Table 7.
Results of logistic regression models for destination walking
| All |
Traditional |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | |||
| Neighbourhood perceptions | ||||||||
| Accessibility | 1.302† (0.195) | / | 1.368† (0.220) | 1.390 (0.511) | / | 1.260 (0.594) | ||
| Traffic safety | 0.941 (0.152) | / | 0.971 (0.178) | 1.176 (0.570) | / | 1.306 (0.703) | ||
| Aesthetics | 1.504† (0.362) | / | 1.418 (0.363) | 1.373 (0.822) | / | 0.772 (0.583) | ||
| Social environment | 1.220 (0.272) | / | 1.032 (0.248) | 1.456 (0.729) | / | 1.539 (0.997) | ||
| Perceived barriers to walking | ||||||||
| Accessibility | / | 1.011 (0.177) | 1.067 (0.110) | / | 0.918 (0.407) | 1.072 (0.603) | ||
| Traffic safety | / | 1.228 (0.239) | 1.092 (0.236) | / | 0.706 (0.279) | 0.726 (0.302) | ||
| Aesthetics | / | 0.819 (0.252) | 0.975 (0.324) | / | 0.508 (0.368) | 0.352 (0.300) | ||
| Social environment | / | 0.655 (0.180) | 0.590† (0.179) | / | 0.530 (0.315) | 0.630 (0.456) | ||
| Control variables | ||||||||
| Gender | 1.188 (0.303) | 1.144 (0.290) | 1.177 (0.303) | 0.873 (0.523) | 0.555 (0.323) | 0.610 (0.403) | ||
| Age | 1.006 (0.009) | 1.008 (0.009) | 1.008 (0.009) | 0.996 (0.016) | 1.006 (0.017) | 1.001 (0.018) | ||
| Income | 0.483 (0.239) | 0.402† (0.198) | 0.425† (0.216) | 0.833 (0.645) | 0.670 (0.519) | 0.722 (0.595) | ||
| Education | 1.140 (0.412) | 1.019 (0.371) | 1.117 (0.415) | 1.029 (0.662) | 0.706 (0.478) | 0.626 (0.444) | ||
| Employment | 1.481 (0.417) | 1.456 (0.406) | 1.542 (0.440) | 0.557 (0.340) | 0.721 (0.445) | 0.601 (0.393) | ||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.034 | 0.023 | 0.045 | 0.039 | 0.104 | 0.118 | ||
| Log likelihood | −188.48 | −190.53 | −186.32 | −41.16 | −38.38 | −37.81 | ||
| N | 289 | 289 | 289 | 62 | 62 | 62 | ||
| Neighbourhood perceptions | ||||||||
| Accessibility | 0.943 (0.253) | / | 0.964 (0.268) | 2.153 (1.370) | / | 1.739 (1.223) | ||
| Traffic safety | 0.774 (0.256) | / | 0.897 (0.347) | 10.114* (9.201) | / | 21.225** (24.143) | ||
| Aesthetics | 2.451* (0.903) | / | 2.481* (0.952) | 0.308 (0.225) | / | 0.286 (0.244) | ||
| Social environment | 1.578 (0.523) | / | 1.368 (0.475) | 0.780 (0.494) | / | 0.333 (0.289) | ||
| Perceived barriers to walking | ||||||||
| Accessibility | / | 1.306 (0.309) | 1.232 (0.306) | / | 0.258* (0.151) | 0.239† (0.177) | ||
| Traffic safety | / | 1.135 (0.330) | 1.063 (0.354) | / | 2.569 (1.783) | 4.627 (4.338) | ||
| Aesthetics | / | 0.881 (0.402) | 1.215 (0.596) | / | 1.012 (0.707) | 0.663 (0.563) | ||
| Social environment | / | 0.469* (0.177) | 0.483† (0.194) | / | 0.899 (0.712) | 0.419 (0.459) | ||
| Control variables | ||||||||
| Gender | 1.039 (0.386) | 1.156 (0.423) | 1.016 (0.387) | 1.487 (1.018) | 1.097 (0.718) | 1.036 (0.843) | ||
| Age | 1.012 (0.015) | 1.004 (0.015) | 1.013 (0.016) | 1.043 (0.032) | 1.056† (0.030) | 1.079* (0.041) | ||
| Income | 0.453 (0.351) | 0.363 (0.288) | 0.398 (0.319) | / | / | / | ||
| Education | 1.315 (0.771) | 1.182 (0.708) | 1.375 (0.841) | 1.111 (1.013) | 0.255 (0.257) | 0.297 (0.371) | ||
| Employment | 1.915 (0.774) | 1.706 (0.661) | 2.133† (0.890) | 2.507 (2.029) | 6.082* (5.257) | 3.959 (3.879) | ||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.055 | 0.041 | 0.076 | 0.185 | 0.122 | 0.276 | ||
| Log likelihood | −103.64 | −105.18 | −101.42 | −32.34 | −34.84 | −28.72 | ||
| N | 165 | 165 | 165 | 62 | 62 | 62 | ||
Notes: The coefficients for logistic regression models are odds coefficients. Standard errors are in parentheses.
†
p≤0.10;
*
p≤0.05;
**
p≤0.01;
***
p≤0.001.
The control variable of income is not included in the models for late conventional suburban neighbourhoods. Income is measured as a binary variable (1= $35,000 and above; 0 = less than $35,000). All respondents in late conventional suburban neighbourhoods who answered the income question indicated income above $35,000.