Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The effect of siblings and family dog ownership on children's independent mobility to neighbourhood destinations

The effect of siblings and family dog ownership on children's independent mobility to... independent mobility (the licence Eand ability to travel without adult Objective: To investigate the effect of sibling age, gender and dog ownership on children’s supervision) is associated with increased independent mobility and how this varies according to the destination visited. physical activity, as well as psychosocial and Methods: Parents reported whether their child had an older sibling; if the child and older developmental benefits. However, it is widely sibling were of the same gender; the number of older siblings; if they owned a dog; and accepted that children’s independent mobility whether their child was allowed to independently travel to school, friends’ or family house, levels are declining. Identifying factors that park/oval/sporting field and local shop. Data were analysed for 181 children aged 8–15 years. encourage children’s independent mobility is Results: The strongest significant sibling effect for independently mobility to school, local important for determining intervention points. shop and ≥3 destinations was for having an older sibling of the same gender (p≤0.05). For Multiple factors influence the declining independent mobility to a friend’s house and park, the strongest significant sibling effect was trend in children’s independent mobility, for having one older sibling (p≤0.05). Dog ownership was associated with increased odds of including demographic (e.g. gender), social being independently mobile to ≥3 destinations (OR=2.43; 95%CI=1.03-5.74). (e.g. perceptions of strangers) and physical 3-9 Conclusions: Parents may be more likely to grant children licence to travel to local places if they environment factors (e.g. traffic exposure). are accompanied by an older sibling or the family dog. Destinations such as parks, shops and friends’ houses are common places that children Implications: Understanding the effects of siblings and dog ownership on children’s 8,10,11 travel to. More independent mobility independent mobility will assist in identifying strategies through which independent mobility 2,10,12,13 is associated with having siblings. can be encouraged. However, it is unclear whether a sibling’s Key words: child, independent travel, mobility, dog, sibling, neighbourhood gender and age relative to the child influences independent mobility. Research mobility and how this varies according to the approval. Parents in the fourth RESIDE survey also suggests that children may be allowed destination visited. (n=305) provided data on 181 children aged to travel independently if they have a family 8–15 years. If there was more than one child dog. Given that ‘stranger danger’ is one of within this age range in the household, the the most highly cited barriers to children’s Methods youngest was included. Variables included independent mobility, walking with siblings whether the child had an older sibling <18 Participants were part of the RESIDential and/or a family dog may reassure both years, the number of older siblings (none, Environments (RESIDE) study; a longitudinal parents and children by providing them with one or ≥two), if the child and older sibling natural experiment of people moving homes. an increased sense of safety. We investigated 15 were of the same gender and dog ownership Details of RESIDE are described elsewhere. the effect of sibling age, gender and dog status (no, yes). Parents reported whether The University of Western Australia’s Human ownership on children’s independent their child was allowed to walk or cycle alone Research Ethics Committee provided ethics 1. Centre for the Built Environment and Health, The University of Western Australia 2. School of Population Health, The University of Western Australia 3. Telethon Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia 4. McCaughey VicHealth Community Wellbeing Unit, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 5. Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, The Royal Children’s Hospital, Victoria 6. Steno Health Promotion Research, Steno Diabetes Centre, Denmark Correspondence to: Dr Hayley Christian, School of Population Health (M707), The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009; e-mail: hayley.christian@uwa.edu.au Submitted: July 2015; Revision requested: November 2015; Accepted: January 2016 The authors have stated they have no conflict of interest. Aust NZ J Public Health. 