Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 33 Livingston Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA.
Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 33 Livingston Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA; Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, 33 Livingston Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA.
Health Place. 2018 Jul;52:34-45. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2018.05.004. Epub 2018 May 26.
To examine how violent crime affects people's recreational and transportation walking duration in daytime and after dark on a typical day, this study undertakes associative and causal analyses with geo-referenced crime data, street-audit data, and data collected through an intercept survey in a three-municipality region of New Jersey that is predominantly inhabited by low-income and minority populations. Survey data was collected from 1173 respondents at 87 intersections selected by stratified random sampling. Similar to many past studies using associative methods, correlation analysis and ordered logit models showed mostly counterintuitive results. However, sequential or causal models, including path and structural equation (SE) models, showed that recorded crime increases fear of crime and chances of victimization, which in turn decrease walking duration for both recreation and transportation. The study concludes that even if people walk more in high-crime areas because of nearby destinations and lack of alternatives, crime may still have an adverse effect on walking, meaning that people in those neighborhoods would have walked even more if not for high crime.
为了研究在典型的一天中，暴力犯罪如何影响人们在白天和夜间的娱乐和交通步行时长，本研究利用与地理位置相关的犯罪数据、街道审计数据以及通过新泽西州三个城市地区的拦截调查收集的数据进行了关联和因果分析，该地区主要居住着低收入和少数族裔人群。调查数据是通过分层随机抽样在 87 个交叉口从 1173 名受访者那里收集的。与许多使用关联方法的过去研究类似，相关分析和有序逻辑回归模型显示出大多与直觉相悖的结果。然而，包括路径和结构方程 (SE) 模型在内的顺序或因果模型表明，记录的犯罪会增加对犯罪的恐惧和受害的可能性，这反过来又会减少娱乐和交通的步行时长。该研究得出的结论是，即使人们因为附近的目的地和缺乏替代选择而在高犯罪率地区走得更多，犯罪仍然可能对步行产生不利影响，这意味着如果没有高犯罪率，这些社区的人们会走得更多。
