Table 1.
Descriptive characteristics of the sample from Cambridge, UK.
| Variable | Percentage (number) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All participants (n = 419) | Car (n = 288) | Car in combination with walking or cycling (n = 131) | p | |
| Personal characteristics | ||||
| Mean age in years (SD) | 43.7 (11.9) | 43.8 (10.8) | 43.5 (11.8) | 0.816 |
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 23.4 (98) | 24.0 (69) | 22.1 (29) | 0.683 |
| Female | 76.6 (321) | 76.0 (219) | 77.9 (102) | |
| Weight status | ||||
| Underweight/normal | 56.3 (232) | 53.4 (151) | 62.8 (81) | 0.073 |
| Overweight/obese | 43.7 (180) | 46.6 (132) | 37.2 (48) | |
| Work type | ||||
| Sedentary/standing | 81.8 (342) | 83.6 (240) | 77.9 (102) | 0.157 |
| Manual | 18.1 (76) | 16.4 (47) | 22.1 (29) | |
| Difficulty walking | ||||
| Yes | 2.4 (10) | 2.1 (6) | 3.0 (4) | 0.546 |
| No | 97.6 (409) | 97.9 (282) | 97.0 (127) | |
| Number of children in the household | ||||
| None | 67.3 (282) | 67.3 (191) | 71.0 (91) | 0.525 |
| One or more | 32.7 (137) | 32.3 (97) | 29.3 (40) | |
| Urban–rural status | ||||
| Urban | 44.3 (185) | 42.9 (123) | 46.6 (61) | 0.479 |
| Rural | 55.9 (234) | 57.1 (164) | 53.4 (70) | |
| Socio-economic characteristics | ||||
| Highest educational qualifications | ||||
| Lower than degree | 35.1 (146) | 35.3 (101) | 34.6 (45) | 0.890 |
| Degree or equivalent | 64.9 (270) | 64.7 (185) | 65.4 (85) | |
| Housing tenure | ||||
| Owned | 85.4 (356) | 84.6 (242) | 87.0 (114) | 0.518 |
| Privately rented/shared ownership/social housing | 14.6 (61) | 15.4 (44) | 13.0 (17) | |
| Index of multiple deprivation | ||||
| Quartile 1 (most deprived) | 291 (25.0) | 28.5 (82) | 17.5 (23) | 0.093 |
| Quartile 2 | 291 (25.0) | 22.9 (66) | 29.7 (39) | |
| Quartile 3 | 291 (25.0) | 25.4 (73) | 25.9 (34) | |
| Quartile 4 (least deprived) | 290 (25.0) | 23.2 (67) | 26.7 (35) | |
| Workplace-related characteristics | ||||
| Distance to work | ||||
| < 10 km | 22.9 (97) | 21.8 (63) | 26.0 (34) | 0.642 |
| 10.01–19.99 km | 27.0 (112) | 26.8 (77) | 26.8 (35) | |
| 20 km and over | 50.1 (210) | 51.4 (148) | 47.2 (62) | |
| Workplace car parking | ||||
| Free parking | 48.5 (203) | 62.2 (179) | 18.3 (24) | 0.001 |
| Pay for parking | 35.3 (148) | 32.6 (94) | 41.2 (54) | |
| No parking | 16.2 (68) | 5.2 (15) | 40.5 (53) | |
| Geographical context of commuting journey | ||||
| Commuting to the heart from within the city | 24.7 (103) | 26.7 (76) | 20.6 (27) | 0.298 |
| Commuting to the outskirts from within the city | 26.9 (112) | 28.0 (80) | 24.4 (32) | |
| Commuting to the heart from outside the city | 22.6 (94) | 20.7 (59) | 26.7 (35) | |
| Commuting to the outskirts from outside the city | 25.7 (107) | 24.6 (70) | 28.3 (37) | |
| Perceptions of the route environmenta | ||||
| Reported the least supportive route (lowest tertile) | 33.4 (138) | 39.4 (111) | 20.6 (27) | 0.001 |
| Middle tertile | 34.2 (158) | 37.9 (107) | 38.9 (51) | |
| Reported the most supportive route (highest tertile) | 28.3 (122) | 22.7 (64) | 40.5 (53) | |
| Psychological measures relating to car use | ||||
| Intention to use car (2 items) | ||||
| Below median | 56.4 (234) | 61.4 (175) | 45.4 (59) | 0.002 |
| Above median | 43.6 (181) | 38.6 (110) | 54.6 (71) | |
| Positive attitude towards car (2 items) | ||||
| Below median | 51.9 (214) | 59.7 (169) | 34.8 (45) | 0.001 |
| Above median | 48.1 (198) | 40.3 (114) | 65.1 (84) | |
| Perceived behavioural control (2 items) | ||||
| Below median | 57.4 (236) | 63.3 (179) | 44.6 (57) | 0.008 |
| Above median | 42.6 (175) | 36.7 (104) | 55.4 (71) | |
| Social norm (2 items) | ||||
| Below median | 59.0 (242) | 66.7 (188) | 42.2 (54) | 0.001 |
| Above median | 41.0 (168) | 33.3 (94) | 57.8 (74) | |
| Habit strength | ||||
| Low habit strength | 50.5 (210) | 54.5 (157) | 40.5 (53) | 0.008 |
| High habit strength | 49.5 (206) | 45.4 (131) | 59.6 (78) | |
| Physical activity | ||||
| Mean minutes/day spent walking on the commute (SD) | 5.14 (11.9) | 0.65 (3.1) | 11.8 (14.7) | 0.001 |
| Mean minutes/day spent cycling on the commute (SD) | 4.3 (9.6) | 1.3 (5.1) | 17.4 (18.2) | 0.001 |
Percentages represent column percentages. Data collected in 2009 in Cambridge, UK. p values represent differences between ‘car only’ and ‘car in combination with walking or cycling’ groups.
a
The seven items comprising the perceptions of the route environment were: ‘It is pleasant to walk’, ‘There is convenient public transport’, ‘There is little traffic’, ‘There are no convenient routes for walking’, ‘It is safe to cross the road’,’ The roads are dangerous for cyclists’ and ‘There are convenient routes for cycling’. Further details can be found in Panter et al. (2011).