2016; 40:316-8; doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12528 316 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2016 vol . 40 no . 4 © 2016 Public Health Association of Australia Younger People Siblings, dogs and children’s independent mobility or more older siblings) was associated with ‘learn’ safe routes and how to negotiate or with other children (without an adult) to higher odds of being independently mobile traffic situations when travelling with older or from four destinations: school; friends’ or to school, friend’s house, the park and local siblings, which helps to build children’s (and family house; park, oval or sporting field; and shop (all p≤0.05). Having an older sibling parents’) confidence in their ability to travel local shop (e.g. deli, newsagent). ‘Overall’ of the same gender was associated with independently. independent mobility included children increased likelihood of being independently who were independently mobile to ≥3 Our findings extend previous research by mobile to school, the park, local shop and destinations. showing that children with an older sibling overall (all p≤0.05). For school, local shop and of the same gender were more likely to be Logistic regression models were fitted to overall independent mobility outcomes, the independently mobile to local destinations. explore the association between independent strongest sibling effect (using the AIC) was Travelling with a sibling may offer additional mobility and sibling-related variables and having an older sibling of the same gender company, yet it is possible that siblings of dog ownership, after adjusting for child age (Table 1). For independent mobility to friend’s the same (compared with opposite) gender and gender and parent age, gender and house and park, the strongest sibling effect may be more willing to spend time together education. was for having only one older sibling (and not because they have common interests and two or more older siblings). mutual friends. Results Dog ownership was also associated with We also observed that dog ownership was an increased odds of being independently Child mean age was 10.7 (SD 2.1) years, 45% associated with overall independent mobility. mobile overall (OR=2.43; 95%CI=1.03-5.74) were male and 29% were independently This suggests that the family dog should be but not with independent mobility to specific mobile to ≥3 destinations. Overall, 56% of considered an important form of non-adult local destinations. children had an older sibling (8–17 years), accompaniment, in that it offers company 26% had an older sibling of the same and may provide parents with an increased gender, 53% had a dog at home and 34% sense of safety. Other studies have shown Conclusion of parents perceived that it was unsafe that children who walk a dog have higher Having an older sibling was significantly for children to independently move levels of physical activity and independent associated with independent mobility to each around the neighbourhood. Detailed mobility than children who own a dog but do destination type, with the number of older sample characteristics have been reported not walk it. siblings and their gender also important. Our previously. Being male and older (vs. female Together, these findings are important. With findings support previous studies reporting and younger) was associated with increased growing levels of parental fear, children’s that having an older sibling is associated odds of being independently mobile 19 independent mobility is being constrained. 9,10,12,13 with increased independent mobility. (results not shown). Having an older sibling This may be an even greater issue considering Travelling with an older sibling is likely to (regardless of the number of older siblings the increasing number of single-child provide parents – the gatekeepers of their or their gender) was associated with higher 20 households. For single-child households, children’s choices – with an added sense odds of being independently mobile to a a well-trained dog that could accompany of safety and perceived protection. This friend’s house (OR=2.12; 95%CI=1.00-4.51), children to local destinations may allay some is important, given that exposure to traffic the park (OR=3.53; 95%CI=1.64-7.61) and parental fears, resulting in parents allowing and fear of strangers are highly cited barriers local shop (OR=2.55; 95%CI=1.09-5.98), see their children some independent mobility. to children’s local travel. Children may