Application of EMGB to Study Impacts of Public Green Space on Active Transport Behavior: Evidence from South Korea
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Theoretical Context
1.1.1. Public Green Space Relevant to Walking and Cycling
1.1.2. Motivation Theory
1.1.3. Models of Goal-Directed Behavior (MGB)
1.2. Hypothesis Development
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Measurements
2.2. Content Validity and Pilot and Pre-Test
2.3. Data Collection
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Sample Profile
3.2. Results of Measurement Model Testing
3.3. Results of Structural Model Testing
3.4. Moderating Effect of Perceived Usefulness of Smart Apps
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Limitations and Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Our team of international researchers are conducting a study regarding the sustainable transport of walking. Your sincere response will contribute to a better understanding of resident behavior in walking. We would greatly appreciate your time and cooperation in completing this questionnaire. Thank you very much! Researchers: Names of the researchers and university are eliminated for anonymity. The layout of this questionnaire is for MS word file only, which is quite different from the online survey screen. 10~25 July 2021. |
- I will provide my best answers: Go to the next question.
- I will not provide my best answers: End the survey.
- I cannot promise either way: End the survey.
- ① Yes: ☞ If you checked “yes,” please answer the following general question (GQ)1.
- ② No: ☞ Close the survey (We thank you for your time spent taking this survey. Your response has been recorded).
- ① Leisure-related activities
- ② Tourism-related activities
- ③ Walking to/from work
- Self-satisfaction
- Experiencing the community
- Mental well-being and health
- Physical well-being and health
- Opportunity to socialize
- Contact with nature
- Visiting attractions
- Protecting the environment
- Access to public transport
- Access to shopping
- Dog walking
- Opportunity to be alone
- Opportunity to be with family
- Other____________________
- ① Yes ② No ③ Same
- ① Yes ② No
- Yes: ☞ If you checked “yes,” please answer the following general question (GQ)5.
- No: ☞ If you checked “no,” please answer the following construct question (GQ)6.
- ① GPS/Maps (e.g., tracker, route) ② Fitness (e.g., calorie counting) ③ Counter (e.g., walking 10,000 steps) ④ Heart rate (e.g., pulse measurement) Safety (e.g., CCTV location) ⑥ Amenity (e.g., toilet, shelter) ⑦ Augmented reality apps ⑧ Other__________
- ① Strongly disagree ② Disagree ③ Somewhat disagree ④ Neither agree nor disagree
- Somewhat agree ⑥ Agree ⑦ Strongly agree
- ① Alone ② Friends ③ Family/Relatives ④ Coworkers Other
CQ1. Awareness of Public Green Space | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. I am interested in public green space for walking. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. I am aware of public green spaces for walking. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. I care about public green trails for walking. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. Public green spaces provide cool areas in which to walk when it is hot. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
5. Public green spaces are attractive for walking at any time of year. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ2. Extrinsic Motivation for Walking | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Walking improves my personal health. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. Walking contributes to the environment. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. Walking contributes to mitigating climate change. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. Walking contributes to lowering air pollution. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
5. Walking improves public health. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ3. Intrinsic Motivation for Walking | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Walking is enjoyable for me. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. Walking brings me self-satisfaction. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. Walking makes me happy. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. I walk for refreshment. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ4. Attitude on Walking | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Walking is an affirmative behavior. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. Walking is a beneficial behavior. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. Walking is an essential behavior. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. Walking is a legitimate behavior. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ5. Subjective Norm on Walking | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Most people who are important to me think I should walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. Most people who are important to me would want me to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. Most people who are important to me support my walking. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. Most people who are important to me are proud that I go walking. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ6. Perceived Behavioral Control | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Walking or not is entirely up to me. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. I can walk whenever I want. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. I have the physical strength to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. I have time to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ7. Positive Anticipated Emotion | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. If I walk, I will feel excited. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. If I walk, I will feel glad. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. If I walk, I will feel satisfied. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. If I walk, I will feel happy. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ8. Negative Anticipated Emotion | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. If I cannot walk, I will be angry. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. If I cannot walk, I will be disappointed. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. If I cannot walk, I will be worried. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. If I cannot walk, I will be sad. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ9. Desire to Walk | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. I do want to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. My desire to walk is passionate. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. I am enthusiastic about walking. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. I am eager to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ10. Behavioral Intention of Walking | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. To increase my personal well-being, I am planning to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. To improve my personal health, I will make an effort to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. To mitigate climate change, I am willing to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. To protect the environment, I do intend to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
5. To increase public well-being, I am planning to walk. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ11. Perceived Usefulness of Smart Applications | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. I believe that using smart applications for walking would enable me to accomplish walking better. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. I believe that using smart applications for walking would improve my walking performance. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. I believe that using smart applications for walking would make it easier to do my walking. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. I believe that using smart applications for walking would enhance my effectiveness in walking. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
- DQ1. What is your gender? (quota sampling)
- ① Male ② Female ③ Other
- Between 18 and 19 years old
- Between 20 and 29 years old
- Between 30 and 39 years old
- Between 40 and 49 years old
- Between 50 and 59 years old
- Between 50 and 59 years old
- 70 years old and over
- ① High school diploma or lower ② 2-year college, attending or degree
- ③ 4-year university, attending or degree ④ Graduate school, attending or degree
- ① Single ② Married ③ Other (specify) _____
- ① Less than KRW 2.00 million ② KRW 2.00–3.99 million ③ KRW 4.00–5.99 million
- ④ KRW 6.00–7.99 million KRW 8.00 million or more
- ① Professional (e.g., attorney, engineer, architect) ② Entrepreneur/Self-employed ③ Service employee ④ Office/Administrative/Clerical Civil Servant (Government) ⑥ Home maker ⑦ Student ⑧ Retiree ⑨ Unemployment ➉ Other (specify)_______
- ① Seoul ② Busan ③ Daegu ④ Incheon ⑤ Daejeon ⑥ Ulsan ⑦ Gwangju ⑧ Sejong ⑨ Gyeonggi ⑩ Gangwon ⑪ Chungbuk
- ⑫ Chungnam ⑬ Jeonbuk ⑭ Jeonnam ⑮ Gyeongbuk ⑯ Gyeongnam ⑰ Jeju
Our team of international researchers are conducting a study regarding the sustainable transport of cycling. Your sincere response will contribute to a better understanding of resident behavior in cycling. We would greatly appreciate your time and cooperation in completing this questionnaire. Thank you very much! Researchers: Names of the researchers and university are eliminated for anonymity. The layout of this questionnaire is for MS word file only, which is quite different from the online survey screen. 10~25 July 2021. |
- I will provide my best answers: Go to the next question.
