Motivation and active travel in adolescent girls and boys in Germany – Findings from the ARRIVE study.

• Boys traveled a higher proportion of trips actively than girls. • Girls expressed less intrinsic motivation and more amotivation than boys. • Behavioral regulations relate differently to travel behavior in boys than in girls. • Integrated and external regulation were associated with higher odds for active travel in girls. • Identified regulation was associated with higher odds for active travel in boys. Active travel (using an active mode of transport such as walking or cycling) contributes to the accumulation of daily physical activity and thus holds potential for promoting health. To promote active travel among adolescents an in-depth understanding of determinants from a sex/gender perspective is needed. Within Self-Determination Theory (SDT), it is proposed that the quality of an individuals' motivation (i.e., the degree to which it is autonomous) determines the extent to which they engage in particular behaviors and perform them effectively. As part of the ARRIVE study, the aim of this research was to investigate the relationship between motivation and active travel in adolescent boys (N = 263, M age = 12.92) and girls (N = 254, M age = 13.21) from a nationwide German sample. Results showed significant group differences between male and female adolescents in the proportion of trips traveled actively, intrinsic motivation and amotivation. Logistic regression analyses demonstrated different relationships of the different types of motivation proposed within SDT on active travel behavior depending on sex/gender. In the total sample, integrated and identified regulation increased the odds of active travel (by 15.8 %, and 20.3 % respectively), whereas amotivation decreased the odds by 23.0 %. Intrinsic motivation and controlled forms of extrinsic motivation (i.e. introjected and external regulation) did not significantly change the odds of active travel. Separate sex/gender-specific analyses were conducted. For boys, only identified regulation significantly increased the odds of active travel (by 40.2 %) and amotivation significantly decreased the odds (by 18.8 %). In girls, integrated (by 25.3 %) and external (by 20.3 %) regulation significantly increased the odds of active travel, while amotivation (26.6 %) significantly decreased the odds. We conclude that disparities exist in the relationship among different regulation types with active travel behavior between adolescent boys and girls, and that findings contradictory to SDT might result from the specific context of traveling to a destination. Considering the regression analyses findings, future interventions to promote active travel among adolescents should incorporate sex/gender-sensitive development, because some behavioral regulations might not be equally effective among girls and boys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]