Relationships between outcome variables Nature relatedness

In document The environmental impacts and wellbeing benefits of sport: Assessing spectator and participant dominated sports in England (Page 144-148)

1) To evaluate the impact of participant-dominated sport (running) on the environment through the calculation of GHG emissions from travel

5.3.7 Relationships between outcome variables Nature relatedness

NR and subfactors all correlated either strongly or moderately positively with each other when tested with a Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient. NR correlated well with its subfactors with a strong positive correlation with Self (76% shared variance), Perspective (62% shared variance) and Experience (61% shared variance); shared variance is the amount that the variations of 2 variables tend to overlap (Table 5.11).

Table 5.11: Correlation matrixes for Nature relatedness and subfactors

NR NR Self NR Perspective NR Experience

NR 1

NR Self .872** 1

NR Perspective .786** .577** 1

NR Experience .781** .583** .436** 1

Notes: r values are reported; ** Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed); *Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed); ns Correlation non-significant

Wellbeing

There was no significant correlation between mental wellbeing and NR with subfactors (p>.05) as shown in Tables 5.12

Table 5.12: Correlation matrix for outcome variables

WEMWBS NR NR Self NR Perspective NR Experience

WEMWBS 1

NR -.043 1

NR Self .043 .872** 1

NR Perspective -.038 .786** .577** 1

NR Experience -.042 .781** .583** .436** 1

Notes: r values are reported; ** Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed); *Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed); ns Correlation non-significant.

Chapter 5. Participant-dominated sport: Runners GHG emissions from travel, nature relatedness and mental wellbeing

145 5.3.8 Importance of being outside in nature running

Participants’ perceptions of the importance of being outside in nature was assessed and being outside in nature scores ranged from 1 to 10; (mean = 7.93, SD = 1.78, median = 8.00).

Importance of being outside in nature between age groups

A Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to evaluate differences in importance of being outside in nature among three age groups: 18-30 years, 31-50 years and 51+ years. The results of the analysis indicated that there was a statistically significant difference in importance of being outside in nature between the three different age groups,[H(2) = 26.593, p <.001]. 18-30 years (M=7.36, SD=2.04,n=205), 31-50 years (M=8.34, SD=1.51,n=165) and 51+ (M=7.90, SD=1.38,n=131).

Further pairwise comparison testing with adjusted p-values showed that there was statistically significant difference in participants’ perceptions of the importance of being outside in nature between the age groups as shown in Table 5.13. Participants between the ages of 31-50 had higher importance score than participants that were 51+ and between 18-30 years.

Table 5.13: Importance of being outside in nature score pairwise comparisons between three age groups standard error, standard test statistic is the z-score, sig is the significant value, adj. sig is the adjusted p-value and ES is the effect size r (.1 = small, .3 = medium and .5 and above = large).

Importance of being outside in nature between indoor and outdoor runners

A Mann Whitney U test compared the importance of being outside in nature between indoor and outdoor participants and found that it differed significantly, [U(671) = 34 128.00, Z = -4.31, p<.001, r

Chapter 5. Participant-dominated sport: Runners GHG emissions from travel, nature relatedness and mental wellbeing

= .17, small effect size]. The importance of being outside in nature score was higher in outdoor participants (M=8.11, SD=1.67,n=499) than indoor (M=7.41, SD1.96,n=174).

Importance of being outside in nature between participants in rural, suburban and urban environments

A Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to evaluate differences in the importance of being outside in nature among three running environments (rural, suburban and urban environments). The importance of being outside in naturevaried significantly between these environments, [2(2, N = 640) = 23.90, p < .001]. Rural (M=8.68,SD=1.37,n=104), suburban (M=7.78,SD=1.77,n=322) and urban (M=7.81,SD=1.88,n=214).

Further pairwise comparison testing with adjusted p-values showed that there was a statistically significant difference in importance of being outside in nature scores between the running environments as shown in Table 5.14. Participants at rural environment preferred to be outside in nature due to availability of green space compared to the suburban and urban environment.

Statistical analyses for the importance of being outside in nature with gender and running condition were insignificant (see Appendix H).

Table 5.14: Importance of being outside in nature pairwise comparisons between three environments with adjusted significance and effect size standard error, standard test statistic is the z-score, sig is the significant value, adj. sig is the adjusted p-value and ES is the effect size r (.1 = small, .3 = medium and .5 and above = large).

Chapter 5. Participant-dominated sport: Runners GHG emissions from travel, nature relatedness and mental wellbeing

147 5.3.9 Importance of the social aspect of participating in running

Participants’ perceptions of the importance of being with other people was assessed and being with other people scores ranged from 1 to 10, (mean = 7.51, SD = 1.91, median = 8.00).

Importance of being with other people with gender

A Mann Whitney U test compared the importance of being with other people between male and female participants and found statistically significant difference between males (M=7.31, SD=1.91,n=368) and females (M=7.76, SD=1.89,n=305). [U(672) = 64 146.000, Z = 3.33, p = .001, r = .13 - small effect size]. The result indicates that the importance of being with other people was higher in females than males.

Importance of being with other people and age groups

A Kruskal-Wallis test was conducted to evaluate differences in importance of being with other people among three age groups: 18-30 years, 31-50 years and 51+ years. The results of the analysis indicated that there was a statistically significant difference in importance of being with other people between these three age groups, [H(2) = 25.965, p <.001], with (M=7.07, SD=1.81,n=205) for 18-30 years, (M=7.31, SD=1.93,n=165) for age group 31-50 years and (M=7.07, SD=1.88,n=131) for 51+ years.

Further pairwise comparison testing with adjusted p-values showed that there was statistically significant difference in importance of being with other people between the age groups as shown in Table 5.15. Younger participants 31-50 years prefer to run with other people because more of them participate in sports and are also encouraged by their age mate.

Chapter 5. Participant-dominated sport: Runners GHG emissions from travel, nature relatedness and mental wellbeing

Table 5.15: Importance of being with other people pairwise comparisons between three age groups standard error, standard test statistic is the z-score, sig is the significant value, adj. sig is the adjusted p-value and ES is the effect size r (.1 = small, .3 = medium and .5 and above = large).

Importance of being with other people between indoor and outdoor runners

A Mann Whitney U test compared the importance of being with other people between indoor and outdoor participants and found statistically significant difference, [U(673) = 49982.50, Z = 3.07, p = .002, r = .12 - small effect size]. The importance of being with other people was higher in indoor participants (M=7.88, SD=1.84,n=174) than outdoor (M=7.39, SD=1.67,n=499). Statistical analyses for the importance of being with other people with environment and running condition were insignificant (see Appendix I).

In document The environmental impacts and wellbeing benefits of sport: Assessing spectator and participant dominated sports in England (Page 144-148)

Related documents