Physical Activity Relationship to Social Capital

DJuana L. Jackson Management of Health and Fitness Northern Michigan University Health, Physical Education, Recreation Faculty Mentor: Dr. Patricia Hogan Health and Fitness Management (coordinator)

Abstract
This study was designed to examine whether physical activity, using the facilities on Northern Michigan Universitys (NMU) campus, positively affected students self-perceived social capital (eg. social involvement, acceptance, and trust of others). A 27 question survey was distributed by email to a random sample of 250 students living within the ten residence halls on Northern Michigan Universitys campus during the Winter 2013 semester using Qualtrics, a web-based data collection software. The survey was open for one month and email out four times one week apart from the other between 03/12/2013 and 04/11/2013. Physical activity does not influence social capital as greatly hypothesized. Overall, the 42 subjects who completed the survey, 54.76% of students said it was important to feel socially connected at NMU and 40.48% felt it was only somewhat important. . However, of the 42 student who felt that social connection was important and somewhat important (95.24%) only 23.81% said they use the PEIF and other facilities on campus as a social outlet to connect with friends and meet new people.

Methods
A 27-question survey was distributed by email to a random sample of 250 students living within the ten residence halls on Northern Michigan Universitys campus during the Winter 2013 semester using Qualtrics, a web-based data collection software. The survey was open for one month and email out four times one week apart from the other between 03/12/2013 and 04/11/2013 to allow ample time for as many students to complete the survey. More specifically, the survey was divided into four subjects (Demographics, Activity Level, PEIF Activity, and Social Connection). These questions pertained to general perception of physical activity in social settings and the individuals preference to engage in activity alone or with others was considered. After the collection period, the data was compared across variables to evaluate the social response of physical activity in comparison to what others are doing in the same social settings based on age, activity, and gender. Activity was defined by the FITT principle. Frequency: how often physical activity if performed Intensity: how hard you work during exercise, to be measured by the Borgs Scale of Perceived Exertion Time: how long exercise goes on Type: the type of exercise a person is doing, that should relate to the Specificity Principle that corresponds to expected results Also defined by Recreational Sports, Club Sports, Open Recreation or Athletics The Demographic variable was used to determine neighborhood classification, activity engagement as a child, continued activity as an adult, and support from family and friends. Activity Level subject was to hone in on the FITT principles variables of the specific types of activity the subject engages in, which programs available on campus they regularly participated in, for how long, at what intensity levels and how often. PEIF Activity (Physical Education Instructional Facility) focused questions on the perceived safety, and aspects of trusting others when using the facility, it also examines whether the subject felt the facility was useful for retention. Lastly, Social Connection examines the importance of social connection to the subject in terms of physical activity.
(

Results
Figure 1: Activity types participants engaged in while on campus Figure 2: Gender of completed surveys

Conclusion
The results did not prove that NMUs recreation facilities are a high factor in retention based on student use. Many students felt that the Physical Education Instructional Facility, the Dome, and The Barry Event Center were of no use to socialize and meet new people. Survey participants did not exhibit a self-perceived higher sense of social-self through campus recreation use. The majority felt campus facility were solely for physical activity, and in this case physical activity was to be done alone. Straying from what was expected, most responses from participants did not offer suggestions of improvements to campus facilities to feel more socially connected. Physical activity does not influence social capital as greatly hypothesized. Overall, the 42 subjects who completed the survey, 54.76% of students said it was important to feel socially connected at NMU and 40.48% felt it was only somewhat important. However, of the 42 student who felt that social connection was important and somewhat important (95.24%) only 23.81% said they use the PEIF and other facilities on campus as a social outlet to connect with friends and meet new people.

Figure 3: Maintained or improved activity level as an adult

Figure 4: Maintained or improved social involvement as an adult

Objectives
The purpose of this study is to determine if NMUs recreation facilities are a high factor in retention based on student use, students will exhibit a higher sense of social-self through campus recreation use, and students will propose to see more construction update to the three campus facilities to better meet their fitness and social needs. Northern Michigan University has three facilities that are available for students to utilize for physical activity and social interaction purposes: The Superior Dome, houses the Wildcat football team and special training areas for the USOEC's boxing, weightlifting and wrestling teams, and a track. The Physical Education Instructional Facility (PEIF) houses a two-level recreation center, complete with a climbing wall, weight room, cardiovascular area, two basketball courts, two lounge areas, and spinning room. Also located in the PEIF are seven racquetball courts, a dance studio, and athletic training facilities. The Berry Events Center home to the NMU mens and womens basketball teams, hockey team and the USOEC short track speed skating squad. It can also be used for students during open skate.

