Prompts to increase physical activity at points-of-choice between stairs and escalators: what about escalator climbers?

Author:

Bellettiere John12,Nguyen Ben1,Liles Sandy1,Berardi Vincent13,Adams Marc A4,Dempsey Paddy56,Benporat Yael1,Kerr Jacqueline2,LaCroix Andrea Z2,Hovell Melbourne1

Affiliation:

1. Center for Behavioral Epidemiology and Community Health (C-BEACH), Graduate School of Public Health, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA

2. Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA

3. Department of Psychology, Chapman University, Orange, CA

4. School of Nutrition and Health Promotion, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ

5. Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

6. Centre for Urban Transitions, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Abstract

Abstract Since 1980, many studies have evaluated whether stair-use prompts increased physical activity by quantifying changes in stair use. To more completely evaluate changes in physical activity, this study addressed the often-overlooked assessment of climbing up escalators by evaluating the degree to which stair-use sign prompts increased active ascent—defined as stair use or escalator climbing. Over 5 months, at an airport stairs/escalator point of choice, we video-recorded passersby (N = 13,544) who ascended either stairs or escalators, on 10 days with signs and 10 days without signs. Ascenders using the stairs, standing on the escalator, and climbing the escalator were compared on days with versus without signs using multivariable logistic regression. The percentage of ascenders on days with versus without signs were as follows: stair use, 6.9 versus 3.6 percent; escalator standing, 75.2 versus 76.0 percent; and escalator climbing, 18.5 versus 20.4 percent. Signs more than doubled the odds of stair use (vs. escalator use; OR = 2.25; 95% CI = 1.90–2.68; p < .001). Signs decreased the odds of escalator climbing (vs. escalator standing or stair use); OR = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.82−0.99; p = .028). Signs increased the odds of active ascent versus escalator standing by 15 percent (OR = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.05–1.25; p = .002). Although stair-use prompts increased stair use more than twofold (125%), they increased active ascent by only 15 percent, partly because escalator climbing—a behavior not targeted by the intervention—decreased. Although our results corroborated the established consensus that point-of-choice prompts increase stair use, future studies should test interventions designed to increase active ascent.

Funder

National Institutes of Health

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Behavioral Neuroscience,Applied Psychology

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3