- I will not provide my best answers: End the survey.
- I cannot promise either way: End the survey.
- ①
- Yes: ☞ If you checked “yes,” please answer the following general question (GQ)1.
- ②
- No: ☞ Close the survey (We thank you for your time spent taking this survey. Your response has been recorded).
- ① Leisure-related activities ② Tourism-related activities ③ Cycling to/from work
- Self-satisfaction
- Experiencing the community
- Mental well-being and health
- Physical well-being and health
- Opportunity to socialize
- Contact with nature
- Visiting attractions
- Protecting the environment
- Access to public transport
- Access to shopping
- Cycling with a dog
- Opportunity to be alone
- Opportunity to be with family
- Other____________________
- ① Yes ② No ③ Same
- ① Yes ② No
- Yes: ☞ If you checked “yes,” please answer the following general question (GQ)5.
- No: ☞ If you checked “no,” please answer the following construct question (GQ)6.
- ① GPS/Maps (e.g., tracker, route) ② Fitness (e.g., calorie counting) ③ Counter (e.g., distance) ④ Heart rate (e.g., pulse measurement) Safety (e.g., CCTV location) ⑥ Amenity (e.g., toilet, shelter) ⑦ Augmented reality apps ⑧ Other__________
- ① Strongly disagree ② Disagree ③ Somewhat disagree ④ Neither agree nor disagree
- Somewhat agree ⑥ Agree ⑦ Strongly agree
- ① Alone ② Friends ③ Family/Relatives ④ Coworkers Other
- ① Yes, I mostly ride electric cycles. ② No, I mostly ride conventional cycles.
CQ1. Awareness of Public Green Space | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. I am interested in public green space for cycling. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. I am aware of public green spaces for cycling. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. I care about public green trails for cycling. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. Public green spaces provide cool areas in which to cycle when it is hot. | |||||||
5. Public green spaces are attractive for cycling at any time of year. |
CQ2. Extrinsic Motivation for Cycling | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Cycling improves my personal health. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. Cycling contributes to the environment. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. Cycling contributes to mitigating climate change. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. Cycling contributes to lowering air pollution. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
5. Cycling improves public health. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ3. Intrinsic Motivation for Cycling | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Cycling is enjoyable for me. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. Cycling brings me self-satisfaction. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. Cycling makes me happy. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. I cycle for refreshment. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ4. Attitude on Cycling | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Cycling is an affirmative behavior. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. Cycling is a beneficial behavior. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. Cycling is an essential behavior. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. Cycling is a legitimate behavior. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ5. Subjective Norm on Cycling | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Most people who are important to me think I should cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. Most people who are important to me would want me to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. Most people who are important to me support my cycling. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. Most people who are important to me are proud that I go cycling. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ6. Perceived Behavioral Control | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. Cycling or not is entirely up to me. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. I can cycle whenever I want. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. I have the physical strength to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. I have time to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ7. Positive Anticipated Emotion | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. If I cycle, I will feel excited. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. If I cycle, I will feel glad. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. If I cycle, I will feel satisfied. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. If I cycle, I will feel happy. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ8. Negative Anticipated Emotion | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. If I cannot cycle, I will be angry. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. If I cannot cycle, I will be disappointed. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. If I cannot cycle, I will be worried. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. If I cannot cycle, I will be sad. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ9. Desire to Cycle | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. I do want to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. My desire to cycle is passionate. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. I am enthusiastic about cycling. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. I am eager to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ10. Behavioral Intention of Cycling | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. To increase my personal well-being, I am planning to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. To improve my personal health, I will make an effort to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. To mitigate climate change, I am willing to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. To protect the environment, I do intend to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
5. To increase public well-being, I am planning to cycle. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
