Runnable Cities: How Does the Running Environment Influence Perceived Attractiveness, Restorativeness, and Running Frequency?

Dick Ettema*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

This article investigates the impact of the running environment on perceived satisfaction, restoration, and running participation based on a questionnaire distributed to 1,581 novice runners. The most frequently experienced impediments on running routes are poor lighting, unleashed dogs, and encounters with cyclists and cars. Regression analyses reveal that attractiveness and restorativeness are positively associated with the quality of the running surface and running in parks or outside towns and negatively by running on public roads in town, by running in larger cities (>250,000 inhabitants), and by other road users. However, attractiveness and restorativeness of running routes play only a minor role in the decision of how frequently to run. Practical considerations (proximity, threats) appear to have a larger impact on running frequency. Importantly, the most frequently mentioned impediments (poor lighting, cars, unleashed dogs) do not affect running frequency, whereas infrequent impediments (threats by other people) significantly affect running frequency.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1127-1147
Number of pages21
JournalEnvironment and Behavior
Volume48
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2016

Keywords

  • academic field
  • content areas
  • health
  • physical activity (walking, cycling, exercise)
  • place type
  • public health
  • recreation/leisure
  • research setting
  • walkability

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Runnable Cities: How Does the Running Environment Influence Perceived Attractiveness, Restorativeness, and Running Frequency?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this