% Yes (n = 91) |
| Individual factors | |||||
| Family factors | |||||
| Maternal education§ | 0.96 (97.6%)‡ | ||||
| - Less than Secondary | 25.0 | 30.0 | 30.3 | 25.0# | |
| - Secondary/trade/diploma | 56.3 | 52.4 | 52.2 | 65.5 | |
| - Bachelor degree or higher | 18.7 | 17.6 | 17.5 | 9.5 | |
| Maternal employment§ | 0.92 (96.4%)‡ | ||||
| - None | 21.6 | 29.6# | 29.2 | 20.3 | |
| - Part-time | 50.2 | 41.4 | 47.3 | 56.5 | |
| - Full-time | 28.2 | 29.0 | 23.5 | 23.2 | |
| Adult home after school on most days§ | 0.32 (91.6%)‡ | 80.1 | 71.9* | 83.6 | 72.6* |
| Scheduling commitments before/after school§ | 0.56 (79.3%)‡ | 40.6 | 21.6*** | 37.6 | 28.7 |
| Child factors & perceptions | |||||
| Overweight or obese | - | 20.2 | 27.8# | 23.8 | 23.0 |
| Cycling is child's preferred school transport mode¥ | 0.61 (80.5%)‡ | 47.8 | 85.1*** | 30.7 | 71.4*** |
| Cycling to school is cool¥a | 0.62ж | 50.8 | 73.7*** | 47.9 | 64.8** |
| Cycling to school is more convenient¥a | 0.67ж | 45.2 | 74.9*** | 36.8 | 68.1*** |
| Confident in ability to cycle to school without adult¥a | 0.67ж | 81.7 | 96.6*** | 73.1 | 87.9** |
| Feels safer being driven to school than cycling¥a | 0.60ж | 29.2 | 14.0*** | 30.3 | 19.8* |
| Would feel safe whilst cycling to school¥a | 0.68ж | 50.0 | 67.0*** | 37.0 | 50.5* |
| Social factors | |||||
| Parent perceptionsb | |||||
| Very/extremely fearful child may be injured if they cycled to school without adult§c | 0.62ж | 22.7 | 11.2** | 26.9 | 18.6 |
| Very/extremely fearful of stranger danger§c | 0.91ж | 87.6 | 79.9* | 90.3 | 75.6*** |
| Often sees/hears news items about traffic dangers §c | 0.40ж | 49.7 | 42.1# | 52.0 | 39.5* |
| Child has a lot to carry§ | 0.57 (75.9%)‡ | 18.6 | 8.0** | 19.9 | 13.8 |
| Driving child to school is more convenient§ | 0.44 (65.4%)‡ | 42.2 | 23.9*** | 45.6 | 22.7*** |
| It is irresponsible to let children cycle to school with other children, without adult§a | 0.71ж | 9.3 | 5.1# | 15.3 | 6.9* |
| Disapproval from others§ | 0.53ж | 3.8 | 0.7# | 4.8 | 1.5 |
| Perceives child's preference is to cycle§ | 0.60 (80.9%)‡ | 35.8 | 75.8*** | 20.4 | 70.0*** |
| Confident in child's ability to cycle without adult§a | 0.67ж | 73.2 | 97.8*** | 69.3 | 91.1*** |
| The school encourages students to cycle to school§ | 0.71 (80.5%)‡ | 90.2 | 95.2# | 90.9 | 92.9 |
| Child perceptions | |||||
| Peer support¥a | 0.80ж | 45.4 | 63.1*** | 27.4 | 41.8** |
| My school would like students to cycle to school¥a | 0.45ж | 53.8 | 62.0# | 55.2 | 54.9 |
| I have many friends in my neighborhood¥ | 0.76 (87.9%)‡ | 69.6 | 77.7* | 66.2 | 75.8# |
| Physical environmental factorsd | |||||
| Parent perceptions | |||||
| Neighborhood is safe enough for children to cycle to school with friends§a | 0.62ж | 60.2 | 80.4*** | 63.0 | 81.3** |
| There are steep hills§ | 0.69 (86.8%)‡ | 10.6 | 8.0 | 12.7 | 3.4* |
| My child would have to cross a busy road§ | 0.68 (83.1%)‡ | 46.9 | 27.8*** | 43.3 | 21.8*** |
| There are no safe crossings for my child to use§ | 0.69 (81.9%)‡ | 30.2 | 21.0* | 30.9 | 16.1** |
| There is a lot of traffic near the school§ | 0.65ж | 53.6 | 36.9*** | 52.3 | 35.6** |
| Drivers near school often exceed the speed limit§a | 0.64ж | 65.6 | 64.8 | 63.5 | 53.9# |
| Child perceptions | |||||
| There are safe places to leave bikes at my school¥a | 0.74ж | 74.9 | 82.1# | 79.7 | 86.8 |
| I would have to cross a busy road¥a | 0.45ж | 48.2 | 50.8 | 44.5 | 59.3** |
| I feel safe crossing the road near my school¥a | 0.56ж | 74.1 | 82.7* | 72.7 | 72.5 |
| Objective Environmental factors | |||||
| School walkability index | - | ||||
| High | 45.4 | 45.8** | 47.5 | 51.6 | |
| Low | 54.6 | 54.2 | 52.5 | 48.4 | |
| Road traffic volume | - | ||||
| High | 54.6 | 54.2** | 52.5 | 48.4 | |
| Low | 45.4 | 45.8 | 47.5 | 51.6 | |
| Pedshed | - | ||||
| High connectivity | 50.5 | 51.4* | 54.4 | 63.7# | |
| Low connectivity | 49.5 | 48.6 | 45.6 | 36.3 | |
| Distance (km) | |||||
| Mean [SE] | 2.0[0.2] | 1.2[0.1]*** 1.6[0.1] 1.3[0.2]* | |||
SE = standard error, km = kilometer #p ≤ 0.10 *p ≤ 0.05 **p ≤ 0.01 ***p ≤ 0.001, ‡Kappa (% agreement), ¥Item based on child self-report, §Item based on parent self-report, жICC, ΦReliability based on how items were originally measured not on how recoded for analysis.
aMeasured on a 5-point Likert scale coded 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree then recoded into two categories: disagree (disagree, strongly disagree or neither) or agree (agree, strongly agree)
bSocial factors with no significant bivariate association with cycling to school included the following three items: child's fear of stranger danger; parent perception that other parents in their child's grade allow their child to cycle to school without an adult; whether the parent often sees/hears news items promoting cycling or walking
cMeasured on a 5-point Likert scale coded 1 = not at all fearful and 5 = extremely fearful then recoded into two categories: not fearful (not at all fearful, not very fearful, somewhat fearful) or fearful (very fearful, extremely fearful).
dPerceived environmental factors with no significant bivariate association with cycling to school included the following five items: child perceived neighborhood friendliness, heavy traffic around the school, heavy traffic around the neighborhood; parent perceived lack of footpaths and neighborhood friendliness