IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0150041.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Are Girls Less Physically Active than Boys? Findings from the LOOK Longitudinal Study

Author

Listed:
  • Rohan M Telford
  • Richard D Telford
  • Lisa S Olive
  • Thomas Cochrane
  • Rachel Davey

Abstract

Background: A gender-based disparity in physical activity (PA) among youth, whereby girls are less active than boys is a persistent finding in the literature. A greater understanding of the mechanisms underlying this difference has potential to guide PA intervention strategies. Methods: Data were collected at age 8 and 12 years (276 boys, 279 girls) from 29 schools as part of the LOOK study. Multilevel linear models were fitted separately for boys and girls to examine effects of individual, family and environmental level correlates on pedometer measured PA. Cardio-respiratory fitness (multi-stage run), percent fat (DEXA), eye-hand coordination (throw and catch test) and perceived competence in physical education (questionnaire) were used as individual level correlates. At the family level, parent’s support and education (questionnaire) were used. School attended and extracurricular sport participation were included as environmental level correlates. Results: Girls were 19% less active than boys (9420 vs 11360 steps/day, p

Suggested Citation

  • Rohan M Telford & Richard D Telford & Lisa S Olive & Thomas Cochrane & Rachel Davey, 2016. "Why Are Girls Less Physically Active than Boys? Findings from the LOOK Longitudinal Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-11, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0150041
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0150041
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0150041&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0150041?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0150041. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.