CQ11. Perceived Usefulness of Smart Applications | Strongly Disagree | Disagree | Somewhat Disagree | Neither Agree nor Disagree | Somewhat Agree | Agree | Strongly Agree |
1. I believe that using smart applications for cycling would enable me to accomplish cycling better. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. I believe that using smart applications for cycling would improve my cycling performance. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. I believe that using smart applications for cycling would make it easier to do my cycling. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. I believe that using smart applications for cycling would enhance my effectiveness in cycling. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
- DQ1. What is your gender? (quota sampling)
- ① Male ② Female ③ Other
- ① Between 18 and 19 years old
- ② Between 20 and 29 years old
- ③ Between 30 and 39 years old
- ④ Between 40 and 49 years old
- ⑤ Between 50 and 59 years old
- ⑥ 60 years old and over
- ① High school diploma or lower ② 2-year college, attending or degree
- ③ 4-year university, attending or degree ④ Graduate school, attending or degree
- ① Single ② Married ③ Other (specify) _____
- ① Less than KRW 2.00 million ② KRW 2.00–3.99 million ③ KRW 4.00–5.99 million
- ④ KRW 6.00–7.99 million KRW 8.00 million or more
- ① Professional (e.g., attorney, engineer, architect) ② Entrepreneur/Self-employed ③ Service employee
- ④ Office/Administrative/Clerical ⑤ Civil Servant (Government) ⑥ Home maker ⑦ Student ⑧ Retiree ⑨ Unemployment
- ⑩ Other (specify)_______
- ① Seoul ② Busan ③ Daegu ④ Incheon ⑤ Daejeon ⑥ Ulsan ⑦ Gwangju ⑧ Sejong ⑨ Gyeonggi ⑩ Gangwon ⑪ Chungbuk ⑫ Chungnam ⑬ Jeonbuk ⑭ Jeonnam ⑮ Gyeongbuk ⑯ Gyeongnam ⑰ Jeju
Appendix B. Common Method Bias Tests
Test Method | Test | Result |
Harmon’s single-factor test | The EFA results are as follows: Nine factors appeared (the total 71.9% variance explained) First factor: 38.3% Second factor: 7.4% Third factor: 5.2% Fourth factor: 4.9% Fifth factor: 4.3% Sixth factor: 3.7% Seventh factor: 3.2% Eighth factor: 2.6% Ninth factor: 2.4% | Since more than one factor appears, and the first factor has less than 50% variance, common method bias is not an issue (Podsakoff, P.M.; MacKenzie, S.B.; Lee, J.Y.; Podsakoff, n.P. Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. J Appl Psychol 2003, 88, 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.). |
Marker variable approach: Correlations between the marker variable (perceived knowledge of smart applications for walking/cycling) and all the constructs in the research model | The 11 correlations are as follows:
| The average of squared multiple correlations: 0.122. Since the correlations are low, and the average of squared multiple correlations with the marker variable is small and insignificant, common method bias is not an issue (Lindell, M.K.; Whitney, D.J. Accounting for Common Method Variance in Cross-Sectional Research Designs. J Appl Psychol 2001, 86, 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.86.1.114.). |
Appendix C. Demographic Characteristic and General Information of the Entire Group for Walking and Cycling
Characteristics | 651 (n) | 100 (%) | Characteristics | 651 (n) | 100 (%) |
Gender | Participated-in types of walking/cycling | ||||
Male | 321 | 49.3 | Leisure-related activities | 216 | 33.2 |
Female | 330 | 50.7 | Tourism-related activities | 217 | 33.3 |
Other | 0 | 0.0 | Work-related activities | 218 | 33.5 |
Age | Reason for walking/cycling | ||||
Between 18 and 29 years old | 117 | 18.0 | Self-satisfaction | 268 | 41.2 |
Between 30 and 39 years old | 115 | 17.7 | Experiencing the community | 77 | 11.8 |
Between 40 and 49 years old | 144 | 22.1 | Mental well-being and health | 236 | 36.3 |
Between 50 and 59 years old | 149 | 22.8 | Physical well-being and health | 436 | 67.0 |
60 years old and over | 126 | 19.4 | Opportunity to socialize | 82 | 12.6 |
Educational level | Contact with nature | 267 | 41.0 | ||
Less than or high school diploma | 117 | 18.0 | Visiting attractions | 149 | 22.9 |
2-year college | 99 | 15.2 | Protecting the environment | 91 | 14.0 |
University | 357 | 54.8 | Access to public transport | 177 | 27.2 |
Graduate school or higher | 78 | 12.0 | Access to shopping | 129 | 19.8 |
Marital status | Walking/cycling with a dog | 37 | 5.7 | ||
Single | 240 | 36.9 | Opportunity to be alone | 118 | 18.1 |
Married | 403 | 61.9 | Opportunity to be with family | 112 | 17.2 |
Other | 8 | 1.2 | Other | 26 | 4.0 |
Monthly household income | More walking/cycling compared to before COVID-19 | ||||
Less than KRW 2.00–3.99 million | 264 | 40.6 | Yes | 155 | 23.8 |
From KRW 4.00 to 7.99 million | 294 | 45.1 | No | 293 | 45.0 |
KRW 8.00 million or more | 93 | 14.3 | Same | 203 | 31.2 |
Occupation | Used smart applications for walking/cycling | ||||
Professional (e.g., attorney, engineer) | 66 | 10.1 | Yes | 421 | 64.7 |
Business owner/Self-employed | 44 | 6.8 | No | 230 | 35.3 |
Service worker | 73 | 11.2 | Used types of smart applications for walking/cycling | ||
Office/Administrative/Clerical worker | 235 | 36.0 | GPS/Maps (e.g., tracker, route) | 242 | 37.2 |
Civil servant (government) | 29 | 4.5 | Fitness (e.g., calorie counting) | 173 | 26.6 |
Home maker | 76 | 11.7 | Counter (e.g., step or distance measurement) | 285 | 43.8 |
Student | 35 | 5.4 | Heart rate (e.g., pulse measurement) | 103 | 15.8 |
Retiree | 21 | 3.2 | Safety (e.g., CCTV location) | 23 | 3.5 |
Unemployed | 29 | 4.5 | Amenity (e.g., toilet, shelter, facilities) | 43 | 6.6 |
Other | 43 | 6.6 | Augmented reality apps | 11 | 1.7 |
Residential area | Other | 16 | 2.5 | ||
Seoul metropolitan area | 428 | 65.6 | Worry about personal safety when walking/cycling | ||
Non-metropolitan area | 223 | 34.4 | Disagree | 253 | 38.8 |
Duration of answering the survey | Neither agree nor disagree | 137 | 21.0 | ||
Between 5 and 533.8 min | 651 | 100.0 | Agree | 261 | 40.2 |
Riding e-cycle | Companions when walking/cycling | ||||
Yes, I mostly ride electric cycles | 27 | 4.1 | Alone | 386 | 59.3 |
No, I mostly ride conventional cycles | 624 | 95.9 | Friends | 82 | 12.6 |
Providing thoughtful/honest answers | Family/relatives | 162 | 24.9 | ||
Yes | 651 | 100.0 | Coworkers | 19 | 2.9 |
No | 0 | 0.0 | Other | 2 | 0.3 |
