Skip to main content

Table 2 Study variables at each time point

From: Safe RESIDential Environments? A longitudinal analysis of the influence of crime-related safety on walking

 

Baseline (n = 1813)

Year 1 (n = 1467)

Year 3 (n = 1230)

Year 7 (n = 531)

Variable

Mean (SD)

Mean (SD)

Mean (SD)

Mean (SD)

Built environment

    

 Residential densitya

15.1 (8.0)

12.7 (5.4)

14.1 (5.2)

14.3 (4.1)

 Street connectivityb

61.5 (18.0)

73.8 (25.7)

78.8 (26.0)

82.3 (27.4)

 Local destinationsc

52.6 (72.7)

15.6 (36.7)

20.7 (49.0)

25.8 (38.3)

Social environment

    

 Social cohesion

3.0 (0.6)

3.6 (0.6)

3.5 (0.6)

3.5 (0.6)

Perceptions

    

 Aesthetics

3.4 (0.7)

3.6 (0.6)

3.4 (0.6)

3.4 (0.6)

 Traffic hazards

2.6 (0.8)

2.2 (0.6)

2.3 (0.6)

2.4 (0.6)

 Street lighting

3.1 (1.0)

3.5 (0.9)

3.4 (0.9)

3.5 (0.9)

Safety from crime

    

 Perceived safety from crime

3.4 (0.8)

3.8 (0.6)

3.7 (0.6)

3.7 (0.6)

 Crimes reported to policed

88.4 (86.9)

71.6 (92.1)

76.6 (85.9)

-

Walking (min/week)

    

 Total walking

96.3 (139.3)

109.4 (178.5)

121.1 (214.0)

109.9 (139.5)

 Walking for recreation

68.7 (98.4)

89.0 (112.8)

90.0 (127.5)

87.6 (121.4)

 Walking for transport

26.6 (57.8)

19.8 (50.2)

25.6 (68.5)

27.8 (69.6)

  1. aRatio of the land area in residential use to the number of residential dwellings
  2. bCount of three (or more) way intersections
  3. cCount of local destinations (all retail and service destinations)
  4. dCrimes committed against the person in public space (e.g., threats, disorderly behaviour, assault, robbery) summarised by suburb (data unavailable at Year 7)