10
POPULATIONS AT RISK ACROSS THE LIFESPAN:CASE REPORTS Social Support for Physical Activity of Middle School Students Lorraine B. Robbins, Manfred Stommel, and Lauren M. Hamel ABSTRACT Objective: To explore gender and age differences in social support and their relationship with physical activity. Design and sample: This cross-sectional study with enhanced reliability due to repeated measures involved 105 boys and 101 girls. Measurements: Information on sources and forms of social support, as well as physical activity, was obtained from students, who completed the same questionnaire twice, 2 weeks apart. Results: Boys, compared with girls, were more likely to name fathers and less likely to identify sisters. Compared with older boys, older girls were less likely to identify fathers. Older girls were less likely than both younger girls and older boys to name brothers. Students who identified fathers reported more minutes and days of physical activity and had a stronger physical activity self-definition than those who did not name fathers. Students who selected peers and sisters had more minutes of physical activity and a stronger physical activity self-definition, respectively, than those who did not name peers and sisters. Transportation and encouragement were related to physical activity. Conclusions: Gender differences in social support are not uniform across age groups. Awareness of these differences can inform the development of appropriate physical activity programs. Key words: adolescent, exercise, physical activity, social support. Many youth are not achieving recommended levels of moderate to vigorous physical activity, a problem mag- nified by a decrease in physical activity from early to late adolescence (Pate et al., 2002). This decline is a major factor for weight gain in adolescence (Kimm et al., 2005), which tracks into adulthood (Serdula et al., 1993), adding to risks for comorbidities (Daniels, 2006). Increasing adolescent physical activity has become a public health priority (United States Department of Health and Human Services, 2000). Social support is a major factor influencing physical activity in middle school students (Duncan, Duncan, & Strycker, 2005). The most frequent sources are parents (Prochaska, Rodgers, & Sallis, 2002) and peers (Duncan et al., 2005). Additional support comes from siblings (Duncan et al., 2005), teachers or coa- ches, as well as other adults (Humbert et al., 2006). Beyond the established sources of support (e.g., from fathers, mothers, brothers, and sisters), information, such as how support configurations differ by gender and with advancing age during middle school, is lacking. Likewise, little is known about the effectiveness of differ- ent forms of support in promoting physical activity among middle school students. The purpose of this study was to explore social support in the context of age and gender differences and examine its effect on physical activity of middle school students. Sources and Forms of Social Support While parents and peers are important supporters of physical activity of middle school students, their respective influence works differently, since social support can take various forms (Duncan et al., 2005). Parents are often seen as role models (Anderssen & Wold, 1992) and providers of emotional support, Lorraine B. Robbins, D.N.Sc, R.N., C.F.N.P., is Assistant Professor, Michigan State University College of Nursing, East Lansing, Michigan. Manfred Stommel, Ph.D., is Asso- ciate Professor, Michigan State University College of Nurs- ing, East Lansing, Michigan. Lauren M. Hamel, is Doctoral Student, Michigan State University, Depart- ment of Communication, East Lansing, Michigan. Correspondence to: Lorraine B. Robbins, Michigan State University College of Nursing, 422A West Fee Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824. E-mail: [email protected] 451 Public Health Nursing Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 451–460 0737-1209/r 2008, The Authors Journal Compilation r 2008, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1446.2008.00729.x

Social Support for Physical Activity of Middle School Students

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

POPULATIONS AT RISK ACROSS THE LIFESPAN: CASE REPORTS

Social Support for Physical Activity ofMiddle School StudentsLorraine B. Robbins, Manfred Stommel, and LaurenM.Hamel

ABSTRACT Objective: To explore gender and age differences in social support and their relationshipwith physical activity. Design and sample: This cross-sectional study with enhanced reliability due torepeated measures involved 105 boys and 101 girls. Measurements: Information on sources and formsof social support, as well as physical activity, was obtained from students, who completed the samequestionnaire twice, 2 weeks apart. Results: Boys, compared with girls, were more likely to name fathersand less likely to identify sisters. Compared with older boys, older girls were less likely to identify fathers.Older girls were less likely than both younger girls and older boys to name brothers. Students whoidentified fathers reported more minutes and days of physical activity and had a stronger physical activityself-definition than those who did not name fathers. Students who selected peers and sisters had moreminutes of physical activity and a stronger physical activity self-definition, respectively, than those whodid not name peers and sisters. Transportation and encouragement were related to physical activity.Conclusions: Gender differences in social support are not uniform across age groups. Awareness of thesedifferences can inform the development of appropriate physical activity programs.

Key words: adolescent, exercise, physical activity, social support.

Many youth are not achieving recommended levels ofmoderate to vigorous physical activity, a problem mag-nified by a decrease in physical activity from early to lateadolescence (Pate et al., 2002). This decline is a majorfactor for weight gain in adolescence (Kimm et al.,2005), which tracks into adulthood (Serdula et al.,1993), adding to risks for comorbidities (Daniels,2006). Increasing adolescent physical activity hasbecome a public health priority (United StatesDepartment of Health and Human Services, 2000).

