A Comparison of Correlates Associated With Adult Physical Activity Behavior in Major Cities and Regional Settings Camille E. Short, Corneel Vandelanotte, Amanda Rebar, and Mitch J. Duncan Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia Objective: People living outside of urban areas are at higher risk for physical inactivity. Understanding physical activity correlates in different settings is important for understanding this risk. This study compared psychological, demographic, and health-related correlates of activity among adults living in major cities (urban areas) and regional (low-population density) towns and whether there were significant differences in how these potential determinants related to physical activity. Methods: Participants (n = 756) were male and female adults who were members of the Australian Health and Social Science panel. Participant characteristics and physical activity were assessed using standardized measures via an online survey. Differences in the strength of the relation between the physical activity correlates were tested using equality of regression coefficient tests. Results: Few differences in physical activity determinants between major cities and regional settings were observed. For major city and regional areas, self-efficacy and outcome expectations were the most strongly related correlates to physical activity. The strength of associations between the correlates and physical activity did not differ between areas, with the exception of working status. Not working was associated with lower odds of meeting physical activity guidelines for major city residents but not for regional residents. Conclusion: Physical activity correlates were generally similar for people living in major city and regional areas. This suggests that physical activity interventions targeting personal factors do not need to tailor to a person’s level of urbanization. Studies examining the interaction between psychological correlates of physical activity and environmental factors are needed. Keywords: physical activity, adults, geographical location, correlates There is strong evidence that engaging in regular physical activity is protective against the occurrence of several chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, hyper- tension, obesity, depression, and osteoporosis, and against prema- ture death (Nocon et al., 2008; Warburton, Nicol, & Bredin, 2006). Regular physical activity is also known to have several quality- of-life benefits, including improved mood and physical function- ing (Penedo & Dahn, 2005). Unfortunately, most adults living in westernized countries are not sufficiently active to obtain health benefits (Sisson & Katzmarzyk, 2008). The economic and health burdens associated with these low population levels of activity have been flagged as a global public health concern (Allender, Foster, Scarborough, & Rayner, 2007; Katzmarzyk, Gledhill, & Shepard, 2000). The challenge is to develop population approaches to physical activity promotion that can be implemented in a cost- effective and sustainable way. To inform this process, a greater understanding of the factors that affect physical activity behavior, especially among at-risk groups, is needed. One population group at higher risk for physical inactivity are those living outside of urban areas. Studies exploring activity levels by degree of urbanization have shown that urban-based adult populations are more active than regional- and rural-based adult populations (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011b; Badland & Schofield, 2006; Brown et al., 2013; Centers for Disease & Prevention, 1998; Trost, Owen, Bauman, Sallis, & Brown, 2002). In part, this is likely due to how these settings differ in terms of sociodemographic and environmental factors, such as reduced access to education and reduced access to physical activity facil- ities in regional and remote compared with urban areas (Badland & Schofield, 2006; Bauman et al., 2012). However, this difference in behavior may also reflect differences in psychological determi- nants of physical activity. Some evidence suggests that there are urban versus nonurban differences in individual, social, and environmental determinants of physical activity that would be missed if analyses were not stratified by level of urbanization. For example, in a study of ethnically diverse, middle- and older-aged U.S. women, it was shown that younger age, perception of fewer barriers, and social support were associated with increased leisure-time physical ac- tivity in urban areas whereas in nonurban areas, these factors plus White race, higher educational attainment, and an aesthetically pleasing environment were associated with increased leisure-time physical activity (Wilcox, Castro, King, Housemann, & Brownson, 2000). In another U.S. study, exercising on neighborhood streets was shown to be positively associated with physical activity among nonurban, but not urban, residents, whereas having friends to exercise with and access to walking paths and parks was shown This article was published Online First November 25, 2013. Camille E. Short, Corneel Vandelanotte, Amanda Rebar, and Mitch J. Duncan, Institute for Health and Social Science Research, Centre for Physical Activity Studies, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Camille E. Short, Centre for Physical Activity Studies, Institute for Health and Social Science Research, Central Queensland University, Building 18, Bruce Highway, Rockhampton, 4701, Australia. E-mail: c.short@cqu .edu.au This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Health Psychology © 2013 American Psychological Association 2014, Vol. 33, No. 11, 1319 –1327 0278-6133/14/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/hea0000027 1319