Skip to main content

Table 3 Intervention, action theory, conceptual theory, and mediating effects on change in walking behaviora

From: Analysis of Individual Social-ecological Mediators and Moderators and Their Ability to Explain Effect of a Randomized Neighborhood Walking Intervention

   Model 1b:
6 mo follow-up adjusted for baseline 		Model 2c:
6 mo follow-up adjusted for baseline, mediators at 3 mo 		Model 3d:
6 mo change from baseline 		Model 4e:
6 mo change from baseline, mediators at 3 mo
Physical activity outcome   b (95% CI) b (95% CI) b (95% CI) b (95% CI)
   Number of minutes of brisk walking   25.64 (11.73,39.55)*** 25.64 (11.73,39.55)*** 37.48 (21.82,53.14)*** 37.48 (21.82,53.14)***
Action theory tests
(single mediator models) 		  α (95% CI) α (95% CI) α (95% CI) α (95% CI)
   Social cohesion   0.097 (-0.010,0.21) 0.059 (-0.032,0.15) 0.17 (0.044,0.30)* 0.13 (0.0094,0.24)*
   Walking efficacy   0.50 (0.14,0.86)** 0.58 (0.27,0.86)*** 0.19 (-0.19,0.56) 0.32 (-0.0011,0.65)
   Perceived neighborhood problems   1.62 (0.65,2.59)** 0.86 (-0.27,1.76) 1.65 (0.56,2.75)** 0.95 (-0.076,1.97)
Conceptual theory tests
(single mediator models) 		  β (95% CI) β (95% CI) β (95% CI) β (95% CI)
   Social cohesion   -2.12 (-16.67,12.42) -8.73 (-23.41,5.94) -5.69 (-19.27,7.90) -5.97 (-19.66,7.71)
   Walking efficacy   17.43 (13.21, 21.66)*** 10.97 (6.43,15.51)*** 12.11 (7.72,16.51)*** 6.18 (1.56,10.81)**
   Perceived neighborhood problems   -1.53 (-2.96,-0.11)* -0.25 (-1.71,1.20) -1.34 (-2.69,0.014) -0.31 (-1.74,1.11)
Mediating effects
(single mediator models) 		  αβ (95% CI) αβ (95% CI) αβ (95% CI) αβ (95% CI)
   Social cohesion   -0.21 (-1.84,1.23) -0.52 (-1.98,0.38) -0.97 (-3.73,1.25) -0.78 (-3.01,0.91)
   Walking efficacy   8.72 (2.53,15.56)** 6.36 (2.69,10.97)*** 2.30 (-2.13,7.14) 1.98 (-0.014,4.95)
   Perceived neighborhood problems   -2.48 (-5.60,-0.22)* -0.22 (-1.66,1.05) -2.21 (-5.31,-0.047)* 0.69 (-0.58,2.58)
Mediating effects
(multiple mediator model) 		  αβ (95% CI) αβ (95% CI) αβ (95% CI) αβ (95% CI)
   Social cohesion   -0.67 (-2.62,0.65) -0.78 (-2.60,0.35) -1.19 (-4.00,0.94) -0.92 (-3.23,0.74)
   Walking efficacy   8.24 (2.39,14.80)** 6.61 (2.82,11.36)** 2.08 (-1.93,6.51) 2.04 (-0.013,5.09)
   Perceived neighborhood problems   -1.83 (-4.68,0.32) -0.15 (-1.56,1.14) -1.32 (-4.03,0.77) 0.035 (-1.44,1.54)
  1. Notes: b-regression coefficient; 95% CI-95% confidence interval; α-estimate of regression coefficient of intervention effect on 6-month walking; β-estimate of regression coefficient of mediator effect on 6-month walking. αβ-product-of-coefficient estimates.
  2. a All models are adjusted for: Individual-level Covariates: Age, Gender, Race/ethnicity (White and Non-White), Years of education (0–12 years, ≥ 13 years), Annual household income (< $15,000, $15,000–$29,999, ≥ 30,000), General health (poor to fair, good to excellent). Neighborhood-level Covariate: Perceived neighborhood safety ("It is safe to walk or jog alone in my neighborhood during the day," rated on a five point scale from 1 [strongly disagree] to 5 [strongly agree]).
  3. bIn the model 1 framework, the outcome for the conceptual model is the number of minutes walked at the 6 month follow-up period and the model is adjusted for the number of minutes walked at baseline. The outcomes for the action theory tests are the observed values of each potential mediator at the 6 month follow-up period and each model is adjusted for the appropriate observed value of the mediator at baseline.
  4. c In the model 2 framework, the outcome for the conceptual model is the number of minutes walked at the 6 month follow-up period and the model is adjusted for the number of minutes walked at baseline. The outcomes for the action theory tests are the observed values of each potential mediator at the 3 month follow-up period and each model is adjusted for the appropriate observed value of the mediator at baseline.
  5. d In the model 3 framework, the outcome for the conceptual model is the change in the number of minutes walked between 6 month follow-up and baseline; no adjustment for baseline is made. The outcomes for the action theory test are the difference in the 6 month and baseline observations for each of the potential mediators; no adjustment for baseline is made.
  6. e In the model 4 framework, the outcome for the conceptual model is the change in the number of minutes walked between 6 month follow-up and baseline; no adjustment for baseline is made. The outcomes for the action theory test are the difference in the 3 month and baseline observations for each of the potential mediators; no adjustment for baseline is made.
  7. *** p < 0.001
  8. ** p < 0.01
  9. * p < 0.05
Back to article page

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

ISSN: 1479-5868

Contact us