Appendix D. Mediating (Indirect) Effects on the Proposed Research Model
Path | Direct Effect | Indirect Effect | Total Effect | t-Value | p-Value | f2 |
Awareness of public green space → Attitude | 0.163 *** | 0.163 *** | 3.708 | <0.001 | 0.029 | |
Awareness of public green space → Desire | −0.002 ns | 0.006 ns | 0.004 ns | 0.733 | >0.05 | |
Awareness of public green space → Behavioral intention | 0.159 *** | 0.001 ns | 0.160 *** | 4.734 | <0.001 | 0.043 |
Motivation → Attitude | 0.539 *** | 0.539 *** | 12.805 | <0.001 | 0.319 | |
Motivation → Desire | −0.083 ns | 0.020 ns | −0.060 ns | 0.795 | >0.05 | 0.005 |
Motivation → Behavioral intention | 0.535 *** | 0.022 * | 0.557 *** | 16.958 | <0.001 | 0.390 |
Attitude → Desire | 0.037 ns | 0.037 ns | 0.857 | >0.05 | 0.002 | |
Attitude → Behavioral intention | 0.008 ns | 0.008 ns | 0.824 | >0.05 | ||
Subjective norm → Desire | 0.137 *** | 0.137 *** | 3.473 | <0.001 | 0.027 | |
Subjective norm → Behavioral intention | 0.030 *** | 0.030 *** | 3.225 | <0.001 | ||
Perceived behavioral control → Desire | 0.003 ns | 0.003 ns | 0.080 | >0.05 | 0.000 | |
Perceived behavioral control → Behavioral intention | 0.001 ns | 0.001 ns | 0.081 | >0.05 | ||
Positive anticipated emotion → Desire | 0.466 *** | 0.466 *** | 10.048 | <0.001 | 0.204 | |
Positive anticipated emotion → Behavioral intention | 0.102 *** | 0.102 *** | 5.775 | <0.001 | ||
Negative anticipated emotion → Desire | 0.225 *** | 0.225 *** | 5.997 | <0.001 | 0.087 | |
Negative anticipated emotion → Behavioral intention | 0.049 *** | 0.049 *** | 4.731 | <0.001 | ||
Desire → Behavioral intention | 0.219 *** | 0.227 *** | 7.127 | <0.001 | 0.082 |
Appendix E. Grouping the Moderator of Smart App Usefulness
Construct | Cronbach Alpha | Group | Sample Size | Mean |
Perceived usefulness of smart applications | 0.817 | High | 433 | 5.36 |
Low | 218 | 3.61 |
References
- Hogendorf, M.; Groeniger, J.O.; Noordzij, J.M.; Beenackers, M.A.; van Lenthe, F.J. Longitudinal Effects of Urban Green Space on Walking and Cycling: A Fixed Effects Analysis. Health Place 2020, 61, 102264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rehling, J.; Bunge, C.; Waldhauer, J.; Conrad, A. Socioeconomic Differences in Walking Time of Children and Adolescents to Public Green Spaces in Urban Areas—Results of the German Environmental Survey (2014–2017). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shen, Y.; Sun, F.; Che, Y. Public Green Spaces and Human Wellbeing: Mapping the Spatial Inequity and Mismatching Status of Public Green Space in the Central City of Shanghai. Urban Urban Green 2017, 27, 59–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carpenter, M. From “healthful Exercise” to “Nature on Prescription”: The Politics of Urban Green Spaces and Walking for Health. Landsc. Urban Plan 2013, 118, 120–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Charreire, H.; Weber, C.; Chaix, B.; Salze, P.; Casey, R.; Banos, A.; Badariotti, D.; Kesse-Guyot, E.; Hercberg, S.; Simon, C.; et al. Identifying Built Environmental Patterns Using Cluster Analysis and GIS: Relationships with Walking, Cycling and Body Mass Index in French Adults. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2012, 9, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Glazener, A.; Khreis, H. Transforming Our Cities: Best Practices towards Clean Air and Active Transportation. Curr. Environ. Health Rep. 2019, 6, 22–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Istenič, S.P. Reviving Public Spaces through Cycling. Etnološka Trib. 2016, 39, 157–175. [Google Scholar]
- Jim, C.Y.; Chen, S.S. Comprehensive Greenspace Planning Based on Landscape Ecology Principles in Compact Nanjing City, China. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2003, 65, 95–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ki, D.; Lee, S. Analyzing the Effects of Green View Index of Neighborhood Streets on Walking Time Using Google Street View and Deep Learning. Landsc. Urban Plan 2021, 205, 103920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarkar, C.; Webster, C.; Pryor, M.; Tang, D.; Melbourne, S.; Zhang, X.; Jianzheng, L. Exploring Associations between Urban Green, Street Design and Walking: Results from the Greater London Boroughs. Landsc. Urban Plan 2015, 143, 112–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bagozzi, R.P.; Baumgartner, H.; Pieters, R.; Zeelenberg, M. The Role of Emotions in Goal-Directed Behavior. In The Why of Consumption: Contemporary Perspectives on Consumer Motives, Goals, and Desires; Ratneshwar, S., Mick, D.G., Huffman, C., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2000; pp. 36–58. [Google Scholar]
- Kelley, N.J.; Gallucci, A.; Riva, P.; Lauro, L.J.R.; Schmeichel, B.J. Stimulating Self-Regulation: A Review of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation Studies of Goal-Directed Behavior. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 2019, 12, 337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lindenberg, S.; Steg, L. Normative, Gain and Hedonic Goal Frames Guiding Environmental Behavior. J. Soc. Issues 2007, 63, 117–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Han, H. Consumer Behavior and Environmental Sustainability in Tourism and Hospitality: A Review of Theories, Concepts, and Latest Research. J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 29, 1021–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, M.J.; Park, J.Y.; Lee, C.K.; Chung, I.Y. The Role of Perceived Ethics in the Decision-Making Process for Responsible Tourism Using an Extended Model of Goal-Directed Behavior. Int. J. Tour. Hosp Res. 2017, 31, 5–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, M.J.; Hall, C.M. Can Co-Creation and Crowdfunding Types Predict Funder Behavior? An Extended Model of Goal-Directed Behavior. Sustainability 2019, 11, 7061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kim, M.J.; Hall, C.M. Do Perceived Risk and Intervention Affect Crowdfunder Behavior for the Sustainable Development Goals? A Model of Goal-Directed Behavior. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 311, 127614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vermeir, I.; Weijters, B.; De Houwer, J.; Geuens, M.; Slabbinck, H.; Spruyt, A.; Van Kerckhove, A.; Van Lippevelde, W.; De Steur, H.; Verbeke, W. Environmentally Sustainable Food Consumption: A Review and Research Agenda from a Goal-Directed Perspective. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 1603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Vos, J.; Singleton, P.A.; Gärling, T. From Attitude to Satisfaction: Introducing the Travel Mode Choice Cycle. Transp. Rev. 2021, 42, 204–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Passafaro, P.; Rimano, A.; Piccini, M.P.; Metastasio, R.; Gambardella, V.; Gullace, G.; Lettieri, C. The Bicycle and the City: Desires and Emotions versus Attitudes, Habits and Norms. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 38, 76–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Domínguez, J.M.L.; Sanguino, T. de J.M. Walking Secure: Safe Routing Planning Algorithm and Pedestrian’s Crossing Intention Detector Based on Fuzzy Logic App. Sensors 2021, 21, 529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ek, A.; Alexandrou, C.; Delisle Nyström, C.; Direito, A.; Eriksson, U.; Hammar, U.; Henriksson, P.; Maddison, R.; Trolle Lagerros, Y.; Löf, M. The Smart City Active Mobile Phone Intervention (SCAMPI) Study to Promote Physical Activity through Active Transportation in Healthy Adults: A Study Protocol for a Randomised Controlled Trial. BMC Public Health 2018, 18, 880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Manor, B.; Yu, W.; Zhu, H.; Harrison, R.; Lo, O.Y.; Lipsitz, L.; Travison, T.; Pascual-Leone, A.; Zhou, J. Smartphone App–Based Assessment of Gait during Normal and Dual-Task Walking-Demonstration of Validity and Reliability. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2018, 6, e8815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Walsh, J.C.; Corbett, T.; Hogan, M.; Duggan, J.; McNamara, A. An Mhealth Intervention Using a Smartphone App to Increase Walking Behavior in Young Adults: A Pilot Study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2016, 4, e5227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Caprì, S.; Ignaccolo, M.; Inturri, G.; Le Pira, M. Green Walking Networks for Climate Change Adaptation. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2016, 45, 84–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, D.; Lu, Y.; Xie, B.; Helbich, M. Large-Scale Greenway Intervention Promotes Walking Behaviors: A Natural Experiment in China. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2021, 101, 103095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keall, M.D.; Shaw, C.; Chapman, R.; Howden-Chapman, P. Reductions in Carbon Dioxide Emissions from an Intervention to Promote Cycling and Walking: A Case Study from New Zealand. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2018, 65, 687–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maslow, A.H. A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychol. Rev. 1943, 50, 370–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kim, M.J.; Preis, M.W. Why Seniors Use Mobile Devices: Applying an Extended Model of Goal-Directed Behavior. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2016, 33, 404–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, C.-K.; Reisinger, Y.; Kim, M.J.; Yoon, S.-M. The Influence of Volunteer Motivation on Satisfaction, Attitudes, and Support for a Mega-Event. Int. J. Hosp Manag. 2014, 40, 37–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deci, E.L.; Koestner, R.; Ryan, R.M. A Meta-Analytic Review of Experiments Examining the Effects of Extrinsic Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation. Psychol. Bull. 1999, 125, 627–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2000, 25, 54–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kalajas-Tilga, H.; Koka, A.; Hein, V.; Tilga, H.; Raudsepp, L. Motivational Processes in Physical Education and Objectively Measured Physical Activity among Adolescents. J. Sport Health Sci. 2020, 9, 462–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Beauchemin, J.D.; Gibbs, T.A.; Granello, P.F.; Gabana, N.T. Motivation for Movement: Influences for Walking Event Participation. Health Educ. J. 2019, 78, 111–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manaugh, K.; El-Geneidy, A.M. Does Distance Matter? Exploring the Links among Values, Motivations, Home Location, and Satisfaction in Walking Trips. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2013, 50, 198–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rejón-Guardia, F.; Alemany-Hormaeche, M.; García-Sastre, M.A. Ibiza Dances to the Rhythm of Pedals: The Motivations of Mountain Biking Tourists Competing in Sporting Events. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2020, 36, 100750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Xu, H.; Yuan, M.; Li, J. Exploring the Relationship between Cycling Motivation, Leisure Benefits and Well-Being. Int. Rev. Spat. Plan. Sustain. Dev. 2019, 7, 157–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
- Ajzen, I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perugini, M.; Bagozzi, R.P. The Role of Desires and Anticipated Emotions in Goal-Directed Behaviours: Broadening and Deepening the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 2001, 40, 79–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volpi, N.C.; Polani, D. Goal-Directed Empowerment: Combining Intrinsic Motivation and Task-Oriented Behaviour. IEEE Trans. Cogn. Dev. Syst. 2020, 8920, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Voon, V.; Baek, K.; Enander, J.; Worbe, Y.; Morris, L.S.; Harrison, N.A.; Robbins, T.W.; Rück, C.; Daw, N. Motivation and Value Influences in the Relative Balance of Goal-Directed and Habitual Behaviours in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. Transl. Psychiatry 2015, 5, e670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lee, C.K.; Song, H.J.; Bendle, L.J.; Kim, M.J.; Han, H. The Impact of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions for 2009 H1N1 Influenza on Travel Intentions: A Model of Goal-Directed Behavior. Tour. Manag. 2012, 33, 89–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, M.J.; Lee, M.J.; Lee, C.K.; Song, H.J. Does Gender Affect Korean Tourists’ Overseas Travel? Applying the Model of Goal-Directed Behavior. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2012, 17, 509–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, M.J.; Lee, C.K.; Petrick, J.F.; Kim, Y.S. The Influence of Perceived Risk and Intervention on International Tourists’ Behavior during the Hong Kong Protest: Application of an Extended Model of Goal-Directed Behavior. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2020, 45, 622–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alcock, I.; White, M.P.; Wheeler, B.W.; Fleming, L.E.; Depledge, M.H. Longitudinal Effects on Mental Health of Moving to Greener and Less Green Urban Areas. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 1247–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kleszczewska, D.; Mazur, J.; Bucksch, J.; Dzielska, A.; Brindley, C.; Michalska, A. Active Transport to School May Reduce Psychosomatic Symptoms in School-Aged Children: Data from Nine Countries. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, W.; Chen, Q.; Jiang, M.; Tao, J.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, X.; Wu, L.; Xu, S.; Kang, Y.; Zeng, Q. Sitting or Walking? Analyzing the Neural Emotional Indicators of Urban Green Space Behavior with Mobile EEG. J. Urban Health 2020, 97, 191–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Möller, H.; Haigh, F.; Hayek, R.; Veerman, L. What Is the Best Practice Method for Quantifying the Health and Economic Benefits of Active Transport? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chalmers, D.J. The Conscious Mind. In Search of a Fundamental Theory; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Han, H.; Meng, B.; Kim, W. Bike-Traveling as a Growing Phenomenon: Role of Attributes, Value, Satisfaction, Desire, and Gender in Developing Loyalty. Tour. Manag. 2017, 59, 91–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohiuddin, M.; Al Mamun, A.; Syed, F.A.; Masud, M.M.; Su, Z. Environmental Knowledge, Awareness, and Business School Students’ Intentions to Purchase Green Vehicles in Emerging Countries. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dhir, A.; Sadiq, M.; Talwar, S.; Sakashita, M.; Kaur, P. Why Do Retail Consumers Buy Green Apparel? A Knowledge-Attitude-Behaviour-Context Perspective. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 59, 102398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herman, L.E.; Udayana, I.B.N.; Farida, N. Young Generation and Environmental Friendly Awareness: Does It the Impact of Green Advertising? Bus. Theory Pract. 2021, 22, 159–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, M.J.; Lee, C.K.; Bonn, M. Obtaining a Better Understanding about Travel-Related Purchase Intentions among Senior Users of Mobile Social Network Sites. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2017, 37, 484–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baumeister, R.F.; Leary, M.R. The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation. Psychol. Bull. 1995, 117, 497–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, H.C.; Cheng, C.C.; Chen, Y.C.; Hong, W. Towards Green Experiential Loyalty: Driving from Experiential Quality, Green Relationship Quality, Environmental Friendliness, Green Support and Green Desire. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 30, 1374–1397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Lee, C.; An, J. Psycho-Social Correlates of Leisure-Time Physical Activity (LTPA) among Older Adults: A Multivariate Analysis. Eur. Rev. Aging Phys. Act. 2020, 17, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laurier, E.; Brown, B.; McGregor, M. Mediated Pedestrian Mobility: Walking and the Map App. Mobilities 2016, 11, 117–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Churchill Jr., G. A. A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs. J. Mark. Res. 1979, 16, 64–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kramer, J.-N.; Künzler, F.; Mishra, V.; Smith, S.N.; Kotz, D.; Scholz, U.; Fleisch, E.; Kowatsch, T. Which Components of a Smartphone Walking App Help Users to Reach Personalized Step Goals? Results from an Optimization Trial. Ann. Behav. Med. 2020, 54, 518–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cicchetti, D.V.; Shoinralter, D.; Tyrer, P.J. The Effect of Number of Rating Scale Categories on Levels of Interrater Reliability: A Monte Carlo Investigation. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 1985, 9, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Preston, C.C.; Colman, A.M. Optimal Number of Response Categories in Rating Scales: Reliability, Validity, Discriminating Power, and Respondent Preferences. Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 2000, 104, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Brislin, R.W. Back-Translation for Cross-Cultural Research. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 1970, 1, 185–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wright, K.B. Researching Internet-Based Populations: Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Survey Research, Online Questionnaire Authoring Software Packages, and Web Survey Services. J. Comput. Commun. 2005, 10, JCMC1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of the Interior and Safety. Resident Registration Demographics. Available online: https://jumin.mois.go.kr/# (accessed on 11 August 2021).
- Embrain. The Largest Panel in Asia with 3 Million Panelists. Available online: http://www.embrain.com/eng/ (accessed on 26 May 2020).
- Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. Multivariate Data Analysis, 8th ed.; Cengage: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- American Association for Public Opinion Research. Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys. Available online: http://www.aapor.org/AAPOR_Main/media/publications/Standard-Definitions20169theditionfinal.pdf (accessed on 12 May 2019).
- Cochran, W.G. The Χ2 Test of Goodness of Fit. Ann. Math. Stat. 1952, 23, 315–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Mena, J.A. An Assessment of the Use of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling in Marketing Research. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2012, 40, 414–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ringle, C.M.; Wende, S.; Becker, J.M. SmartPLS 3.3.5. Available online: http://www.smartpls.com (accessed on 18 September 2021).
