Cycling for transport and recreation: Associations with socio-economic position, environmental perceptions, and psychological disposition

Objective Interest is growing in promoting utility cycling (i.e., for transport) as a means of incorporating daily physical activity (PA) into people's lives, but little is known about correlates of utility cycling. Our primary aim was to examine cross-sectional relationships between socio-economic characteristics, neighborhood environment perceptions and psychological disposition with utility cycling (with or without additional recreational cycling). A secondary aim was to compare these relationships with those for recreation-only cycling. Method Baseline survey data (2007) from 10,233 participants in HABITAT, a multilevel longitudinal study of PA, sedentary behavior, and health in Brisbane adults aged 40–65 years, were analyzed using multinomial regression modeling. Results Greater income, habitual PA, and positive beliefs about PA were associated with utility and recreation-only cycling (p < 0.05). Always having vehicle access and not in the labor force were associated with recreation-only cycling (p < 0.05). Some or no vehicle access, part-time employment, and perceived environmental factors (little crime, few cul-de-sacs, nearby transport and recreational destinations) were associated with utility cycling (p < 0.05). Conclusion Our findings suggest differences in associations between socio-economic, neighborhood perceptions and psychological factors and utility and recreation-only cycling in Brisbane residents aged 40–65 years. Tailored approaches appear to be required to promote utility and recreational cycling.