Social support is a major factor influencingphysical activity in middle school students (Duncan,

Duncan, & Strycker, 2005). The most frequent sourcesare parents (Prochaska, Rodgers, & Sallis, 2002) andpeers (Duncan et al., 2005). Additional support comesfrom siblings (Duncan et al., 2005), teachers or coa-ches, as well as other adults (Humbert et al., 2006).Beyond the established sources of support (e.g., fromfathers, mothers, brothers, and sisters), information,such as how support configurations differ by genderand with advancing age duringmiddle school, is lacking.Likewise, little is known about the effectiveness of differ-ent forms of support in promoting physical activityamong middle school students. The purpose of thisstudy was to explore social support in the context ofage and gender differences and examine its effect onphysical activity of middle school students.

Sources and Forms of Social Support

While parents and peers are important supportersof physical activity of middle school students, theirrespective influence works differently, since socialsupport can take various forms (Duncan et al., 2005).Parents are often seen as role models (Anderssen &Wold, 1992) and providers of emotional support,

Lorraine B. Robbins, D.N.Sc, R.N., C.F.N.P., is AssistantProfessor, Michigan State University College of Nursing,East Lansing,Michigan.Manfred Stommel, Ph.D., is Asso-ciateProfessor,MichiganStateUniversityCollege of Nurs-ing, East Lansing, Michigan. Lauren M. Hamel, isDoctoral Student, Michigan State University, Depart-ment of Communication, East Lansing, Michigan.Correspondence to:Lorraine B. Robbins, Michigan State University Collegeof Nursing, 422A West Fee Hall, East Lansing, MI48824. E-mail: [email protected]

451

Public Health Nursing Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 451–4600737-1209/r 2008, The AuthorsJournal Compilationr 2008, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1446.2008.00729.x

which may include watching their children or en-couraging their children to be active (Duncan et al.,2005; McGuire, Hannan, Neumark-Sztainer, Coss-row, & Story, 2002). Parents also provide logisticsupport, which may involve transportation (Davison,Cutting, & Birch, 2003; Prochaska et al., 2002). Bycontrast, peers usually provide support in the formof ‘‘playmates’’ or participants in physical activity(Voorhees et al., 2005).

Prochaska et al. (2002) found that, althoughparental and peer support was positively correlatedwith adolescent physical activity, peer support was astronger predictor. Frenn et al. (2005) also identifiedpeer support as a consistent predictor of activityacross sex and age groups. In a qualitative study,Humbert et al. (2006) reported that most adolescentswanted some type of adult (e.g., parent, coach, collegestudent, or teacher) to be involved in their physicalactivities. The literature suggests that perceptionsregarding supportive persons may differ based onadolescent gender and age and that some forms ofsupport may be better predictors of physical activitythan others at certain ages or developmental periods(e.g., middle school). No analysis was found thatcompared perceptions of support among youngerand older boys and girls of middle school age.

Gender Differences

Boys of middle school age are more physically activethan their female counterparts (McGuire et al., 2002;Prochaska et al., 2002; Raudsepp, 2006), and somegender-specific differences have been describedregarding sources and forms of social supportreceived (Duncan et al., 2005; McGuire et al., 2002).Consistent findings were noted in two studies inwhich adolescent girls reported more help with trans-portation or parental logistic support (includingtransportation) than did boys (Duncan et al., 2005;Raudsepp, 2006).

Raudsepp (2006) found that only explicit model-ing of fathers (engaging in physical activity to encour-age similar behavior in their children) (Davison et al.,2003) was more common for boys than girls, butadded that fathers’ modeling exceeded the impactof mothers’ modeling for both sons and daughters.Contradictory information was reported in anotherstudy (McGuire et al., 2002), in which no relationshipemerged between parental physical activity and thatof either adolescent boys or girls. Only parental

encouragement had a positive effect for both boysand girls. Despite findings that the gender of thesupport person may affect adolescent physical activ-ity, no study was found that examined the influence ofsupport received from fathers, mothers, brothers, orsisters on the physical activity of middle school youth.

Age Differences

Results from two studies indicated that parental sup-port had less effect than that of peers on adolescentphysical activity (Duncan et al., 2005; Prochaskaet al., 2002). Duncan et al. (2005) also found thatyounger adolescents perceived greater social supportfrom parents and siblings than did older adolescents.In a study exploring the impact of various forms ofsupport from friends on middle school girls’ physicalactivity, Voorhees et al. (2005) found that frequencyof physical activity with friends was the most signifi-cant predictor for both sixth- and eighth-grade girls.No comparable study including younger and oldermiddle school boys was discovered.

Further Examination

While the current study is restricted to 11- to 14-year-olds, this age represents a time when peers begin tohave greater influence than parents, and genderdifferentiation becomes more pronounced. We focuson the following questions: (1) Which persons aremost likely to provide support for middle school boys’and girls’ physical activity? (2) Do the referenced sup-port persons differ based on the adolescents’ ages andgenders? (3) What sources and forms of support arerelated to physical activity?