- Chin, W.W.; Marcolin, B.L.; Newsted, P.R. A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and Electronic-Mail Emotion/Adoption Study. Inf. Syst. Res. 2003, 14, 189–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Keil, M.; Tan, B.C.Y.; Wei, K.; Saarinen, T.; Tuunainen, V.; Wassenaar, A. A Cross-Cultural Study on Escalation of Commitment Behavior in Software Projects. MIS Q. 2000, 24, 299–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Stevens, J. Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, 5th ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A New Criterion for Assessing Discriminant Validity in Variance-Based Structural Equation Modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Geisser, S. A Predictive Approach to the Random Effect Model A. Biom. Trust 1974, 61, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stone, M. Cross-Validatory Choice and Assessment of Statistical Predictions. J. R. Stat. Soc. 1974, 36, 111–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J. A Power Primer. Psychol. Bull. 1992, 112, 155–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Construct | Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio (<0.9) | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
1. Awareness of public green space | ||||||||||
2. Extrinsic motivation | 0.548 | |||||||||
3. Intrinsic motivation | 0.628 | 0.520 | ||||||||
4. Attitude | 0.572 | 0.632 | 0.596 | |||||||
5. Subjective norm | 0.486 | 0.430 | 0.506 | 0.607 | ||||||
6. Perceived behavioral control | 0.502 | 0.522 | 0.517 | 0.574 | 0.399 | |||||
7. Positive anticipated emotion | 0.594 | 0.568 | 0.860 | 0.618 | 0.545 | 0.502 | ||||
8. Negative anticipated emotion | 0.409 | 0.248 | 0.377 | 0.456 | 0.519 | 0.306 | 0.415 | |||
9. Desire | 0.510 | 0.410 | 0.726 | 0.579 | 0.590 | 0.411 | 0.763 | 0.554 | ||
10. Behavioral intention | 0.677 | 0.732 | 0.754 | 0.689 | 0.603 | 0.503 | 0.755 | 0.442 | 0.694 | |
Cronbach’s alpha ≥ 0.7 | 0.856 | 0.899 | 0.909 | 0.849 | 0.884 | 0.766 | 0.927 | 0.942 | 0.914 | 0.852 |
Rho_A (reliability coefficient) ≥ 0.7 | 0.866 | 0.901 | 0.915 | 0.861 | 0.891 | 0.800 | 0.927 | 0.946 | 0.914 | 0.852 |
Composite reliability ≥ 0.7 | 0.898 | 0.926 | 0.937 | 0.899 | 0.920 | 0.846 | 0.948 | 0.958 | 0.939 | 0.894 |
AVE ≥ 0.5 | 0.638 | 0.717 | 0.787 | 0.691 | 0.742 | 0.581 | 0.82 | 0.852 | 0.795 | 0.629 |
Effect size (Q2) > 0 | - | - | - | 0.288 | - | - | - | - | 0.456 | 0.394 |
Constructs | Factor Loading | t-Value | Mean | SD * | Kurtosis | Skewness | VIF ** |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Awareness of public green space | |||||||
1. I am interested in public green space for walking/cycling. | 0.864 | 71.650 | 5.261 | 1.218 | 0.394 | −0.653 | 2.685 |
2. I am aware of public green spaces for walking/cycling. | 0.693 | 24.276 | 4.939 | 1.343 | 0.173 | −0.628 | 1.486 |
3. I care about public green trails for walking/cycling. | 0.866 | 75.457 | 5.427 | 1.164 | 0.640 | −0.682 | 2.701 |
4. Public green spaces provide cool areas in which to walk/cycle when it is hot. | 0.772 | 37.634 | 5.498 | 1.135 | 0.496 | −0.727 | 1.782 |
5. Public green spaces are attractive for walking/cycling at any time of year. | 0.787 | 35.861 | 5.450 | 1.154 | 0.503 | −0.692 | 1.846 |
Extrinsic motivation | |||||||
1. Walking/cycling improves my personal health. | 0.729 | 31.041 | 5.937 | 0.949 | 1.597 | −0.987 | 1.562 |
2. Walking/cycling contributes to the environment. | 0.903 | 70.813 | 5.533 | 1.120 | 0.460 | −0.665 | 3.565 |
3. Walking/cycling contributes to mitigating climate change. | 0.891 | 60.295 | 5.396 | 1.182 | 1.003 | −0.789 | 3.558 |
4. Walking/cycling contributes to lowering air pollution. | 0.895 | 94.862 | 5.512 | 1.212 | 0.896 | −0.849 | 3.520 |
5. Walking/cycling improves public health. | 0.802 | 42.136 | 5.144 | 1.118 | 0.120 | −0.333 | 1.999 |
Intrinsic motivation | |||||||
1. Walking/cycling is enjoyable for me. | 0.911 | 112.620 | 5.287 | 1.164 | 0.363 | −0.551 | 3.366 |
2. Walking/cycling brings me self-satisfaction. | 0.896 | 95.143 | 5.298 | 1.168 | 0.434 | −0.550 | 2.887 |
3. Walking/cycling makes me happy. | 0.915 | 132.335 | 5.169 | 1.178 | 0.199 | −0.387 | 3.484 |
4. I walk for refreshment. | 0.824 | 38.645 | 5.339 | 1.163 | 1.025 | −0.763 | 2.037 |
Attitude to active transport | |||||||
1. Walking/cycling is an affirmative behavior. | 0.881 | 90.493 | 5.690 | 1.009 | 1.041 | −0.759 | 2.563 |
2. Walking/cycling is a beneficial behavior. | 0.864 | 67.478 | 5.730 | 0.987 | 0.524 | −0.648 | 2.418 |
3. Walking/cycling is an essential behavior. | 0.713 | 26.581 | 4.763 | 1.428 | −0.231 | −0.397 | 1.498 |
4. Walking/cycling is a legitimate behavior. | 0.857 | 67.214 | 5.255 | 1.100 | 0.275 | −0.406 | 2.213 |
Subjective norm on active transport | |||||||
1. Most people who are important to me think I should walk/cycle. | 0.860 | 65.546 | 4.293 | 1.409 | −0.391 | −0.223 | 2.445 |
2. Most people who are important to me would want me to walk/cycle. | 0.897 | 82.026 | 4.516 | 1.331 | −0.028 | −0.288 | 3.016 |
3. Most people who are important to me support my walking/cycling. | 0.819 | 37.580 | 4.980 | 1.244 | 0.633 | −0.630 | 2.010 |