also Table 1. Having one older sibling (but not two Understanding the effects of siblings and dog ownership (including dog-related factors such as size and breed, training and Table 1: Association between sibling and dog ownership status and independent mobility to specific destinations socialisation and child–dog attachment) on and overall. independent mobility will assist in identifying School Friends or family Park/oval or Local shop Overall Independent the potential pathways through which OR (95% CI) house sporting field OR (95% CI) Mobility OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) independent mobility can be encouraged. Older sibling 1.95 (0.94-4.02)* 2.12 (1.00-4.51)** 3.53 (1.64-7.61)*** 2.55 (1.09-5.98)** 1.88 (0.80-4.40) AIC=210.42 AIC=200.57 AIC=203.02 AIC=167.89 AIC=163.19 Acknowledgements Number of older siblings 0 (ref ) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 The RESIDE II Study was funded by a 1 2.27 (1.06-4.86)** 2.70 (1.20-6.05)** 5.24 (2.25-12.20)*** 2.97 (1.20-7.33)** 2.30 (0.93-5.68)* grant from the Western Australian Health 2+ 1.09 (0.33-3.60 0.96 (0.29-3.23) 1.13 (0.35-3.66) 1.50 (0.39-5.80) 0.91 (0.22-3.80) Promotion Foundation (18921). The first AIC=210.81 AIC=199.61 AIC=198.13 AIC=168.85 AIC=163.48 author is supported by a National Health and Older sibling same gender 2.21 (1.01-4.83)** 2.13 (0.94-4.84)* 2.74 (1.22-6.18)** 4.59 (1.76-12.00)*** 2.79 (1.08-7.19)** Medical Research Council (NHMRC)/National Heart Foundation Early Career Fellowship AIC=209.79 AIC=201.26 AIC=208.14 AIC=162.36 AIC=160.77 (1036350) and the last author is supported by Dog ownership 1.14 (0.56-2.31) 2.03 (0.97-4.26)* 1.50 (0.74-3.05) 2.19 (0.95-5.03)* 2.43 (1.03-5.74)** an NHMRC Principal Research Fellow Award AIC=213.64 AIC=200.97 AIC=213.04 AIC=169.30 AIC=161.18 (1004900). Mrs Claire Lauritsen coordinated All models adjusted for child age and gender and parent age, gender and education. AIC=Akaike information criterion (best sibling variable for each independent mobility destination is the one that gives the smallest AIC). data collection and Ms Pulan Bai provided Boldface indicates statistical significance (*p<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01). administrative assistance. a: Independently mobile to and from three or all four of the destinations. 2016 vol . 40 no . 4 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 317 © 2016 Public Health Association of Australia Christian et al. Brief Report 11. Veitch J, Salmon J, Ball K. Children’s active free play in References local neighbourhoods: A behavioural mapping study. Health Educ Res. 2008;23(5):870-9. 1. Hillman M, Adams J, Whitelegg J. One false move: A 12. Jones L, Davis A, Eyers T. Young people, transport and study of children’s independent mobility. London (UK): risk: Comparing access and independent mobility in Policy Studies Institute; 1990. urban, suburban and rural environments. Health Educ 2. Prezza M, Pilloni S, Morabito C, Sersante C, Alparone J. 2000;59(4):315-28. FR, Giuliani MV. The influence of psychosocial and 13. Zwerts E, Allaert G, Janssens D, Wets G, Witlox F. How environmental factors on children’s independent children view their travel behaviour: A case study from mobility and relationship to peer frequentation. J Flanders (Belgium). J Transp Geogr. 2010;18(6):702-10. Community Appl Soc Psychol. 2001;11(6):435-50. 14. Christian H, Trapp G, Villanueva K, Zubrick SR, 3. Fyhri A, Hjorthol R, Mackett RL, Fotel TN, Kyttä M. Koekemoer R, Giles-Corti B. Dog walking is associated Children’s active travel and independent mobility in with more outdoor play and independent mobility for four countries: Development, social contributing trends children. Prev Med. 2014;67:259-63. and measures. Transp Policy (Oxf ). 2011;18(5):703-10. 15. Giles-Corti B, Knuiman M, Timperio A, et al. Evaluation of 4. Carver A, Timperio A, Crawford D. Playing it the implementation of a state government community safe: The influence of neighbourhood safety on design policy aimed at increasing local walking: Design children’s physical activity—A review. Health Place. issues and baseline results from RESIDE, Perth Western 2008;14(2):217-27. Australia. Prev Med. 2008;46(1):46-54. 5. Zubrick S, Wood L, Villanueva K, Wood G, Giles-Corti 16. Cutt H, Giles-Corti B, Knuiman M, Pikora T. Physical B, Christian H. Nothing but Fear Itself: Parental Fear as activity behavior of dog owners: Development and a Determinant Impacting on Child Physical Activity and reliability of the Dogs And Physical Activity (DAPA) tool. Independent Mobility. Melbourne (AUST): Victorian J Phys Act Health. 