Methods

The study used a cross-sectional survey with a short-term follow-up for enhanced reliability of the keymeasures. The Michigan State University Biomedicaland Health Institutional Review Board approvedprocedures for the protection of participants. Thestudy was conducted in a public middle school in aMidwestern rural location no more than 5 miles froman urban area with a population of 22,362 (NationalCenter for Education Statistics [NCES], 2005–2006).According to the 2005–2006 NCES report, 398(31.4%) of the 1,269 students in this school were Blackor African American, 814 (64.1%) were White or

452 Public Health Nursing Volume 25 Number 5 September/October 2008

European American, and the remainder were mem-bers of other races. Thirty-two percent were eligiblefor the free or reduced-price lunch.

The school principal provided a letter indicatingthat the study could be conducted during physicaleducation (PE) class time, and both PE teachers atthe school supported the endeavor. At the time ofthe study, a total of 500 middle school students wereenrolled in PE during the school year. All wererequired to take PE for one semester of the schoolyear. Half met the requirement in the first or fallsemester, while the remainder took PE during thesecond or the spring semester.

After being trained by the first author, the two PEteachers followed a written protocol to informtheir students that all were being invited to partici-pate in a research study, which involved completing asurvey about their thoughts and feelings related tophysical activity or exercise. PE teachers distributedenvelopes to their students that contained a letter toparents/guardians attached to consent and assentforms describing the study. PE teachers then toldthe students that they or their parent/guardiansneeded to contact the researchers with any study-re-lated questions.

Of the 500 students receiving envelopes, 262(52.4%) returned signed consent/assent forms totheir respective PE teacher. Fifty-one students wereabsent from school and 5 refused to participate at thetime of data collection. The final response rate was41.2%, with a total of 206 students completing thesame questionnaire in its entirety at two time points,2 weeks apart. This time period has been recom-mended as a matter of convenience for exploringshort-range stability (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).Data were collected in November 2005 (n5 108) andFebruary 2006 (n598).

Before the data collection, the first author and aresearch team member explained the study to all in-terested students who returned signed assent andparent/guardian consent forms. Students were toldthat participation was voluntary and could be stoppedat any time without penalty or effect on theiracademic grades or the school services they receive.Researchers remained in the room to answer anyquestions posed by the students during questionnairecompletion. To enhance student ability to attend toand complete the items, researchers read the instruc-tions for questionnaire completion along with eachitem to small groups of participants. The researchers

asked participants to be sure to complete items on onepage before progressing to another page.

MeasuresTo assess social support, students were asked to nameup to three people who ‘‘helped them the most toexercise, be active, or do sports’’ from 18 categories ofpersons (Robbins, Gretebeck, Pender, & Kazanis,2006). For parsimony and robustness purposes, thesecategories were collapsed into eight for the analyses:(1) father/stepfather, (2) mother/stepmother, (3)brother/stepbrother, (4) sister/stepsister, (5) peersof the same age (e.g., cousins, friends, and team-mates), (6) coach or gym teacher, (7) other adults notpart of the family (e.g., teachers, doctors/nurses,school nurses, counselors, guardians), and (8) otheradult family members (e.g., grandparents and auntsor uncles). No student reported support from anysource other than those listed in the survey. Only sixstudents reported that they did not have any sourceof support. Each category was coded 15a personin named category supported physical activity ofrespondent or 05no support for physical activityfrom person in this category.

Students reported the type of support given byeach person identified. Choices were: (1) taking ortransporting the student to play sports or exercise, (2)exercising or playing active games or sports with thestudent, (3) encouraging the student to exercise orplay hard, (4) watching the student exercise, playactive games, or do sports, and (5) congratulating orpraising the student for getting exercise or physicalactivity. Students indicated how often each personperformed each of the five tasks (05never, 15 some-times, 25often). Responses concerning encouraging,watching, or praising the student were highly consistentwith average correlations 4.87 (Cronbach’s a5 .95)and were thus combined into a general ‘‘support in theform of encouragement’’ scale. While support in theform of ‘‘transportation’’ and ‘‘participating in physicalactivity’’ was also correlated with encouragement, asso-ciations were not as strong (r5 .61 and .63) and theitems or the three were kept as separate dimensions ofsupport. In the analysis, social support measures re-ferred to types of support provided, regardless of whoprovides the support.

In written responses to the measure, studentsidentified support persons at one session and thenagain at a second session 2 weeks later. The levelof agreement was high between the two time

Robbins et al.: Social Support for Physical Activity 453

periods (ks4.6), but not uniformly so. Students wereconsistent in their choices of father and mother, butless so with respect to coaches, peers, and othersupport persons. In the analysis, we focused only onpersons named repeatedly in both sessions.

Three measures of physical activity were used. Oneexplored how adolescents view themselves in terms ofphysical activity (physical activity self-definition), whilethe other two consisted of self-reports of physicalactivity. The physical activity self-definition measureis based on responses to two statements and onequestion (repeated at both administrations): (1) ‘‘Iam someone who is an exerciser or physically activeperson,’’ (2) ‘‘I am someone who will be an exerciseror physically active person as an adult,’’ and (3) ‘‘Howimportant is being someone who is an exerciser orphysically active person to you?’’ Items were adaptedfrom a study that explored physical activity self-definition among adolescents (Robbins, Pis, Pender,& Kazanis, 2004). All three items allowed for threeordinal response categories, including: 05does not (orwill not) describe me, 15describes (or will describe)me a little, and 25describes (or will describe) me alot for the first two statements, as well as 05does notmatter at all, 15matters a little, and 25matters a lotfor the latter question. Cronbach’s a of .81 testifies to ahigh internal consistency in responses.

