Running head: SAFETY IN PARKS 1

Safety in Parks

RPTM 433

Zachary Fernandez

1/30/18

I certify that this assignment is my own work. I have not plagiarized any of its contents, nor have

I collaborated with other students in the writing of this paper. [Zachary Fernandez]
SAFETY IN PARKS 2

Introduction

Oak Hall Regional Park is a relatively new park, opening in 2015, the park spans 68-

acres and cost $461,627 to acquire (Centre Region Parks and Recreation, 2016). In 2009, the

Centre Region Parks and Recreation Agency held a community meeting to discuss the planning

of the park and to give the community the power to help create/map the park (CRPR, 2016). In

this study, the researchers will be visiting the park periodically to speak with individuals present

and in the surrounding area. In order to reinforce the study, studies involving the topic of park

safety will be explored thoroughly.

Research Problem

When taking parks and playgrounds into consideration, children are at the center of

attention. With children not being of age to make decisions on their own, they are to follow what

their parents say to them. This could have an effect on the usage of a park when considering the

parents view of how safe a park may be. Another issue would be the sense of feeling comfortable

or safe in the child’s perception. If the child or the parent doesn’t feel safe they may not return to

the playground/park. Some issues, regarding the safety of a child or even an adult, can be

reviewed and adjusted accordingly until there is no longer a sense of feeling unsafe.

Research Question

1. What are some concerns with the park in terms of safety and wellbeing?

Literature Review

Overall Findings

Parents are very much the driving force of their children’s level of physical activity when

taking into consideration the surrounding environment. For example, according to Valentine and

McKendrick (1997), 70% of parents, who have eight to eleven years old children, reported they
SAFETY IN PARKS 3

were worried about social problem and road traffic as major restrictions for children’s free-play.

The perceptions of the parents, including but not limited to the example above, is a result of the

parent’s anxiety of their children’s safety and rather isn’t strictly about the parks level of

provisions (Valentine & McKendrick, 1997). Also, in a study conducted by Ishaudina & Masrom

in 2017, they concluded that parents feel comfortable in playground settings in which the

equipment is well maintained.

Similarities

It seems that most parents are more concerned with social aspects of safety rather than

physical danger that might be present right in front of them at the park (Ishaudina & Masrom,

2017). Thus, the anxieties of the children being kidnapped or harmed by other individuals makes

the parents turn a blind eye to safety hazards their children might be playing on or with. Another

reoccurring piece of information within the studies, was the mentioning of road traffic being a

concern among parents as stated by both Ishaudina & Masrom (2017) and Santos, Pizarro, Mota,

& Marques (2013).

Differences

Within the results of Ishaudina’s & Masrom’s (2017) study it was concluded that parents

should have a higher awareness when supervising their children at the playground. This seems to

contradict the findings of Esteban-Cornejo, Carlson, Conway, Cain, Saelens, Frank, and Sallis

(2016) as the perceptions of neighborhood safety often influence parents and their willingness to

let their children “go and play”. Other differences within the literature were the defining factor of

the word “safety”. It could mean anything from the surrounding environment or social issues to

the playground itself along with its equipment.

SAFETY IN PARKS 4

Need for Study

Within the research, safety went a long way in being the deciding factor for parents,

understandably. This is vital in making sure the park can effectively benefit the community and

its surrounding areas. Another particularly interesting piece of information is that parents lack

the knowledge and awareness of safety precautions and safety hazards on the playground

(Ishaudina & Masrom, 2017). Now knowing this, parents can be informed by the park’s agency

to possibly avoid potential safety hazards. The Centre Region Parks and Recreation agency will

need to be informed on the adult perceptions of the park in order to effectively make changes and

create a safer environment.

How these studies will inform this project

These studies have shed light on the perceptions of adults pertaining to their children and

the safety of the environment in which they are in. It is now evident that the consensus is of

parents being concerned with social problems and road traffic and this can help narrow down the

focus of survey/interview questions pertaining to Oak Hall Regional Park. This will also aide the

CRPR in developing a playground that is up to the community’s safety standards.

