Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38832347›Full record

ArticleLandscape and urban planning2023

Motivations for urban front gardening: A quantitative analysis.

Niamh Murtagh, Rachael Frost

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Landscape and urban planning, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Niamh MurtaghThe Bartlett School of Sustainable Construction, University College London (UCL), 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 7HB, United Kingdom.
Rachael FrostDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, University College London (UCL), UCL Royal Free Campus, Rowland Hill Street, London NW3 2PF, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Private gardens in urban settings offer multiple benefits for the environment and society. In addition to benefits to people's health and well-being, planting in front gardens in particular can mitigate local flooding and urban heat islands. To encourage more front garden planting, greater understanding of householders' motivations for front gardening is needed. Addressing research gaps on gardening for reasons other than food production and on motivations for gardening in front gardens, a large-scale online survey (n = 1,000) was conducted with urban/suburban dwellers in England. Exploratory factor analysis identified three factors of motivation: enjoyment, meaning and benefit (intrinsic), creating something beautiful (aesthetic) and functional outcomes (utilitarian). A multiple regression model incorporating the three factors and sociodemographic variables explained 11% of variance of time spent front gardening, with intrinsic motivations the strongest predictor. Intrinsic motivations were stronger for women than for men. The study provides a quantitative categorisation of motivational factors as a basis for comparative research and design of interventions and policy to increase front gardening.

Indexed as

Ecosystem servicesMotivationNature-based solutionsSelf-determination theoryUrban front gardens

Identifiers

PMID38832347
PMCPMC11145945

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.