Physical activity was assessed in two ways: (1) asingle item asking ‘‘In a typical or usual week, howmany days do you do physical activity for a total of60minutes (1 hour) or more per day?’’ (responsechoices ranged from 0 to 7) (Hagler, Calfas, Norman,Sallis, & Patrick, 2006); and (2) a Child and Adoles-cent Activity Log adapted from the instrument usedby Garcia, George, Coviak, Antonakos, and Pender(1997). Content and criterion validity and test-retestreliability have been established (Garcia et al., 1997).

Using the log, students identified physical activi-ties (from a list of 22) that they had participated induring the past two weekdays and last Sunday.The same list was used for each day. Researchersrecommend that physical activity surveys for earlyadolescents limit their recall span to the previous2 days, since beyond 2 days, the ability to accuratelyrecall this information is reduced (McMurray et al.,2004). Since weekday physical activity is likely todiffer from weekend physical activity, informationabout physical activity was sought for two weekdaysand the last Sunday before data collection. In order tobolster students’ recall ability and meet teacher

requests that Monday (first day of school week) beavoided, Wednesdays were chosen as data collectiondays on which students could provide informationabout their physical activity during the previous twoweekdays, and yet still be able to recall the different,possiblymore salient, physical activity done last Sunday.However, due to unexpected changes in PE classactivities (e.g., guest speaker or student assembly),some data collection had to occur on a Tuesday duringwhich students reported the physical activity that theydid yesterday, the day before yesterday or Sunday,and last Friday. After identifying their physical activ-ities for a particular day, participants reported theirnumber of minutes of participation and rated theintensity of each activity (moderate or vigorous). Thisinformation was combined to obtain a single estimateof how many minutes each respondent spent inmoderate or vigorous physical activity on the twoprior weekdays and one weekend day at each of thetwo administrations of the log (6 days total).

AnalysisFrequencies and percentages were used to show thedistribution of support persons in the sample, followedby an averaged ranking of the roles these persons play insupporting the student’s physical activities. Logisticregression models (Hosmer & Lemeshow, 2001) wereused to identify which types of support persons are im-portant to the students based on age group and gender.Stepwise linear regression models were used to exam-ine potential correlates of physical activity (Draper &Smith, 1998). Independent variables having p-values4.10 were excluded from the regression models. p-val-ues listed are based on log-likelihood ratios associatedwith the respective logit regression, so that interactioneffects between gender and age groups could be tested.

Results

The sample, 105 (51%) boys and 101 (49%) girls, wasdivided into 43 (20.9%) sixth, 84 (40.8%) seventh,and 79 (38.3%) eighth graders. Approximately half(n597; 47.1%) described themselves as White orEuropean American, while one fifth identified them-selves as Black or African American (n540; 19.4%).The remainder (n569; 33.5%) reported ‘‘other’’ ormultiple races or were ‘‘not sure’’ about their race. Agedistribution was as follows: 11 years (17.0%), 12 years(35.4%), 13 years (39.8%), and 14 years (7.8%).

454 Public Health Nursing Volume 25 Number 5 September/October 2008

Table 1 shows persons or categories of personsnamed by students as supporting them in physicalactivity. Students identified parents, coaches/gymteachers, and peers as the most important supportpersons. Boys were significantly more likely than girlsto name fathers (po.01) and much less likely to namesisters (po.01).

Table 2 includes age as an additional variablerelated to support person identification. Because oflimited sample size, the two younger and two olderage categories were combined, respectively, into agroup of 11- and 12-year-olds and a group of 13- and14-year-olds. The table shows the percentage ofyounger or older boys and girls who identified variouspersons or person groups as supportive in differentways, as well as descriptive information for the threemeasures related to physical activity. Younger boysreported the greatest number of minutes of physicalactivity during six reference days, as well as days perweek with at least 1 hr of moderate to vigorous phys-ical activity. Table 3 indicates that several main andinteraction effects emerged as statistically significant:The odds of older boys identifying their fathers assupporting them in physical activities are 2.24 timesgreater than that of older girls. The odds of older girlsselecting their brothers as support persons are 0.19and 5.32 times lower than that of younger girls andolder boys, respectively.

Table 4 shows results from three stepwise linearregression models, focusing on three physical activityoutcome variables: total minutes of physical activityduring six reference days (M5434.9; SD5355.7),number of days per week with at least 1 hr of moderate

TABLE 1. Persons or Groups of Persons Helping MiddleSchool StudentsWith Physical Activity: By Gender of Students

Reportedsupportperson

Girls(n5 101)

Boys(n5 105)

Total(N5 206)

w2p-

valuea% % n (%)

Father/stepfather

44.6 64.8 113 (54.9) 8.5 o.01

Mother/stepmother

56.4 49.5 109 (52.9) 1.0 .32

Brother/stepbrother

21.8 29.5 53 (25.7) 1.6 .20

Sister/stepsister

29.7 3.8 32 (15.5)22.4 o.01a

Coach/gymteacher

55.4 49.5 108 (52.4) 0.7 .40

Peers 62.4 52.4 118 (57.3) 2.1 .15Other family 11.9 21.0 34 (16.5) 3.1 .08Othernonfamily

7.9 10.5 19 (9.2) 0.4 .53

Note. df5 1.aFischer’s exact test.