4. Most people who are important to me are proud that I go walking/cycling. | 0.869 | 63.156 | 4.429 | 1.324 | 0.314 | −0.345 | 2.187 |
Perceived behavioral control | |||||||
1. Walking/cycling or not is entirely up to me. | 0.652 | 16.000 | 5.954 | 0.997 | 0.931 | −0.990 | 1.412 |
2. I can walk/cycle whenever I want. | 0.786 | 29.999 | 5.320 | 1.317 | 0.266 | −0.798 | 1.683 |
3. I have the physical strength to walk/cycle. | 0.750 | 23.633 | 5.696 | 1.025 | 0.139 | −0.686 | 1.365 |
4. I have time to walk/cycle. | 0.848 | 49.348 | 5.281 | 1.137 | 0.268 | −0.542 | 1.696 |
Positive anticipated emotion | |||||||
1. If I walk/cycle, I will feel excited. | 0.900 | 85.682 | 5.157 | 1.203 | 0.393 | −0.521 | 3.098 |
2. If I walk/cycle, I will feel glad. | 0.920 | 117.165 | 5.210 | 1.152 | 0.728 | −0.556 | 3.782 |
3. If I walk/cycle, I will feel satisfied. | 0.887 | 88.516 | 5.461 | 1.031 | 0.669 | −0.582 | 2.747 |
4. If I walk/cycle, I will feel happy. | 0.915 | 124.078 | 5.252 | 1.140 | 0.349 | −0.449 | 3.576 |
Negative anticipated emotion | |||||||
1. If I cannot walk/cycle, I will be angry. | 0.921 | 120.119 | 3.989 | 1.736 | −0.848 | −0.035 | 3.881 |
2. If I cannot walk/cycle, I will be disappointed. | 0.932 | 157.084 | 4.607 | 1.695 | −0.762 | −0.390 | 4.200 |
3. If I cannot walk/cycle, I will be worried. | 0.902 | 76.368 | 4.539 | 1.687 | −0.869 | −0.243 | 3.285 |
4. If I cannot walk/cycle, I will be sad. | 0.937 | 174.769 | 4.458 | 1.750 | −0.848 | −0.278 | 4.488 |
Desire to walk/cycle | |||||||
1. I do want to walk/cycle. | 0.847 | 67.976 | 5.167 | 1.197 | 0.712 | −0.670 | 2.122 |
2. My desire to walk/cycle is passionate. | 0.914 | 130.799 | 4.525 | 1.367 | 0.022 | −0.431 | 3.495 |
3. I am enthusiastic about walking/cycling. | 0.886 | 70.491 | 4.038 | 1.382 | −0.267 | −0.146 | 3.151 |
4. I am eager to walk/cycle. | 0.916 | 128.309 | 4.258 | 1.397 | −0.201 | −0.308 | 3.827 |
Behavioral intention in active transport | |||||||
1. To increase my personal well-being, I am planning to walk/cycle. | 0.785 | 42.778 | 5.301 | 1.099 | 0.746 | −0.652 | 1.951 |
2. To improve my personal health, I will make an effort to walk/cycle. | 0.740 | 26.692 | 5.605 | 1.093 | 1.104 | −0.861 | 1.771 |
3. To mitigate climate change, I am willing to walk/cycle. | 0.822 | 54.767 | 4.900 | 1.275 | 0.310 | −0.588 | 2.574 |
4. To protect the environment, I do intend to walk/cycle. | 0.822 | 50.032 | 4.693 | 1.372 | −0.082 | −0.387 | 2.795 |
5. To increase public well-being, I am planning to walk/cycle. | 0.792 | 42.040 | 4.584 | 1.312 | −0.037 | −0.259 | 1.973 |
Perceived usefulness of smart applications | |||||||
1. I believe that using smart applications for walking/cycling would enable me to accomplish walking/cycling better. | 0.897 | 89.006 | 4.628 | 1.244 | 0.067 | −0.266 | 2.880 |
2. I believe that using smart applications for walking/cycling would improve my walking/cycling performance. | 0.885 | 73.279 | 4.866 | 1.22 | 0.197 | −0.358 | 2.871 |
3. I believe that using smart applications for walking/cycling would make it easier to do my walking/cycling. | 0.861 | 60.945 | 4.567 | 1.329 | −0.124 | −0.304 | 2.238 |
4. I believe that using smart applications for walking/cycling would enhance my effectiveness in walking/cycling. | 0.876 | 72.385 | 5.022 | 1.149 | 0.724 | −0.493 | 2.664 |
H5 | Path | High Group (A) | Low Group (B) | A–B | t-Value | p-Value | Hypothesis Test |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H5a | Awareness of public green space → Attitude | 0.206 *** | 0.076 ns | 0.130 | 25.705 | <0.001 | Supported |
H5b | Awareness of public green space → Desire | 0.017 ns | −0.068 ns | 0.085 | 20.052 | ns | Not supported |
H5c | Awareness of public green space → Behavioral intention | 0.202 *** | 0.099 ns | 0.102 | 25.726 | <0.001 | Supported |
H5d | Motivation for walking/cycling → Attitude | 0.470 *** | 0.585 *** | −0.115 | −25.561 | <0.001 | Supported |
H5e | Motivation for walking/cycling → Desire | 0.086 ns | 0.027 ns | 0.058 | 10.128 | ns | Not supported |
H5f | Motivation for walking/cycling → Behavioral intention | 0.494 *** | 0.561 *** | −0.067 | −15.812 | <0.001 | Supported |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kim, M.J.; Hall, C.M. Application of EMGB to Study Impacts of Public Green Space on Active Transport Behavior: Evidence from South Korea. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 7459. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127459
Kim MJ, Hall CM. Application of EMGB to Study Impacts of Public Green Space on Active Transport Behavior: Evidence from South Korea. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(12):7459. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127459
Chicago/Turabian StyleKim, Myung Ja, and C. Michael Hall. 2022. "Application of EMGB to Study Impacts of Public Green Space on Active Transport Behavior: Evidence from South Korea" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 12: 7459. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127459
APA StyleKim, M. J., & Hall, C. M. (2022). Application of EMGB to Study Impacts of Public Green Space on Active Transport Behavior: Evidence from South Korea. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(12), 7459. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127459