2008;5 Supp 1:73-89. Health Promotion Foundation; 2010. 17. Christian H, Klinker C, Villanueva K, et al. The effect 6. Schoeppe S, Duncan MJ, Badland H, Oliver M, Curtis C. of the social and physical environment on children’s Associations of children’s independent mobility and independent mobility to neighborhood destinations. active travel with physical activity, sedentary behaviour J Phys Act Health. 2015;12:S84-S93. and weight status: A systematic review. J Sci Med Sport. 18. Christian H, Trapp G, Lauritsen C, Wright K, Giles- 2013;16(4):312-19. Corti B. Understanding the relationship between 7. Villanueva K, Giles-Corti B, Bulsara M, et al. Does dog ownership and children’s physical activity and the walkability of neighbourhoods affect children’s sedentary behaviour. Pediatr Obes. 2013;8(5):392-403. independent mobility, independent of parental, 19. Foster S, Villanueva K, Wood L, Christian H, Giles-Corti social-cultural and individual factors? Child Geogr. B. The impact of parents’ fear of strangers and informal 2014;12(4):393-411. social control on children’s independent mobility. 8. Villanueva K, Giles-Corti B, Bulsara M, et al. Where do Health Place. 2014;26:60-8. children travel to and what local opportunities are 20. Weston R, Qu L, Baxter J. Australian Families with available? The relationship between neighborhood Children and Adolescents. Australian Family Trends No.: destinations and children’s independent mobility. 5. Melbourne (AUST): Australian Institute of Family Environ Behav. 2013;45(6):679-705. Studies; 2013. 9. Alparone FR, Pacilli MG. On children’s independent mobility: The interplay of demographic, environmental, and psychosocial factors. Child Geogr. 2012;10(1):109- 10. Mackett R, Brown B, Gong YI, Kitazawa KAY, Paskins J. Children’s independent movement in the local environment. Built Environ. 2007;33(4):454-68. 318 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2016 vol . 40 no . 4 © 2016 Public Health Association of Australia http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health Wiley

The effect of siblings and family dog ownership on children's independent mobility to neighbourhood destinations

Download PDF
3 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/the-effect-of-siblings-and-family-dog-ownership-on-children-s-qNyC5PuSXK

References (23)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
© 2016 Public Health Association of Australia
ISSN
1326-0200
eISSN
1753-6405
DOI
10.1111/1753-6405.12528
pmid
27197957
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

independent mobility (the licence Eand ability to travel without adult Objective: To investigate the effect of sibling age, gender and dog ownership on children’s supervision) is associated with increased independent mobility and how this varies according to the destination visited. physical activity, as well as psychosocial and Methods: Parents reported whether their child had an older sibling; if the child and older developmental benefits. However, it is widely sibling were of the same gender; the number of older siblings; if they owned a dog; and accepted that children’s independent mobility whether their child was allowed to independently travel to school, friends’ or family house, levels are declining. Identifying factors that park/oval/sporting field and local shop. Data were analysed for 181 children aged 8–15 years. encourage children’s independent mobility is Results: The strongest significant sibling effect for independently mobility to school, local important for determining intervention points. shop and ≥3 destinations was for having an older sibling of the same gender (p≤0.05). For Multiple factors influence the declining independent mobility to a friend’s house and park, the strongest significant sibling effect was trend in children’s independent mobility, for having one older sibling (p≤0.05). Dog ownership was associated with increased odds of including demographic (e.g. gender), social being independently mobile to ≥3 destinations (OR=2.43; 95%CI=1.03-5.74). (e.g. perceptions of strangers) and physical 3-9 Conclusions: Parents may be more likely to grant children licence to travel to local places if they environment factors (e.g. traffic exposure). are accompanied by an older sibling or the family dog. Destinations such as parks, shops and friends’ houses are common places that children Implications: Understanding the effects of siblings and dog ownership on children’s 8,10,11 travel to. More independent mobility