Factorial Invariance of the Physical Activity Neighborhood Environment Survey Among Single- Versus Multi-Family Housing Residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Individual perceptions of one's neighborhood environment influence decisions about physical activity participation. Differences between single-family housing neighborhoods versus multi-family housing neighborhoods may affect perceptions and lead to varying responses on surveys designed to assess perceptions of the neighborhood environment for physical activity. This study tested the factorial invariance for the Physical Activity Neighborhood Environment Survey (PANES) between residents of single-family versus multi-family housing neighborhoods. METHOD: This study was a secondary data analysis of PANES ratings from African American and Hispanic or Latina women (n = 324) who participated in the Health Is Power study (NCI R01CA109403), a multi-site, community-based trial to investigate the relationship between neighborhood factors and physical activity adoption and maintenance. Factorial invariance was tested using a series of nested confirmatory factor analysis models. RESULTS: The final model was a 2nd-order factor structure with partial invariance of item intercepts. The 2nd-order factor structure and the relationships of the PANES items to the 1st-order factors (amenable, unsafe, and walkable) and of the 1st-order factors to the 2nd-order factor (environment) were invariant between the single-family and multi-family housing neighborhood groups. CONCLUSION: These findings support the construct validity of PANES, which can be considered valid for measuring neighborhood perceptions among residents of neighborhoods with different housing types.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".