Skip to main content

Table 4 Perceived influence on physical activity by perceived comparison category for each network

From: Perceived influence and college students’ diet and physical activity behaviors: an examination of ego-centric social networks

Networks Comparison categories Comparison to Nominee’s physical activity, N (%)a Influence on physical activity, Mean (SD) χ 2 (p-value)b
Family Better 46 (39.7) 4.87 (2.74) 19.33 (<0.001)
Same as 21 (18.1) 3.86 (2.67)
Worse 49 (42.2) 2.45 (2.08)
College Friends Better 48 (46.2) 3.77 (1.90) 17.48 (<0.001)
Same as 32 (30.8) 2.34 (1.82)
Worse 24 (23.1) 2.08 (1.73)
High School Friends Better 33 (37.9) 2.73 (2.20) 2.67 (0.26)
Same as 23 (26.4) 2.52 (2.01)
Worse 31 (35.6) 1.81 (1.60)
Significant Others Better 5 (27.8) 4.20 (2.17) 3.15 (0.21)
Same as 8 (44.4) 6.63 (2.39)
Worse 5 (27.8) 5.20 (3.11)
  1. aPercentages add up to 100 within each cell
  2. bKruskal-Wallis test of mean influence on physical activity across three comparison categories, two-tailed tests for significance