↓ Skip to main content

How do environmental factors influence walking in groups? A walk-along study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Health Psychology, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How do environmental factors influence walking in groups? A walk-along study
Published in
Journal of Health Psychology, December 2013
DOI 10.1177/1359105313511839
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aikaterini Kassavou, David P French, Kerry Chamberlain

Abstract

Insufficient attention has been given to the influence of context on health-related behaviour change. This article reports on walk-along interviews conducted with 10 leaders of walking groups while leading their groups to investigate the influence of contextual factors on walking behaviours in groups. Data analysis used ideas from thematic analysis and grounded theory, approaching the data inductively. We identified that characteristics of place influenced the type of walking that people do in groups and the processes used by walkers to make sense of their behaviours in the places they walk. This research provides insight into how place influences walking in groups. It also suggests recommendations for co-ordinators and policymakers that could be used to facilitate behaviour change, when designing interventions targeting public health within the community.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 35 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 28%
Researcher 7 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 2 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 17%
Unspecified 4 11%
Sports and Recreations 3 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 6%
Other 10 28%
Unknown 2 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2015.
All research outputs
#2,366,951
of 11,301,645 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Health Psychology
#296
of 1,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,080
of 192,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Health Psychology
#7
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,301,645 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,515 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 192,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.