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