Skip to main content

Table 2 Study variables at each time point

From: Safe RESIDential Environments? A longitudinal analysis of the influence of crime-related safety on walking

  Baseline (n = 1813) Year 1 (n = 1467) Year 3 (n = 1230) Year 7 (n = 531)
Variable Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD)
Built environment     
 Residential densitya 15.1 (8.0) 12.7 (5.4) 14.1 (5.2) 14.3 (4.1)
 Street connectivityb 61.5 (18.0) 73.8 (25.7) 78.8 (26.0) 82.3 (27.4)
 Local destinationsc 52.6 (72.7) 15.6 (36.7) 20.7 (49.0) 25.8 (38.3)
Social environment     
 Social cohesion 3.0 (0.6) 3.6 (0.6) 3.5 (0.6) 3.5 (0.6)
Perceptions     
 Aesthetics 3.4 (0.7) 3.6 (0.6) 3.4 (0.6) 3.4 (0.6)
 Traffic hazards 2.6 (0.8) 2.2 (0.6) 2.3 (0.6) 2.4 (0.6)
 Street lighting 3.1 (1.0) 3.5 (0.9) 3.4 (0.9) 3.5 (0.9)
Safety from crime     
 Perceived safety from crime 3.4 (0.8) 3.8 (0.6) 3.7 (0.6) 3.7 (0.6)
 Crimes reported to policed 88.4 (86.9) 71.6 (92.1) 76.6 (85.9) -
Walking (min/week)     
 Total walking 96.3 (139.3) 109.4 (178.5) 121.1 (214.0) 109.9 (139.5)
 Walking for recreation 68.7 (98.4) 89.0 (112.8) 90.0 (127.5) 87.6 (121.4)
 Walking for transport 26.6 (57.8) 19.8 (50.2) 25.6 (68.5) 27.8 (69.6)
  1. aRatio of the land area in residential use to the number of residential dwellings
  2. bCount of three (or more) way intersections
  3. cCount of local destinations (all retail and service destinations)
  4. dCrimes committed against the person in public space (e.g., threats, disorderly behaviour, assault, robbery) summarised by suburb (data unavailable at Year 7)