TABLE2. Proportions of Persons or Groups of PersonsHelping Middle School Students With Physical Activity: ByGender and Age Group of Students (N5 206)

Supportpersons

Girls Boys

11–12 years(n5 54)

13–14 years(n547)

11–12 years(n5 54)

13–14 years(n5 51)

% % % %

Father/stepfather�

51.9 36.2 63.0 66.7

Mother/stepmother

63.0 48.9 50.0 49.0

Brother/stepbrother�

33.3 8.5 29.6 29.4

Sister/stepsister

25.9 29.8 3.7 3.9

Coach/gymteacher

50.0 61.7 51.9 47.1

Peers 57.4 68.1 51.9 52.9Other family 11.1 12.8 18.5 23.5Othernonfamily

3.7 12.8 9.3 11.8

Physicalactivity M SD M SD M SD M SD

Minutes(6 days)

377.5 282.9 430.0 314.8 507.4 455.7 423.3 336.4

Numberof daysper week 3.8 1.9 3.9 1.8 4.1 1.8 3.7 2.1

Self-definition 1.5 0.4 1.4 0.4 1.6 0.5 1.6 0.5

Note. �po.05.

TABLE3. Logistic Regression of Selected Model Variables ofPersons or Groups of Persons Helping Middle School StudentsWith Physical Activity: By Gender and Age Group of Students(N5 206)

Variable B SELikelihood

ratiop-

valueOddsratio

95%CI

Father/stepfatherGender �0.35 0.89 0.15 .70 0.71 0.12–4.05Age �0.64 0.41 2.48 .12 0.53 0.24–1.17Age�Gender

0.81 0.41 3.84 .05 2.24 1.00–5.00

Brother/stepbrotherGender � 1.84 1.03 3.22 .07 0.16 0.02–1.19Age � 1.68 0.60 7.93 o.01 0.19 0.06–0.60Age�Gender

1.67 0.74 5.17 .02 5.32 1.26–22.45

Robbins et al.: Social Support for Physical Activity 455

to vigorous physical activity (M53.9; SD5 1.9), andphysical activity self-definition (M5 1.5; SD50.5).Initial models included the following (demographic)independent variables: (1) student age group (15 13–14 years old, 05 11–12 years old), (2) student gender(15male, 05 female), (3) Student Gender�Age Groupinteraction, (4) father’s or stepfather’s education (15atleast some college, 05high school or less), (5)mother’s or stepmother’s education (15at least somecollege, 05high school or less), and (6) student’s/family’s race or ethnicity (15minority, 05white). Inaddition, the analysis focuses on the eight dichotomousvariables (Table 1), which indicate whether (15yes) ornot (05no) students identified the person or personsin question as supporting them.

Table 4 shows a few significant independent vari-ables accounting for the variance in the dependentvariables. Using p-values4.10 as exclusion criteria inthe stepwise regression, we excluded the followingindependent variables from the models: mother’sor stepmother’s education, coach/gym teacher, andother nonfamily. A significant effect emerged forfather support on total minutes of physical activityduring six reference days (t52.03, p5 .04), number

of days of physical activity (t5 2.55, p5 .01), andphysical activity self-definition (t5 2.15, p5 .03).Peer support was related to physical activity: Studentswith peer support exercised more (t5 1.99, po.05)during the reference period (6 days) than otherstudents. Students who identified sisters as helpful(majority being girls) had stronger physical activityself-definitions (t52.17, p5 .03) than did those whodid not select sisters.

In the three models reported in Table 5, wecontrolled for age, gender, and race/ethnicity todetermine the degree to which different forms ofsupport explain the variations in the reported valuesof the criterion outcomes. Transportation explainedthe variance in minutes of physical activity during sixreference days (t5 1.99, po.05), while encouragementexplained the number of days per week with at least1 hr of moderate to vigorous physical activity (t52.14,p5 .03). Both transportation (t52.01, po.05) and en-couragement (t52.54, p5 .01) explained the variationin physical activity self-definition.

Discussion

Gender and age differencesOur data shed light on sources and forms of supportfor physical activity by age and gender. A salient find-ing was the magnitude of the difference in support

TABLE4. Sources of Social Support: Relationship WithMinutes of Physical Activity (6 Days), Number of Days PerWeek With at Least 1Hr of Physical Activity, and Physical Ac-tivity Self-Definition (N5 206)

Independentvariables

Minutesof physicalactivitya

Number ofdays ofphysicalactivityb

Physicalactivity self-definitionc

B SE B SE B SE

Father support 104.2 51.4� .6 .3� .2 .1�

Mother support � .5 .3Brother support 80.0 57.5Sister support .2 .1�

Other family 99.6 65.6 � .1 .1Peer support 98.9 49.8�

Student’s agegroup

71.9 69.5 � .1 .1

Student’s gender 103.1 65.8 .1 .1Gender�AgeGroup

� 158.9 96.2 � .6 .3�

Race/ethnicity .1 .1Father’seducation

96.8 51.4 .1 .1

Note. aR2 5 .083; F5 2.229; po.03. bR2 5 .051; F5 3.607;po.02. cR2 5 .115; F5 3.683; po.01. �po.05.

