IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i5p2430-d508820.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Affects Older Adults’ Viewing Behaviors in Neighborhood Open Space: A Study in Hong Kong

Author

Listed:
  • Mu-Fei He

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, School of Architecture, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
    Both authors contribute equally to this work.)

  • Shu-Lin Shi

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, School of Architecture, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
    Both authors contribute equally to this work.)

  • Ming-Yi He

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, School of Architecture, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Yan-Peng Leng

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, School of Architecture, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Shao-Yi Wang

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, School of Architecture, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China)

Abstract

Research on older adults’ behaviors, living environments, and their quality of life (QoL) has grown rapidly. Viewing behaviors, although broadly acknowledged as critical for older adults’ QoL, have not been systematically examined in situ. What affects the viewing behaviors of older adults in neighborhood open space (NOS) is still unclear. This study conducted unobtrusive continuous observations in NOS of two residential estates in Hong Kong. With spatio-temporal analyses with ArcGIS Pro and statistical analyses with SPSS, principal influential factors to viewing behaviors of older adults in NOS were identified, including distances for viewing, landscape attractiveness, body supporting elements, as well as moving and interactive behaviors. How these factors would affect older adults’ well-being and QoL is discussed from the perspectives of supportive landscape design, sense of control, prospect and refuge, and social support, etc. Corresponding design implications are proposed to enrich existing NOS design knowledge for older adults’ quality of life.

Suggested Citation

  • Mu-Fei He & Shu-Lin Shi & Ming-Yi He & Yan-Peng Leng & Shao-Yi Wang, 2021. "What Affects Older Adults’ Viewing Behaviors in Neighborhood Open Space: A Study in Hong Kong," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-16, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:5:p:2430-:d:508820
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2430/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2430/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saelens, B.E. & Sallis, J.F. & Black, J.B. & Chen, D., 2003. "Neighborhood-Based Differences in Physical Activity: An Environment Scale Evaluation," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 93(9), pages 1552-1558.
    2. Lucy E. Keniger & Kevin J. Gaston & Katherine N. Irvine & Richard A. Fuller, 2013. "What are the Benefits of Interacting with Nature?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-23, March.
    3. Shu Lin Shi & Chau Ming Tong & Yi Qi Tao, 2018. "How does spatial organisation of gardens at care facilities for the elderly influence use patterns: a case study in Hong Kong," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 124-138, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ling Zhang & Kebin Shao & Wenfeng Tang & Stephen Siu Yu Lau & Hongzhan Lai & Yiqi Tao, 2023. "Outdoor Space Elements in Urban Residential Areas in Shenzhen, China: Optimization Based on Health-Promoting Behaviours of Older People," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Jing Zhao & Linshen Wang & Qing Ye & Qiang Zhao & Shutong Wei, 2022. "Association of Environmental Elements with Respondents’ Behaviors in Open Spaces Using the Direct Gradient Analysis Method: A Case Study of Jining, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-15, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anura Amarasinghe & Gerard D'Souza & Cheryl Brown & Tatiana Borisova, 2006. "A Spatial Analysis of Obesity in West Virginia," Working Papers Working Paper 2006-13, Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University.
    2. Qiang Wen & Haiqiang Liu & Jinyuan Chen & Huiyao Ye & Zeyu Pan, 2023. "Evaluation of Satisfaction with the Built Environment of University Buildings under the Epidemic and Its Impact on Student Anxiety," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-23, February.
    3. Martina Zorić & Jelena Farkić & Marko Kebert & Emina Mladenović & Dragić Karaklić & Gorana Isailović & Saša Orlović, 2022. "Developing Forest Therapy Programmes Based on the Health Benefits of Terpenes in Dominant Tree Species in Tara National Park (Serbia)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-15, May.
    4. Spielman, Seth E. & Yoo, Eun-hye, 2009. "The spatial dimensions of neighborhood effects," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1098-1105, March.
    5. Kevin Credit & Elizabeth Mack, 2019. "Place-making and performance: The impact of walkable built environments on business performance in Phoenix and Boston," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 46(2), pages 264-285, February.
    6. Mi Namgung & B. Elizabeth Mercado Gonzalez & Seungwoo Park, 2019. "The Role of Built Environment on Health of Older Adults in Korea: Obesity and Gender Differences," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-13, September.
    7. Courtney Coughenour & Hanns de la Fuente-Mella & Alexander Paz, 2019. "Analysis of Self-Reported Walking for Transit in a Sprawling Urban Metropolitan Area in the Western U.S," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, February.
    8. Eric T. H. Chan & Tim Schwanen & David Banister, 2021. "The role of perceived environment, neighbourhood characteristics, and attitudes in walking behaviour: evidence from a rapidly developing city in China," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 431-454, February.
    9. McNeill, Lorna Haughton & Kreuter, Matthew W. & Subramanian, S.V., 2006. "Social Environment and Physical activity: A review of concepts and evidence," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 1011-1022, August.
    10. Aleksandra Kosanic & Karsten Lambers & Stamatia Galata & Katja Kothieringer & Angelika Abderhalden, 2023. "Importance of Cultural Ecosystem Services for Cultural Identity and Wellbeing in the Lower Engadine, Switzerland," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-14, December.
    11. Fernando Fonseca & Escolástica Fernandes & Rui Ramos, 2022. "Walkable Cities: Using the Smart Pedestrian Net Method for Evaluating a Pedestrian Network in Guimarães, Portugal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-23, August.
    12. repec:rri:wpaper:200613 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Kent, Jennifer L. & Mulley, Corinne & Stevens, Nick, 2020. "Challenging policies that prohibit public transport use: Travelling with pets as a case study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 86-94.
    14. Victor O. Akande & Robert A.C. Ruiter & Stef P.J. Kremers, 2019. "Environmental and Motivational Determinants of Physical Activity among Canadian Inuit in the Arctic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-14, July.
    15. Letizia Appolloni & Maria Vittoria Corazza & Daniela D’Alessandro, 2019. "The Pleasure of Walking: An Innovative Methodology to Assess Appropriate Walkable Performance in Urban Areas to Support Transport Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-26, June.
    16. Jun-Hyun Kim & Chanam Lee & Wonmin Sohn, 2016. "Urban Natural Environments, Obesity, and Health-Related Quality of Life among Hispanic Children Living in Inner-City Neighborhoods," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
    17. Park, Sungjin, 2008. "Defining, Measuring, and Evaluating Path Walkability, and Testing Its Impacts on Transit Users’ Mode Choice and Walking Distance to the Station," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt0ct7c30p, University of California Transportation Center.
    18. Razieh Zandieh & Javier Martinez & Johannes Flacke & Phil Jones & Martin Van Maarseveen, 2016. "Older Adults’ Outdoor Walking: Inequalities in Neighbourhood Safety, Pedestrian Infrastructure and Aesthetics," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, November.
    19. Qiaohui Liu & Xiaoping Wang & Jinglan Liu & Guolin Zhang & Congying An & Yuqi Liu & Xiaoli Fan & Yishen Hu & Heng Zhang, 2021. "The Relationship between the Restorative Perception of the Environment and the Physiological and Psychological Effects of Different Types of Forests on University Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-16, November.
    20. Guillem Artigues & Sara Mateo & Maria Ramos & Elena Cabeza, 2020. "Validation of the Urban Walkability Perception Questionnaire (UWPQ) in the Balearic Islands," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-16, September.
    21. Zimu Jia & Long Chen & Jingjia Chen & Guowei Lyu & Ding Zhou & Ying Long, 2020. "Urban modeling for streets using vector cellular automata: Framework and its application in Beijing," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(8), pages 1418-1439, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:5:p:2430-:d:508820. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.