independent mobility will assist in identifying strategies through which independent mobility 2,10,12,13 is associated with having siblings. can be encouraged. However, it is unclear whether a sibling’s Key words: child, independent travel, mobility, dog, sibling, neighbourhood gender and age relative to the child influences independent mobility. Research mobility and how this varies according to the approval. Parents in the fourth RESIDE survey also suggests that children may be allowed destination visited. (n=305) provided data on 181 children aged to travel independently if they have a family 8–15 years. If there was more than one child dog. Given that ‘stranger danger’ is one of within this age range in the household, the the most highly cited barriers to children’s Methods youngest was included. Variables included independent mobility, walking with siblings whether the child had an older sibling <18 Participants were part of the RESIDential and/or a family dog may reassure both years, the number of older siblings (none, Environments (RESIDE) study; a longitudinal parents and children by providing them with one or ≥two), if the child and older sibling natural experiment of people moving homes. an increased sense of safety. We investigated 15 were of the same gender and dog ownership Details of RESIDE are described elsewhere. the effect of sibling age, gender and dog status (no, yes). Parents reported whether The University of Western Australia’s Human ownership on children’s independent their child was allowed to walk or cycle alone Research Ethics Committee provided ethics 1. Centre for the Built Environment and Health, The University of Western Australia 2. School of Population Health, The University of Western Australia 3. Telethon Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia 4. McCaughey VicHealth Community Wellbeing Unit, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 5. Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, The Royal Children’s Hospital, Victoria 6. Steno Health Promotion Research, Steno Diabetes Centre, Denmark Correspondence to: Dr Hayley Christian, School of Population Health (M707), The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009; e-mail: hayley.christian@uwa.edu.au Submitted: July 2015; Revision requested: November 2015; Accepted: January 2016 The authors have stated they have no conflict of interest. Aust NZ J Public Health. 2016; 40:316-8; doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12528 316 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2016 vol . 40 no . 4 © 2016 Public Health Association of Australia Younger People Siblings, dogs and children’s independent mobility or more older siblings) was associated with ‘learn’ safe routes and how to negotiate or with other children (without an adult) to higher odds of being independently mobile traffic situations when travelling with older or from four destinations: school; friends’ or to school, friend’s house, the park and local siblings, which helps to build children’s (and family house; park, oval or sporting field; and shop (all p≤0.05). Having an older sibling parents’) confidence in their ability to travel local shop (e.g. deli, newsagent). ‘Overall’ of the same gender was associated with independently. independent mobility included children increased likelihood of being independently who were independently mobile to ≥3 Our findings extend previous research by mobile to school, the park, local shop and destinations. showing that children with an older sibling overall (all p≤0.05). For school, local shop and of the same gender were more likely to be Logistic regression models were fitted to overall independent mobility outcomes, the independently mobile to local destinations. explore the association between independent strongest sibling effect (using the AIC) was Travelling with a sibling may offer additional mobility and sibling-related variables and having an older sibling of the same gender company, yet it is possible that siblings of dog ownership, after adjusting for child age (Table 1). For independent mobility to friend’s the same (compared with opposite) gender and gender and parent age, gender and house and park, the strongest sibling effect may be more willing to spend time together education. was for having only one older sibling (and not because they have common interests and two or more older siblings). mutual friends. Results Dog ownership was also associated with We also observed that dog ownership was an increased odds of being independently Child mean age was 10.7 (SD 2.1) years, 45% associated with overall independent mobility. mobile overall (OR=2.43; 95%CI=1.03-5.74) were male and 29% were independently This suggests that the family dog should be but not with independent mobility to specific mobile to ≥3 destinations. Overall, 56% of considered an important form of non-adult local destinations. children had an older sibling (8–17 years), accompaniment, in that it offers company 26% had an older sibling of the same and may provide parents with an increased gender, 53% had a dog at home and 34% sense of safety. Other studies have shown Conclusion of parents perceived that it was unsafe that children who walk a dog have higher Having an older sibling was significantly for children to independently move levels of physical activity and independent associated with independent mobility to each around the neighbourhood. Detailed mobility than children who own a dog but do destination type, with the number of older sample characteristics have been reported not walk it. siblings and their gender also important. Our previously. Being male and older (vs. female Together, these findings are important. With findings support previous studies reporting and younger) was associated with increased growing levels of parental fear, children’s that having an older sibling is associated odds of being independently mobile 19 independent mobility is being constrained. 9,10,12,13 with increased independent mobility. (results not shown). Having an older sibling This may be an even greater issue considering Travelling with an older sibling is likely to (regardless of the number of older siblings the increasing number of single-child provide parents – the gatekeepers of their or their gender) was associated with higher 20 households. For single-child households, children’s choices – with an added sense odds of being independently mobile to a a well-trained dog that could accompany of safety and perceived protection. This friend’s house (OR=2.12; 95%CI=1.00-4.51), children to local destinations may allay some is important, given that exposure to traffic the park (OR=3.53; 95%CI=1.64-7.61) and parental fears, resulting in parents allowing and fear of strangers are highly cited barriers local shop (OR=2.55; 95%CI=1.09-5.98), see their children some independent mobility. to children’s local travel. Children may also Table 1. Having one older sibling (but not two Understanding the effects of siblings and dog ownership (including dog-related factors such as size and breed, training and Table 1: Association between sibling and dog ownership status and independent mobility to specific destinations socialisation and child–dog attachment) on and overall. independent mobility will assist in identifying School Friends or family Park/oval or Local shop Overall Independent the potential pathways through which OR (95% CI) house sporting field OR (95% CI) Mobility OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) independent mobility can be encouraged. Older sibling 1.95 (0.94-4.02)* 2.12 (1.00-4.51)** 3.53 (1.64-7.61)*** 2.55 (1.09-5.98)** 1.88 (0.80-4.40) AIC=210.42 AIC=200.57 AIC=203.02 AIC=167.89 AIC=163.19 Acknowledgements Number of older siblings 0 (ref ) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 The RESIDE II Study was funded by a 1 2.27 (1.06-4.86)** 2.70 (1.20-6.05)** 5.24 (2.25-12.20)*** 2.97 (1.20-7.33)** 2.30 (0.93-5.68)* grant from the Western Australian Health 2+ 1.09 (0.33-3.60 0.96 (0.29-3.23) 1.13 (0.35-3.66) 1.50 (0.39-5.80) 0.91 (0.22-3.80) Promotion Foundation (18921). The first AIC=210.81 AIC=199.61 AIC=198.13 AIC=168.85 AIC=163.48 author is supported by a National Health and Older sibling same gender 2.21 (1.01-4.83)** 2.13 (0.94-4.84)* 2.74 (1.22-6.18)** 4.59 (1.76-12.00)*** 2.79 (1.08-7.19)** Medical Research Council (NHMRC)/National Heart Foundation Early Career Fellowship AIC=209.79 AIC=201.26 AIC=208.14 AIC=162.36 AIC=160.77 (1036350) and the last author is supported by Dog ownership 1.14 (0.56-2.31) 2.03 (0.97-4.26)* 1.50 (0.74-3.05) 2.19 (0.95-5.03)* 2.43 (1.03-5.74)** an NHMRC Principal Research Fellow Award AIC=213.64 AIC=200.97 AIC=213.04 AIC=169.30 AIC=161.18 (1004900). Mrs Claire Lauritsen coordinated All models adjusted for child age and gender and parent age, gender and education. AIC=Akaike information criterion (best sibling variable for each independent mobility destination is the one that gives the smallest AIC). data collection and Ms Pulan Bai provided Boldface indicates statistical significance (*p<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01). administrative assistance. a: Independently mobile to and from three or all four of the destinations. 2016 vol . 40 no . 4 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 317 © 2016 Public Health Association of Australia Christian et al. Brief Report 11. Veitch J, Salmon J, Ball K. Children’s active free play in References local neighbourhoods: A behavioural mapping study. Health Educ Res. 2008;23(5):870-9. 1. Hillman M, Adams J, Whitelegg J. One false move: A 12. Jones L, Davis A, Eyers T. Young people, transport and study of children’s independent mobility. London (UK): risk: Comparing access and independent mobility in Policy Studies Institute; 1990. urban, suburban and rural environments. Health Educ 2. Prezza M, Pilloni S, Morabito C, Sersante C, Alparone J. 2000;59(4):315-28. FR, Giuliani MV. The influence of psychosocial and 13. Zwerts E, Allaert G, Janssens D, Wets G, Witlox F. How environmental factors on children’s independent children view their travel behaviour: A case study from mobility and relationship to peer frequentation. J Flanders (Belgium). J Transp Geogr. 2010;18(6):702-10. Community Appl Soc Psychol. 2001;11(6):435-50. 14. Christian H, Trapp G, Villanueva K, Zubrick SR, 3. Fyhri A, Hjorthol R, Mackett RL, Fotel TN, Kyttä M. Koekemoer R, Giles-Corti B. Dog walking is associated Children’s active travel and independent mobility in with more outdoor play and independent mobility for four countries: Development, social contributing trends children. Prev Med. 2014;67:259-63. and measures. Transp Policy (Oxf ). 2011;18(5):703-10. 15. Giles-Corti B, Knuiman M, Timperio A, et al. Evaluation of 4. Carver A, Timperio A, Crawford D. Playing it the implementation of a state government community safe: The influence of neighbourhood safety on design policy aimed at increasing local walking: Design children’s physical activity—A review. Health Place. issues and baseline results from RESIDE, Perth Western 2008;14(2):217-27. Australia. Prev Med. 2008;46(1):46-54. 5. Zubrick S, Wood L, Villanueva K, Wood G, Giles-Corti 16. Cutt H, Giles-Corti B, Knuiman M, Pikora T. Physical B, Christian H. Nothing but Fear Itself: Parental Fear as activity behavior of dog owners: Development and a Determinant Impacting on Child Physical Activity and reliability of the Dogs And Physical Activity (DAPA) tool. Independent Mobility. Melbourne (AUST): Victorian J Phys Act Health. 2008;5 Supp 1:73-89. Health Promotion Foundation; 2010. 17. Christian H, Klinker C, Villanueva K, et al. The effect 6. Schoeppe S, Duncan MJ, Badland H, Oliver M, Curtis C. of the social and physical environment on children’s Associations of children’s independent mobility and independent mobility to neighborhood destinations. active travel with physical activity, sedentary behaviour J Phys Act Health. 2015;12:S84-S93. and weight status: A systematic review. J Sci Med Sport. 18. Christian H, Trapp G, Lauritsen C, Wright K, Giles- 2013;16(4):312-19. Corti B. Understanding the relationship between 7. Villanueva K, Giles-Corti B, Bulsara M, et al. Does dog ownership and children’s physical activity and the walkability of neighbourhoods affect children’s sedentary behaviour. Pediatr Obes. 2013;8(5):392-403. independent mobility, independent of parental, 19. Foster S, Villanueva K, Wood L, Christian H, Giles-Corti social-cultural and individual factors? Child Geogr. B. The impact of parents’ fear of strangers and informal 2014;12(4):393-411. social control on children’s independent mobility. 8. Villanueva K, Giles-Corti B, Bulsara M, et al. Where do Health Place. 2014;26:60-8. children travel to and what local opportunities are 20. Weston R, Qu L, Baxter J. Australian Families with available? The relationship between neighborhood Children and Adolescents. Australian Family Trends No.: destinations and children’s independent mobility. 5. Melbourne (AUST): Australian Institute of Family Environ Behav. 2013;45(6):679-705. Studies; 2013. 9. Alparone FR, Pacilli MG. On children’s independent mobility: The interplay of demographic, environmental, and psychosocial factors. Child Geogr. 2012;10(1):109- 10. Mackett R, Brown B, Gong YI, Kitazawa KAY, Paskins J. Children’s independent movement in the local environment. Built Environ. 2007;33(4):454-68. 318 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2016 vol . 40 no . 4 © 2016 Public Health Association of Australia

Journal

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health – Wiley

Published: Aug 1, 2016

Keywords: ; ; ; ; ;

There are no references for this article.