Research PaperPark attributes that encourage park visitation among adolescents: A conjoint analysis
Introduction
Parks are an important public resource that provide opportunities for people of all ages to engage in physical activity, connect socially with family and friends, and have contact with nature. Despite the benefits associated with park visitation, parks are generally under-utilised and, research within Australia and internationally shows that park visitation among adolescents is particularly low (Floyd et al., 2011, Lindberg and Schipperijn, 2015). For example, a recent observational study of park visitors in Melbourne, Australia, showed that only seven percent of all park visitors were teens (aged 13–20 years), with the majority of park users being younger children and adults (Veitch et al., 2015).
It is plausible that the features and amenities in parks may not appeal to adolescents, discouraging visitation. Indeed, it is a common perception among parents and children that amenities in neighbourhood parks are typically better suited to younger children (Veitch, Bagley, Ball, & Salmon, 2006; Veitch, Salmon, & Ball, 2007). However, little is known about what features/amenities would attract adolescents to visit parks. Most studies examining the importance of specific park features for visitation and park-based physical activity have been conducted with adults (Kaczynski, Potwarka, & Saelens, 2008) and children (Timperio et al., 2008, Veitch et al., 2007), and these findings may or may not be relevant to adolescents.
Further, parks provide a setting where adolescents can participate in physical activity. Few adolescents participate in enough physical activity to meet current recommendations of 60 min of moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity every day (Hallal et al., 2012). Longitudinal studies have shown that a steep decline in physical activity occurs between childhood and adolescence (Nelson, Gordon-Larsen, Song, & Popkin, 2006), with continued declines across the lifespan (Telama, Yang, Laakso, & Viikari, 1997). Importantly, adolescents have been shown to be engage in moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity when using playgrounds in parks (Oreskovic et al., 2015). Thus, creating and enhancing opportunities for adolescents to be active at parks is critical.
One of the few studies to examine adolescents’ perceptions on park features (Veitch et al., 2016) used photography imagery to identify characteristics of parks that are perceived to be important for park visitation and park-based physical activity. That study found physically challenging play equipment is likely to encourage adolescents to visit parks whereas rules, rubbish, graffiti, and skate bowls may discourage visitation. Although these findings will help to inform future research aiming to better understand what park features are important for adolescents, the relative importance of different park features is still unknown (Cohen et al., 2006).
Parks receive significant investment for modifications and re-development, particularly from local authorities. To ensure that park renewal and development stimulates park visitation to optimal levels it is important to understand which park features are most likely to attract visitors from all age groups. While natural experiment study designs can determine the impact of changes to specific park attributes on park visitation (Veitch, Ball, Crawford, Abbott, & Salmon, 2012; Veitch et al., 2014), they are costly, time-consuming and difficult to conduct as control of the environmental change is outside of the researcher’s control (Craig et al., 2012, Hunter et al., 2015). Virtual experiments in a ‘laboratory’ setting based on conjoint analyses can be an alternative to natural experiments for identifying which park features to prioritise in park design. Conjoint analysis is a quantitative market research technique that examines the joint effects of park characteristics as they are presented to participants in different combinations, rather than in isolation. This makes it possible to identify the relative importance of individual features and therefore better understand what features should be prioritised in the design and management of parks to facilitate and encourage use of these spaces. Conjoint analysis has successfully been used previously to examine the park preferences of older adults (Alves, Aspinall, Thompson, & Sugiyama, 2008), street preferences for children’s cycling for transport (Ghekiere, Deforche et al., 2015; Ghekiere, Van Cauwenberg et al., 2015), adults cycling (Mertens et al., 2015), and walking among older adults (Van Cauwenberg et al., 2016); however, it has not been applied among adolescents to examine preferences for park features.
The aim of this study was to examine the relative importance of selected environmental attributes (park features) that might influence adolescents’ decision to visit a park using an experimental design, based on an adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis approach. Identifying the relative importance of park features will inform which features should be prioritised in the design of parks to facilitate and encourage active and social use of these spaces by this age group. Parks were defined as publically accessible urban green spaces.
Section snippets
Methods
This was a cross-sectional study in which adolescents completed a web-based survey constructed using Sawtooth SSI Web (v 8.4.6) (www.sawtoothsoftware.com.au). All data were collected between November 2014 and February 2015. The study was approved by the Human Ethics Advisory Group (H167_2013) and approval to conduct research in schools was granted from the Department of Education and Training.
Results
Table 2 presents the sample’s characteristics. The participants (n = 92) had a mean age of 14.7 years (SD = 1.0) and 57% were female. Almost 23% attended a school located in a high SES area, 42% in a mid SES area and 35% in a low SES area. Twenty-five percent of participants were regular park visitors reporting that they had visited a park at least once per week over the past three months, 40% reported that they usually visited the park for one hour or less, and 48% usually visited parks with
Discussion
The aim of this study was to examine the relative importance of park attributes that may influence adolescents’ preference to visit a park. To our knowledge this is the first time that ACBC analysis has been performed to examine the relative importance of park features among this important age group. There is a dearth of research on what specific park attributes are associated with park visitation among adolescents. Furthermore, identifying which attributes have higher importance compared to
Conclusions
Due to the physical and mental health benefits of visiting parks and the low levels of park visitation observed among adolescents, it is critical that urban planners and policy makers consider park features that encourage youth visitation when redeveloping parks or building new parks. This study found that the presence of slides (particularly long steep slides) was the most important park attribute, followed by the absence of rubbish/graffiti, and the presence of swings and a walking path.
Competing interests
The author’s declare that there are no competing interests.
Author contributions
JV, JS and AT conceived and planned the study. BD, JvC and AG provided expert input into the design and analysis. SB assisted with the study design. JV drafted the manuscript and all authors contributed critical feedback on drafts.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by a Deakin University Central Research Grants Scheme. JV is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Early Career Fellowship (ID 1053426). JS is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Principal Research Fellowships (ID 1026216). AT is supported by a Future Leader Fellowship (ID 100046) from the National Heart Foundation of Australia. AG is funded by a grant from Scientific Research Foundation Flanders (FWO, GA11111N). JVC is funded
References (30)
- et al.
Park-based physical activity among children and adolescents
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
(2011) - et al.
Global physical activity levels: Surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects
Lancet
(2012) - et al.
The impact of interventions to promote physical activity in urban green space: A systematic review and recommendations for future research
Social Science and Medicine
(2015) - et al.
Active use of urban park facilities—Expectations versus reality
Urban Forestry & Urban Greening
(2015) - et al.
Built and social environments associations with adolescent overweight and activity
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
(2006) - et al.
Physical activity in childhood and adolescence as predictor of physical activity in young adulthood
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
(1997) - et al.
Features of public open spaces and physical activity among children: Findings from the CLAN study
Preventive Medicine
(2008) - et al.
Where do children usually play? A qualitative study of parents' perceptions of influences on children's active free-play
Health & Place
(2006) - et al.
Park improvements and park activity: A natural experiment
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
(2012) - et al.
Do features of public open spaces vary between urban and rural areas?
Preventive Medicine
(2013)