Environmental perceptions as mediators of the relationship between the objective built environment and walking among socio-economically disadvantaged women

Table 3 Regression analyses for possible mediators of the associations between the destinations/connectivity score and walking for transportation

Possible mediators	α (SE)	95% CI for α	β (SE)	95% CI for β	αβ (SE)	95% CI for αβ	Proportion mediated (%)
Aesthetics	−0.02 (0.005)	−0.03, -0.01	0.34 (0.23)	−0.12, 0.80
Physical activity environment	0.01 (0.004)	0.001, 0.02	0.97 (0.23)	0.52, 1.42	0.01 (0.005)	0.001, 0.02	6.1
Personal safety	−0.04 (0.007)	−0.05, -0.03	0.38 (0.16)	0.08, 0.69	−0.02 (0.007)	−0.03, -0.002	S
Neighbourhood social cohesion	−0.02 (0.004)	−0.03, -0.01	0.26 (0.24)	−0.22, 0.73

SE standard error, CI confidence interval, S suppression effect.
All significant associations are presented in bold font.
Notes: α–coefficients were estimated by regressing the potential mediators onto the destinations/connectivity z-score; β-coefficients were estimated by regressing walking for transportation onto the destinations/connectivity z-score and potential mediators; αβ-coefficients represent the mediated effect; all possible mediators were positively scored (higher score = better perceptions); all analyses were controlled for individual-level age, smoking status, marital status, employment status and educational level.

ISSN: 1479-5868