IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v6y2009i4p1443-1455d4628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Barriers to Exercise in Younger and Older Non-Exercising Adult Women: A Cross Sectional Study in London, United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Walid El Ansari

    (Faculty of Sport, Health & Social Care, University of Gloucestershire, Gloucester, UK)

  • Geoff Lovell

    (School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia)

Abstract

A survey of 100 women in the south of London, United Kingdom (UK) compared exercise barrier intensities between non-exercising younger (20-27 years) and older (28-35 years) adult women; and examined childcare duties as perceived barriers to exercise. Perceived barriers to exercise were examined using an Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale (EBBS) comprising four subscales (exercise milieu; time expenditure; physical exertion; family discouragement). Participants’ number of children was also noted. Non-exercising older women reported significantly higher total exercise barriers, as well as across three barrier subscales: exercise milieu, time expenditure, and family discouragement. For both age groups, significant correlation existed between number of children and women’s total exercise barrier scores. Number of children explained »25% and »30% of the variance of younger and older women’s total barrier scores respectively. For both women groups, the strongest correlation between exercise barrier and number of children was for the time expenditure subscale. Broad grouping of 20-35 year old non-exercising women does not reflect a homogenous sample. Age categories employing narrower age brackets are recommended. Issues surrounding family responsibilities e.g. childcare duties may be shared between these groups and require further research and policy attention.

Suggested Citation

  • Walid El Ansari & Geoff Lovell, 2009. "Barriers to Exercise in Younger and Older Non-Exercising Adult Women: A Cross Sectional Study in London, United Kingdom," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-13, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:6:y:2009:i:4:p:1443-1455:d:4628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/6/4/1443/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/6/4/1443/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Stefan Koehn & Farzad Amirabdollahian, 2021. "Reliability, Validity, and Gender Invariance of the Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale: An Emerging Evidence for a More Concise Research Tool," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Geoff P. Lovell & Walid El Ansari & John K. Parker, 2010. "Perceived Exercise Benefits and Barriers of Non-Exercising Female University Students in the United Kingdom," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Manny M. Y. Kwok & Eric T. C. Poon & Shamay S. M. Ng & Matthew C. Y. Lai & Billy C. L. So, 2022. "Effects of Aquatic versus Land High-Intensity Interval Training on Acute Cardiometabolic and Perceptive Responses in Healthy Young Women," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Vojko Vučković & Klemen Krejač & Tanja Kajtna, 2022. "Exercise Motives of College Students after the COVID-19 Lockdown," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-11, June.
    5. Rebecca M. Meiring & Silmara Gusso & Eloise McCullough & Lynley Bradnam, 2021. "The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic Movement Restrictions on Self-Reported Physical Activity and Health in New Zealand: A Cross-Sectional Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-11, February.

    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:6:y:2009:i:4:p:1443-1455:d:4628. 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: 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.