4.7 Article

Exploring the causal effects of bicycling for transportation on mental health

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102773

Keywords

Utilitarian bicycling; Psychological distress; Life satisfaction; Propensity score methods

Funding

  1. University of Melbourne

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that regular bicycling was negatively associated with psychological distress and positively associated with life satisfaction, while occasional bicycling was not significantly associated with mental health. Factors such as physical activity levels, physical health conditions, and neighborhood physical environment did not fully mediate the effects of utilitarian bicycling on mental wellbeing.
Few studies have investigated how transportation-related bicycling might contribute to better mental health. We investigated the effects of utilitarian bicycling frequency on psychological distress and life satisfaction, and explored the possible causal mechanisms, using large and statewide representative survey data from Victoria, Australia. Propensity score methods were applied to balance treatment and control groups, effectively reducing the selection bias that potentially confounds the causal effects. This study finds that occasional bicycling was not significantly associated with mental health, while regular bicycling was negatively associated with psychological distress and positively associated with life satisfaction. This study also finds that physical activity levels, physical health conditions, and neighborhood physical environment do not fully mediate the effects of utilitarian bicycling on mental wellbeing. These findings support the policies of promoting transportation bicycling to improve population mental health, and highlight the potential role of regular bicycling in combating psychological distress and improving life satisfaction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available