Makavelou S., Michalopoulou M., Moraitaki K., and Papadimitriou K.
Dept of Physical Education and Sport Science Democritus University of Thrace, Komotini, Greece
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to determine habitual physical activity differences between adult women
residing in an urban area and adult women residing in a rural area in Greece. Additionally differences in
physical activity of high intensity, moderate intensity physical activity as well as walking were also
assessed. Subjects in this study were 198 adult women (41.2 + 8.3 years), 98 of them resided at the city of
Arta and 100 resided in villages in the respective prefecture. Physical activity was recorded with the long
version of the self administered International Physical Activity Questionnaire (Craig et al., 2003). The
dependent variables that were included in data analysis included the total score of physical activity, the
score of high intensity physical activity, moderate intensity physical activity and walking. “Place of
residence” was the constant factor used in the analysis of data. According to the results of the ANOVA
Multiple Analysis of Variance a significant residence effect was reported for the factor area of residence
for total physical activity score (F(1,196) = 6,075, p = .05) in favor of women residing in urban districts.
Additionally, according to the results of Multiple Analysis of Variance adult women residing in urban
districts were significant more active in physical activity related to work (F(1,196) = 14,908, p = .000) and
to recreation (F(1,196) = 7,230, p = .008). Women residing in rural areas scored higher in physical activity
related to taking care of others and the house (F(1,196) = 83,667, p = .000). No differences were detected in
physical activity related to transportation (F(1,196) = 1,127, p = .290). In conclusion women residing in
villages in rural districts of Arta Prefecture were more active when compared to adult women residing in
the city of Arta only when taking care of others or the house.
References
Baranowski T, Anderson C, Carmack C. Mediating variable framework in physical activity
interventions. How are we doing? How might we do better? American Journal of Preventive
Medicine 1998;15:266– 97.
2. Bauman AE, Sallis JF, Dzewaltowski DA, Owen N. Toward a better understanding of the influences
on physical activity. The role of determinants, correlates, causal variables, mediators, moderators,and
confounders. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2002;23:5– 14.
3. Brownson RC, Eyler AA, King AC.(2000).Patterns and correlates of physical activity among US
women 40 years and older. American Journal of Public Health,;90:264–70.
4. Kesaniemi YA, Danforth E, Jensen MD, Kopelman PG, Lefebvre P, Reeder BA. Dose– response
issues concerning physical activity and health: an evidence-based symposium. Medicine Science in
Sports & Exercise2001; 33:S351 – 8.
5. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention; 1996.
6. Sallis JF, Owen N. Physical Activity and Behavioral Medicine. London: Sage; 1999.
7. Seefeldt V, Malina RM, Clark MA. Factors affecting levels of physical activity in adults. Sports
Medicine 2002;32:143– 68.
8. Trost SG, Owen N, Bauman AE, Sallis JF, Brown W. Correlates of adults’ participation in physical
activity: review and update. Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise 2002;12:1996– 2001.
9. Wilcox, S., Castro S., King C.A., Housemann R, Brownson C.R., (2000). Determinants of leisure
time physical activity in rural compared with urban older and ethnically diverse women in the United
States. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2000; 54:667–672.