TABLE 5. Forms of Social Support: Relationship With Min-utes of Physical Activity (6 Days), Number of Days Per WeekWith at Least 1Hr of Physical Activity, and Physical ActivitySelf-Definition (N5 206)

Independentvariables

Minutesof physicalactivitya

Number ofdays

physicalactivityb

Physicalactivityself-

definitionc

B SE B SE B SE

Transportationsupport

129.3 65.1� .2 .3 .1 .1�

Participationsupport

35.6 74.7 .1 .4 .0 .1

Encouragement 132.6 75.6 .8 .4� .3 .1�

Student’s agegroup

44.3 64.7 .1 .3 � .1 .1

Student’s gender 131.1 63.0� .4 .3 .1 .1Gender�Age

Group� 120.5 91.1 � .7 .5 .0 .1

Race/ethnicity 27.7 46.1 .2 .2 .1 .1

Note. aR2 5 .158; F5 5.300; po.01. bR2 5 .109; F5 3.470;po.01. cR2 5 .188; F56.542; po.01. �po.05.

456 Public Health Nursing Volume 25 Number 5 September/October 2008

from fathers and brothers reported by older girls ascompared with the other groups. In a study of middleand high school students, McGuire et al. (2002) notedthat parental-adolescent relationships were strongerfor boys than girls, but did not examine whetherthis relationship differed based on parental gender.Davison et al. (2003) found that girls are more likelyto continue physical activity when at least one of theparents offers support, which can either be material-istic or logistical (e.g., rides to practice) or involve set-ting an example.

Contrary to all other groups, older girls identifiedpeers and gym teachers or coaches rather than familymembers as their most important sources of support.As girls increase in age and sports begin to segregateby gender, fathers may be less likely to offer supportto their daughters due to difficulty identifying withactivities their daughters engage in. Emphasis mayneed to be placed on encouraging mothers to continueto support their older teenage daughters.

The findings concerning boys are inconsistentwith previous reports that adolescents experience ashift in social support from more to less dependenceon their families (McGuire et al., 2002). Althoughspecific gender differences were not explored, Duncanet al. (2005) found that older middle school studentsperceived less parent and sibling support than youngerones, and middle school students in general who per-ceived increased support from friends had higher lev-els of physical activity. The results from the currentstudy indicated that this anticipated transitionaway from family members occurred only for girls.Research is needed to determine whether or notsame-sex parents offer more support than oppositesex parents when their sons or daughters are involvedin a sport or a physical activity perceived as specific totheir own sex.

Older girls reported almost an hour more ofphysical activity than younger girls during the 6 daysabout which they were asked, whereas older boysreported more than an hour less of physical activitythan younger boys. This finding contradicts themajority of other studies in which physical activitydiminished for both boys and girls with increasing ageacross adolescence (McGuire et al., 2002; Prochaskaet al., 2002; Raudsepp, 2006). Also, with advancingage, boys and girls usually transition from relying onparents to using peers as major sources of support(McGuire et al., 2002). In this study, older boys con-tinued to identify parents, especially fathers, as main

support persons, and yet reported fewer minutes anddays of physical activity than younger boys. This novelfinding differs from other studies, which indicate thatparental support, especially from fathers, is a salientpredictor of youth physical activity (Beets, Vogel,Forlaw, Pitetti, & Cardinal, 2006; Ferreira et al.,2006). What effects changes in social support haveon the physical activity of boys and girls as theyprogress through middle school and beyond meritfurther investigation.

Social support and physical activityRegardless of how physical activity was assessed ineach of the three models (Table 4), father supportsignificantly explained the variance in the reportedmeasures. This finding is consistent with what wasnoted in another study (Wilson & Dollman, 2007), inwhich father support was identified as the mostsignificant predictor of physical activity among Viet-namese Australian adolescent boys. Given the strongimpact of father support in these studies, consider-ation to the potential role of fathers in interventionsto increase adolescent physical activity may bewarranted (Wilson & Dollman, 2007).

Encouragement and transportation emerged asstronger correlates of physical activity than actualparticipation in the behavior with the students.Consistent with these findings, Hoefer, McKenzie,Sallis, Marshall, and Conway (2001) found parentaltransportation to be one of the strongest determinantsof physical activity. Parental encouragement has alsobeen linked to high levels of physical activity inadolescents (McGuire et al., 2002; Prochaska et al.,2002). Both forms are more likely to be the domain ofthe mother than the father, as noted by Davison et al.(2003) in a study involving 9-year-old girls and theirparents. Still, there is concern that youth physicalactivity has become dependent on parents’ ability orwillingness to transport their children.

