Psychosocial and environmental factors associated with cycling for transport among a working population

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine psychosocial and environmental predictors of cycling for transportation. A sample of 343 Flemish adults (43% men) living at maximum 10 km from their workplace was surveyed. Self-report measures of cycling, demographic variables, psychosocial variables, self-efficacy, perceived benefits and barriers and environmental attributes (destination, traffic variables and facilities at the workplace) of cycling for transport were obtained by means of a mailing questionnaire. Modeling and social support by accompanying, external self-efficacy, ecological-economic awareness and lack of time and interest were positively associated with the likelihood of cycling for transport and varied in importance between cyclists and non-cyclists. Cyclists estimate the time to destination shorter than non-cyclists and indicate to have more facilities for cyclists at the workplace. The results suggest that when people live in a setting with adequate bicycle infrastructure, individual determinants (psychosocial, self-efficacy, perceived benefits and barriers) outperform the role of environmental determinants in this sample. Promotion campaigns aimed at increasing cycling for transportation should focus on creating social support by encouraging cycling with partners, increasing self-efficacy, raising ecological and economic awareness, decreasing lack of time and interest barriers and providing facilities for cyclists at the workplace.

Personal and behavioral factors associated with bicycling in adults from Curitiba, Paraná State, Brazil

“…Additionally, middle-aged adults (aged 30 to 39.9 years) reported a higher frequency of bicycling for transportation, which is corroborated by other studies 7,9,12,13 . One hypothesis is that middle-aged adults are more economically active, and bicycles are an efficient and inexpensive way of arriving at work 14,19 ; however, the lack of information about travel destination prevents the testing of this hypothesis. The proportion of cyclists was higher among those with lower socioeconomic status, which is consistent with the literature 7,12,13,21 and supports the hypotheses presented above.…”

“…Despite these benefits, the use of the bicycle for transportation and leisure is low, both in highincome countries 7,8 and in low-and middleincome countries 9,10 . In Brazil, an estimated 8 to 16% of adults commute by bicycle 11 , a prevalence similar to that of Canada 7,12,13 and Australia 8 but lower than in European countries 14,15,16 . The use of the bicycle in leisure time is one of the five most common forms of physical activity among Brazilian adults 17 .…”

Cycling Habits and Other Psychological Variables Affecting Commuting by Bicycle in Madrid, Spain

“…Too dangerous, lack of sufficient fitness, lack of motivation, lack of facilities at work (showers, bike racks, etc. ), no bike lanes, personal safety during journey, bad weather, lack of proper lighting, distance, topography, lack of safe parking at destination, lack of cycling knowledge or experience, too much traffic, uncomfortable, difficulties with trip chaining, need to carry things, air pollution, free car parking at work, lack of time, and bad road conditions (3,4,6,9,16,(18)(19)(20)(21)(22).…”

Assessing the Bicycle Network in St. Louis: A PlaceBased User-Centered Approach

“…Using predetermined criteria, each segment of the network is given an LTS rating from 1 to 4, resulting in a map that shows which The value of such infrastructure for increasing cycling is mixed. While many studies have found a positive correlation between levels of bicycle infrastructure and bicycle commuting [15][16][17] others have found little correlation [18][19][20][21]. What is certain is that many cyclists prefer routes with bicycle facilities [22][23][24][25][26][27][28] and bicycle infrastructure encourages non-cyclists to try cycling [14].…”