Skip to main content

Table 2 Within and between city differences in physical activity behaviour by dog walking status

From: The association between dog walking, physical activity and owner’s perceptions of safety: cross-sectional evidence from the US and Australia

  San Diego (n = 276) Portland (n = 233) Nashville (n = 296) Perth (n = 308) Significant between city comparisons (Dog walkers)2
  Non-dog walker1 (n = 134) Mean (SE) Dog walker (n = 142) Mean (SE) Non-dog walker1 (n = 110) Mean (SE) Dog walker (n = 123) Mean (SE) Non-dog walker1 (n = 141) Mean (SE) Dog walker (n = 155) Mean (SE) Non-dog walker1 (n = 105) Mean (SE) Dog walker (n = 203) Mean (SE) p-value
≥30mins moderate-vigorous physical activity (days/week) 3.5 (2.5) 4.3 (2.2)** 3.2 (2.5) 4.0 (2.2)* 2.9 (2.3) 4.1 (2.2)*** 2.8 (2.6) 3.9 (2.6)*** 0.467
Frequency of neighbourhood walking/week 2.3 (2.7) 7.6 (4.0)*** 2.1 (2.6) 6.5 (3.8)*** 1.6 (2.1) 6.7 (4.4)*** 1.9 (2.8) 6.4 (3.8)*** 0.027 PE < SD
Walk in local park (%) 17.2 45.1*** 12.7 42.3*** 11.3 28.4*** 19.0 80.3*** 0.000 PE > SD, PL, NV
Frequency of dog walking/week - 6.0 (4.0) - 5.1 (3.6) - 5.3 (3.9) - 5.0 (3.4) 0.074
Minutes of dog walking/week - 108.6 (134.8) - 93.5 (106.3) - 108.1 (142.9) - 92.8 (115.0) 0.510
  1. *p ≤ 0.05; **p ≤ 0.01; ***p ≤ 0.001; 1Reference group; SD San Diego, PL Portland, NV Nashville, PE Perth
  2. 1Reference group = Non-dog walker
  3. 2Reference group = Perth