Strengths and limitationsThe study had strengths and weaknesses. A strengthwas the exploration of numerous sources of socialsupport beyond parents, siblings, and friends (recom-mended by Duncan et al., 2005). Still, some forms ofsupport (e.g., monetary) that may be important foryouth physical activity (Duncan et al., 2005) were notaddressed. Since instrument brevity and simplicitytend to result in increased data accuracy from youth(Sallis & Owen, 1999), we chose to avoid adding items

Robbins et al.: Social Support for Physical Activity 457

to the social support measure to keep the responseburden low (Haerens, Deforche, Vandelanotte, Maes,& De Bourdeaudhuij, 2007).

A limitation was that all social support and physicalactivity indicators were ascertained through self-report.The two physical activity measures used in this studyrepresent alternative, but acceptable, ways to assessphysical activity. They differ in that one provides ageneral estimate of number of days of physical activitydone in a typical week, while the other requires recall ofminutes of actual engagement in specific physical activ-ities over the past few days. Obtaining a generalestimate may yield important information, if, for somereason (e.g., illness, break from a sport), a student’sphysical activity over the past few days does not reflectthe typical pattern. However, one limitation is that itdoes not include a list of physical activities that can beused by a respondent to enhance recall ability. Anotheris that it fails to provide researchers with informationregarding the number of minutes a student has actuallyengaged in a particular physical activity. Because bothmeasures have strengths and limitations and noevidence was found that health professionals can relymore on one than the other, both were used. The rea-sons for the differing regression results between somevariables (e.g., Gender�Age and peer support) and thephysical activity measures (Table 4) cannot be deter-mined from this study. The findings are, however, notsurprising in lieu of noted differences among measures.

Owing to this study’s cross-sectional design, nocausal conclusions related to social support and phys-ical activity can be drawn. For example, the pattern ofassociations may reflect the following two possibil-ities: (1) Support from fathers leads to high levels ofphysical activity among children or (2) highly activechildren subsequently elicit support from their fathers(Davison et al., 2003). To answer the questions raisedin this study, longitudinal designs are needed, such asthose examining whether or not parental support canprotect children against the reported decline in phys-ical activity across adolescence (Pate et al., 2002).

While student responses to questions about phys-ical activity and social support showed stability over a2-week period, the perception of social support cannotbe entirely separated from its desirability amongteenage respondents. It is unclear whether the highsupport of fathers reported by older boys reflectswishful thinking or reality, while the low support fromfathers and brothers reported by older girls mayreflect development toward greater gender identity.

In addition, even though recall of activity involvedtwo time periods (2 weeks apart) of 3 days each andshowed reasonable consistency, objective measures,such as accelerometers, are preferable (Prochaskaet al., 2002).

Finally, the racial composition of the sample wasat variance with the percentages listed in the popula-tion-based NCES report for this school. Whether thesedifferences represent self-selection bias in the sampleis not clear. While the percentages of both Europeanand African Americans in the sample were muchlower than the comparable NCES numbers, a plausibleexplanation is that these differences resulted from thefact that the NCES data collection effort did not allowfor a nonspecific or a multiracial category.

Conclusion

If confirmed in other studies, the results have impor-tant implications for health professionals. They offeran insight into the relationship between sources andforms of social support and physical activity amongyounger and older middle school boys and girls. Withthe exception of social support from fathers perceivedby older girls, the relatively high percentages of boysand girls identifying parents as sources of supportindicate that parents still play important roles withregard to the physical activity of their children ofmiddle school age. Health professionals can informparents of the importance of continuing to supporttheir adolescents by encouraging physical activity andassisting with transportation. Interventions to improveparents’ time management may be warranted.

Research using longitudinal designs is needed toassess change in social support across time (Voorheeset al., 2005). Given the changing nature of family andsocial contexts and implications for interventions toenhance physical activity, continuing investigation ofthe role of significant others in providing variousforms of support to youth of different ages is impera-tive (Duncan et al., 2005).

Acknowledgments

Support for conducting this study was received fromMichigan State University College of Nursing Funds.

The authors would like to acknowledge Ms. BlairMorley, Michigan State University UndergraduateNursing Honors Student, for her assistance with dataentering.

458 Public Health Nursing Volume 25 Number 5 September/October 2008

References

Anderssen, N., & Wold, B. (1992). Parental andpeer influences on leisure-time physical activityin young adolescents. Research Quar-terly for Exercise and Sport, 63(4), 341–348.

Beets, M. W., Vogel, R., Forlaw, L., Pitetti, K. H., &Cardinal, B. J. (2006). Social support andyouth physical activity: The role of providerand type. American Journal of Health Behav-ior, 30(3), 278–289.

Daniels, S. R. (2006). The consequences of child-hood overweight and obesity. The Future ofChildren, 16(1), 47–67.

Davison, K. K., Cutting, T. M., & Birch, L. L. (2003).Parents’ activity-related parenting practicespredict girls’ physical activity. Medicine andScience in Sports and Exercise, 35(9), 1589–1595.

Draper, N. R., & Smith, H. (1998). Applied regressionanalysis (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley & Sons.

Duncan, S. C., Duncan, T. E., & Strycker, L. A. (2005).Sources and types of social support in youthphysical activity. Health Psychology, 24(1),3–10.

