Picture of athlete cycling

Open Access research with a real impact on health...

The Strathprints institutional repository is a digital archive of University of Strathclyde's Open Access research outputs. Strathprints provides access to thousands of Open Access research papers by Strathclyde researchers, including by researchers from the Physical Activity for Health Group based within the School of Psychological Sciences & Health. Research here seeks to better understand how and why physical activity improves health, gain a better understanding of the amount, intensity, and type of physical activity needed for health benefits, and evaluate the effect of interventions to promote physical activity.

Explore open research content by Physical Activity for Health...

Using pedometers as motivational tools : are goals set in steps more effective than goals set in minutes for increasing walking?

Baker, Graham and Mutrie, Nanette and Lowry, Ruth (2008) Using pedometers as motivational tools : are goals set in steps more effective than goals set in minutes for increasing walking? International Journal of Health Promotion and Education, 46. ISSN 1463-5240

[img]
Preview
Text (strathprints007839)
strathprints007839.pdf - Accepted Author Manuscript

Download (140kB) | Preview

Abstract

Background Pedometers are popular devices that measure walking steps. There has been a recent surge in promoting the pedometer as a motivational tool to increase walking. However, little empirical evidence exists to support this suggestion. This study examined the effectiveness of a pedometer as a motivational tool to increase walking. 50 participants (7 men and 43 women, mean age (SD) 40.16 (8.81) years, range 25-61 years) were randomly assigned to either an intervention group who followed a four-week walking programme with goals set in steps (using an open pedometer for feedback) or a comparison group who followed an equivalent four-week walking programme with goals set in minutes. Participants had step-counts recorded at baseline, weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and at weeks 16 and 52 for follow-up. Both groups significantly increased step-counts from baseline to week 4 with no significant difference between groups. However, a significantly greater number of participants in the intervention group (77%) compared with the comparison group (54%) achieved their week 4 goals (p=0.03). There was no significant change in step-counts from week 4 to week 16. There was a significant decrease from week 16 to week 52. In the short term, both goals set in minutes and goals set in steps using a pedometer may be effective at promoting walking. In the long term, additional support may be required to sustain increases in walking.