Cited by 62Urban Agriculture and SustainabilityRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementUrban Green Space and Health

Growing minds: evaluating the effect of gardening on quality of life and physical activity level of older adults

Open access
Sommerfeld, Aime J., Waliczek, Tina M., Zajicek, Jayne M.·2010·HortTechnology

Abstract

A questionnaire based on the Life Satisfaction Inventory A (LSIA) was used to investigate older adult (age 50+ years) gardeners' and nongardeners' perceptions of personal life satisfaction and levels of physical activity. The LSIA measures five components of quality of life: “zest for life,” “resolution and fortitude,” “congruence between desired and achieved goals,” “physical, psychological, and social self-concept,” and “optimism.” Additional multiple-choice questions were asked to determine respondents' level of physical activity, perceptions of overall health and well-being as well as to gather demographic information. The survey was posted on a university homepage for ≈1 month. Responses were gathered from 298 participants who differentiated themselves as gardeners or nongardeners by responding positively or negatively to the question “do you garden?” Results indicated statistically significant differences in comparisons of overall life satisfaction scores with gardeners receiving higher mean scores indicating more positive results on the LSIA. Four individual quality-of-life statements included in the LSIA yielded statistically significantly more positive answers by gardeners when compared with nongardeners. Other questions regarding healthful practices revealed that personal reports of physical activity and perceptions of personal health were statistically significantly more positive among gardeners when compared with nongardeners.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.21273/horttech.20.4.705

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [22]22. Lewis, C. 1996. Green nature/human nature. University of Illinois Press, Chi- cago, IL.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sommerfeld, A. J., Waliczek, T. M., & Zajicek, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • Texas State University (US)
Venue
HortTechnology
Published
2010-08
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
705-710
ISSN
  • 1063-0198 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-7714
OpenAlex
W2288930425
Cited by
62
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4
FWCI
2.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
HortTechnology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Urban Agriculture and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Recreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
Keywords
gardening, older adults, quality of life, life satisfaction, physical activity, well-being, health perception, horticultural therapy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review