Ferreira, I., van der Horst, K., Wendel-Vos, W.,Kremers, S., van Lenthe, F. J., & Brug, J.(2006). Environmental correlates of physicalactivity in youth—a review and update. ObesityReviews, 8(2), 129–154.

Frenn, M., Malin, S., Villarruel, A. M., Slaikeu, K., Mc-Carthy, S., Freeman, J., et al. (2005). Determi-nants of physical activity and low-fat dietamong low income African American and His-panic middle school students. Public HealthNursing, 22(2), 89–97.

Garcia, A. W., George, T. R., Coviak, C., Antonakos, C.,& Pender, N. J. (1997). Development of thechild/adolescent activity log: A comprehensiveand feasible measure of leisure-time physicalactivity. International Journal of BehavioralMedicine, 4(4), 323–338.

Haerens, L., Deforche, B., Vandelanotte, C., Maes, L.,& De Bourdeaudhuij, I. (2007). Acceptability,feasibility and effectiveness of a computer-tailored physical activity intervention inadolescents. Patient Education and Coun-seling, 66(3), 303–310.

Hagler, A. S., Calfas, K. J., Norman, G. J., Sallis, J. F., &Patrick, K. (2006). Construct validity of physicalactivity and sedentary behaviors staging mea-sures for adolescents. Annals of BehavioralMedicine, 31(2), 186–193.

Hoefer, W. R., McKenzie, T. L., Sallis, J. F.,Marshall, S. J., & Conway, T. L. (2001). Paren-tal provision of transportation for adolescentactivity. American Journal of Preventive Med-icine, 21(1), 48–51.

Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2001). Appliedlogistic regression (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley& Sons.

Humbert,M. L., Chad, K. E., Spink, K. S.,Muhajarine, N.,Anderson, K. D., Bruner, M. W., et al. (2006).Factors that influence physical activity partici-pation among high- and low-SES youth. Qual-itative Health Research, 16(4), 467–483.

Kimm, S. Y. S., Glynn,N.W., Obarzanek, E., Krista, A.M.,Daniels, S. R., Barton, B. A., et al. (2005). Rela-tion between the changes in physical activityand body-mass index during adolescence:A multicentre longitudinal study. Lancet,366(9482), 301–307.

McGuire, M. T., Hannan, P. J., Neumark-Sztainer, D.,Cossrow, N. H. F., & Story, M. (2002). Parentalcorrelates of physical activity in a racially/ethnically diverse adolescent sample. Journalof Adolescent Health, 30(4), 253–261.

McMurray, R. G., Ring, K. B., Treuth,M. S., Welk, G. J.,Pate, R. R., Schmitz, K. H., et al. (2004). Com-parison of two approaches to structured physi-cal activity surveys for adolescents. Medicineand Science in Sports and Exercise, 36(12),2135–2143.

National Center for Education Statistics [NCES]. Publicschool data 2005–2006 school year. RetrievedAugust 5, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometrictheory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Pate, R. R., Freedson, P. S., Sallis, J. F., Taylor, W. C.,Sirard, J., Trost, S. G., et al. (2002). Compliancewith physical activity guidelines: Prevalence ina population of children and youth. Annals ofEpidemiology, 12(5), 303–308.

Prochaska, J. J., Rodgers, M.W., & Sallis, J. F. (2002).Association of parent and peer supportwith adolescent physical activity. ResearchQuarterly for Exercise and Sport, 73(2), 206–210.

Raudsepp, L. (2006). The relationship between socio-economic status, parental support and adoles-cent physical activity. Acta Paediatrica, 95(1),93–98.

Robbins, L. B., Gretebeck, K. A., Pender, N. J., &Kazanis, A. S. (2006). Girls on the move pro-gram to increase physical activity participation.Nursing Research, 55(3), 206–216.

Robbins et al.: Social Support for Physical Activity 459

Robbins, L. B., Pis,M. B., Pender, N. J., & Kazanis, A. S.(2004). Physical activity self-definition amongadolescents. Research and Theory for NursingPractice: An International Journal, 18(4),317–330.

Sallis, J. F., & Owen, N. (1999). Physical activity andbehavioral medicine. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.

Serdula, M. K., Ivery, D., Coates, R. J., Freedman,D. S., Williamson, D. F., & Byers, T. (1993).Do obese children become obese ad-ults? A review of the literature. AmericanJournal of Preventive Medicine, 22(2),167–177.

United States Department of Health and HumanServices. (2000). Healthy people 2010 (Con-ference edition, in two volumes). Washington,DC: Author.

Voorhees, C. C., Murray, D., Welk, G., Birnbaum, A.,Ribisl, K.M., Johnson, C. C., et al. (2005). The roleof peer social network factors and physical activityin adolescent girls. American Journal of HealthBehavior, 29(2), 183–190.

Wilson, A. N., & Dollman, J. (2007). Social influenceson physical activity in Anglo- and Vietnamese-Australian adolescent males in a single sexschool. Journal of Science and Medicine inSport, 10(3), 147–155.

460 Public Health Nursing Volume 25 Number 5 September/October 2008