miun.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Methods for determining route distances in active commuting: Their validity and reproducibility
Research Unit for Movement, Health and Environment, The Åstrand Laboratory, GIH - The Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden, School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Mid Sweden University, Faculty of Human Sciences, Department of Health Sciences.
2011 (English)In: Journal of Transport Geography, ISSN 0966-6923, E-ISSN 1873-1236, Vol. 19, no 4, p. 563-574Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Distance is a variable of pivotal importance in transport studies. Therefore, after checking the validity of a potential criterion method for measuring active commuting route distances, this method was used to assess the validity and reproducibility of four methods of approximating the commuting route distances covered by pedestrians and bicyclists. The methods assessed were: self-estimated distance, straight-line distance, GIS shortest-route distance, and GPS-measured distance. For this purpose, participants were recruited when walking or bicycling in Stockholm, Sweden. Questionnaires and individually-adjusted maps were sent twice to 133 participants. The distances of map-drawn commuting routes functioned as criterion distances. The participants were also asked to estimate their distances. The straight-line distance between origin and destination was measured using map-drawn routes. The shortest route between home addresses and workplace addresses was calculated with three GIS algorithms. Eighty-six trips were measured with GPS. The main results were that test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) exceeded 0.99 for all methods, except for self-estimated distance (ICC = 0.76). No order effects existed between test and retest. Significant differences were, however, noted between criterion distance and self-estimated distance (114 ± 63%), straight-line distance (79.1 ± 10.5%), GIS shortest route (112 ± 18% to 121 ± 22%) and GPS distance (105 ± 4%). We conclude that commonly-used distance estimation methods produce systematic errors of differing magnitudes when used in a context of active commuting in suburban and urban environments. These errors can at average level be corrected for, whereas individual relative errors will remain.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Amsterdam: Elsevier , 2011. Vol. 19, no 4, p. 563-574
Keywords [en]
Commuting; Cycling; Distance; Reproducibility; Validity; Walking
National Category
Sport and Fitness Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:miun:diva-11824DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.06.006ISI: 000292427700010Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-79957455375OAI: oai:DiVA.org:miun-11824DiVA, id: diva2:329660
Projects
www.gih.se/faapAvailable from: 2010-07-13 Created: 2010-07-13 Last updated: 2017-12-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Schantz, Peter

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Schantz, Peter
By organisation
Department of Health Sciences
In the same journal
Journal of Transport Geography
Sport and Fitness Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 46 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf