Effectiveness of a Point-of-Decision Prompt to Encourage Physical Distancing on Greenways and Rail-Trails During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IF 5.2 2区 心理学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environment and Behavior Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.1177/00139165221114897
Richard W. Christiana, S. Daily, T. Bias, V. Haas, Angela M. Dyer, Elizabeth Shay, A. Hege, Robert S. Broce, Heather Venrick, C. Abildso
{"title":"Effectiveness of a Point-of-Decision Prompt to Encourage Physical Distancing on Greenways and Rail-Trails During the COVID-19 Pandemic","authors":"Richard W. Christiana, S. Daily, T. Bias, V. Haas, Angela M. Dyer, Elizabeth Shay, A. Hege, Robert S. Broce, Heather Venrick, C. Abildso","doi":"10.1177/00139165221114897","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Adherence to public health messaging recommending physical distancing in public outdoor spaces during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic and strategies to promote physical distancing are currently unknown. This study examined the effectiveness of a point-of-decision prompt to increase physical distancing (maintaining at least 6 ft of distance) on greenways and rail-trails using systematic observation with passive infrared cameras. Results indicate that the intervention did not have a significant effect on interacting groups maintaining physical distance. However, groups maintaining physical distance increased from baseline (72%) to post-intervention (79%) and likelihood of maintaining physical distance at baseline and post-intervention was higher when: passing in the opposite direction compared to passing in the same direction; using 12-foot-wide trails compared to 10-foot-wide trails; and only one person was in each group. These results provide important implications for public health and parks and recreation professionals to promote physical distancing on multi-use trails.","PeriodicalId":48374,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Behavior","volume":"54 1","pages":"951 - 970"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00139165221114897","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Adherence to public health messaging recommending physical distancing in public outdoor spaces during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic and strategies to promote physical distancing are currently unknown. This study examined the effectiveness of a point-of-decision prompt to increase physical distancing (maintaining at least 6 ft of distance) on greenways and rail-trails using systematic observation with passive infrared cameras. Results indicate that the intervention did not have a significant effect on interacting groups maintaining physical distance. However, groups maintaining physical distance increased from baseline (72%) to post-intervention (79%) and likelihood of maintaining physical distance at baseline and post-intervention was higher when: passing in the opposite direction compared to passing in the same direction; using 12-foot-wide trails compared to 10-foot-wide trails; and only one person was in each group. These results provide important implications for public health and parks and recreation professionals to promote physical distancing on multi-use trails.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,在绿道和铁路道上鼓励保持距离的决策点提示的有效性
在COVID-19大流行的最初几个月,遵守公共卫生信息建议在公共室外空间保持身体距离,以及促进保持身体距离的战略目前尚不清楚。本研究利用被动红外摄像机的系统观察,检验了在绿道和铁路道上增加物理距离(保持至少6英尺的距离)的决策点提示的有效性。结果表明,干预对相互作用群体保持物理距离没有显著影响。然而,从基线(72%)到干预后(79%),保持身体距离的组增加了,并且在基线和干预后保持身体距离的可能性更高:相反方向的传球比相同方向的传球;使用12英尺宽的步道而不是10英尺宽的步道;每组只有一个人。这些结果对公共卫生、公园和娱乐专业人员促进在多用途步道上保持身体距离具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.30
自引率
1.80%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: Environment & Behavior is an interdisciplinary journal designed to report rigorous experimental and theoretical work focusing on the influence of the physical environment on human behavior at the individual, group, and institutional levels.
期刊最新文献
Cross-Cultural Applications of the New Ecological Paradigm in Protected Area Contexts Evidence on the Effectiveness-Acceptance Trade-Off Between Forced Active Choice and Default Nudging: A Field Study to Reduce Meat Consumption in Cafeterias Ecological Dominance Orientation as a predictor of Wildlife Value Orientations and Support for Lethal Wildlife Management Psychosocial Determinants of Lyme Disease Preventive Behavior Among Outdoor Recreationists Spatial Optimism and Cross-Over Effects in the Perceptions of Interconnected Wildfire, Flood, and Mudslide Hazards
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1