Figure 5: Feelings of social connection importance compared to use of PEIF facility as social outlet

Discussion
Figure 1 outlines activity type participants like to engage in while on campus. Representing 66.67% of the group, 28 out of the 42 people chose individual fitness activities. Figure 2 is simply a breakdown of gender based on the completed surveys. Figure 3 and 4 show that while roughly half of the subjects maintained or improved physical fitness, 88.89% maintain or improved their social involvement. In this case physical activity does not directly influence social capital, but from another standpoint, social capital may have the power to influence physical activity. Figure 5 54.76% of students said it was important to feel socially connected at NMU and 40.48% felt it was only somewhat important. However, 95.24% of students who felt that social connection was important and somewhat important only 23.81% said they use the PEIF as a social outlet to connect with friends and meet new people.

References
Bedimo-Rung, Ariane L.. Andrew J. Mowen, Deborah A. Cohen, The significance of parks to physical activity and public health: A conceptual model, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Volume 28, Issue 2, Supplement 2, February 2005, Pages 159-168, ISSN 0749-3797, 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.024. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379704003046) Broyles, Stephanie T. Andrew J. Mowen, Katherine P. Theall, Jeanette Gustat, Ariane L. Rung, Integrating Social Capital Into a Park-Use and Active-Living Framework, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Volume 40, Issue 5, May 2011, Pages 522-529, ISSN 0749-3797, 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.12.028. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379711000468) Cavallo, David N. Deborah F. Tate, Amy V. Ries, Jane D. Brown, Robert F. DeVellis, Alice S. Ammerman, A Social MediaBased Physical Activity Intervention: A Randomized Controlled Trial, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Volume 43, Issue 5, November 2012, Pages 527-532, ISSN 0749-3797, 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.07.019. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074937971200520X) Center for Institutional Effectiveness (2004) A Fresh Look at Traditional and Nontraditional Undergraduates at KSU. Retrieved April 14, 2013 from http://ir.kennesaw.edu/EIMWebApps/vic/analytic_studies/documents/pdf/study_trad_nontrad_ug_200308.pdf Cliff DP, Janssen X. Levels of habitual physical activity in early childhood. In: Tremblay RE, Barr RG, Peters RDeV, Boivin M, eds. Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development [online]. Montreal, Quebec: Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development; 2011:16. Available at: http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/documents/Cliff-JanssenANGxp1.pdf. Accessed [10/12/2012]. DiGiandomenico, M. (2010). An analysis of the relationship between social support, selected demographics, and physical activity among community college students. Kent State University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 246. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/746039002?accountid=2745. (746039002). Foster, Sarah Billie Giles-Corti, The built environment, neighborhood crime and constrained physical activity: An exploration of inconsistent findings, Preventive Medicine, Volume 47, Issue 3, September 2008, Pages 241-251, ISSN 0091-7435, 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.03.017. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091743508001588) Goodman, R. (2010) PEIF proposal delayed until summer, The North Wind. Retrieved from http://www.thenorthwindonline.com/?p=3858841 Hill, Jennie Lynn. (2009). Examining the potential relationships between social capital, built environment and physical activity: A mixed methods study. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Accession Order No. 3373526). Kamarudin, K., & Mohd, S. O. (2007). Attitudes toward physical activities among college students. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 22(1), 43-54. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/89070657?accountid=2745 Magoc, D., Tomaka, J., & Bridges-Arzaga, A. (2011). Using the Web to Increase Physical Activity in College Students. American Journal Of Health Behavior, 35(2), 142-154. McArthur, L. H., & Raedeke, T. D. (2009). Race and sex differences in college student physical activity correlates. American Journal of Health Behavior, 33(1), 80+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA209477208&v=2.1&u=lom_nmichu&it=r&p=HRCA&sw=w Nathan K. Cobb, Amanda L. Graham, Health Behavior Interventions in the Age of Facebook, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Volume 43, Issue 5, November 2012, Pages 571-572, ISSN 0749-3797, 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.08.001. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379712005326) Ode, Joshua James. (2007). Assessing physical activity behaviors in college students. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Assession Order No. 3282176). Telama R, Yang X, Viikari J, Valimaki I, Wanne O, Raitakari O. Physical activity from childhood to adulthood: a 21-year tracking study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2005;28(3):267-273. Tremblay, Mark S, Margot Shields, Manon Laviolette, Cora L. Craig, Ian Janssen and Sarah Connor Gorber. Fitness of Canadian Children and Youth: results from the 2007-2009 Canadian Health Measures Survey. Health Reports 2010;21(1) Trites, Stephen J. (2011) Physical activity and social capital in Canadian adolescents. (Masters Thesis). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Accession Order No. MR83105). UCtelevision. (2008, February 29). Obesity and Social NetworksHealth Matters. Retrieved October 28, 2012, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTyZ7Kagh5I&feature=my_watch_later_videos&list=WLD0878333D8BA1DEC