Safety is one of the top concerns, if not the top concern, when dealing with children and

the perception of the parents is most important when making considerations to the park. The

following studies have aided in the process of gathering information to help in continuing my

research project of Oak Hall Regional Park. The similarities along with differences, and the need

for a study were all considered within this literature review. The next step will be using this

information to narrow down and tailor my research on-site issues/points-of-interest. This

information is vital for agencies such as the CRPR as it gives insight into the minds of parents

and how they view safety in relation to parks and making a choice in said parks.
SAFETY IN PARKS 5

Methods

Study Purpose

The purpose surrounding this study is to gather information on the perceptions of safety

within Oak Hall Regional Park and to develop a basis of understanding in the perception of

parents and children in comparison to current studies. By developing an understanding of the

individuals whom visit the park, changes can be made to better accommodate and to ensure a

better experience for said individuals.

Research Design

In order to effectively gauge the community and those who visit the park, information

will need to be gathered but interviewing everyone in the park would simply be too time

consuming. Due to the lack of time, quantitative data will need to be collected in the form of

surveys in order to get a basic understanding of what the needs of park are when speaking on

safety. These surveys will have carefully crafted questions in order to create a clear picture

without speaking in person to the individuals. Next, qualitative data will be collected in the form

of face to face interviews with at least five individuals in the surrounding area of Oak Hall. This

will build off of the surveys and bring it all together to form the results of the research question

at hand. For this study, a cross-sectional study will be used, thus meaning that comparisons will

be made at a single time. Data will also be collected about the individuals including, age, race,

gender, ethnicity, etc. in order to grasp a better understanding of who is conveying this

information.

Participants

For the following study, the demographic would be, parents with children that frequently

use the park and adults whom use the park. These groups of individuals fit the needs of the
SAFETY IN PARKS 6

research because it includes the parents of the children whom use the park, and the perception of

the parents is vital in that the main goal is to keep the children safe when using the park. Also,

the final group that has been chosen to take part is adults whom use the park. According to the

U.S. Census Bureau, the demographic of the individuals is expected to be of white race as the

statistics for white individuals in 2016 was 88%. Also, the average age in Centre county ranges

from 20 to 44 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2016). These individual’s perceptions of safety in the park

are also essential as there are many activities that these adults take part in, in the park, including

but not limited to, running along the trails, dog walking, nature walks, and more.

Sampling

For sampling, a systematic random cluster sampling will be employed. Due to the small

population surrounding the park, it would be in the best interest of the researchers to create

subpopulations and then randomly pick a subpopulation and assess all of which in said cluster.

The radius of sampling structure would involve the park and a 15-20-mile radius surrounding the

park. Included within the radius, would be households in which a survey would be delivered to

and another group would have an interview take place. In the park, a convenience sample will be

implemented in order to gather as much data from individuals currently at the park. This will be

used to create a large sample to better understand the data received. This would ensure an

effective plan along with maximizing the data in which will be received.

Data Collection

Survey

See attached “Appendix A”

SAFETY IN PARKS 7

Face Validity

Face Validity is the process in which researchers use others to ensure the content makes

sense. In order to create this survey, the researchers collaborated and ensured that all of the

questions being asked of the participants, were of sound wording and thoroughly made sense.

Other measures that were taken in order to ensure validity, were administering a pilot run with

individuals whom were unaware of the research but given enough background information to be

able to complete the survey. These individuals then reported feedback of how the survey could

be improved in which creates a better, more clear question set.

Data Collection and Analysis Objectivity

To avoid bias in the question set in the survey and interview questions, questions were

conveyed in a manner in which none of the researcher’s individual thoughts were included. Thus,

there will be no room for the participants to sub-consciously be swayed to the answer in which

the researcher might want individuals to answer with. This is vital in ensuring the results of the

data collection are of sound information being directly conveyed to researchers by the

participants. To create an effective method of analyzing the collected data, researchers will need

to review data without a bias. This will be achieved by using methods such as implementing a

Likert scale. The Likert scale would effectively reduce a bias and effectively relay data to the

researcher without the use of words. For the open-ended questions on the survey and interview

questions, individual words will be picked out of the grouped data and used to form a more

polished data set in order for the researchers to create a clear picture. While researchers collect

data, there will be multiple individuals from the research team coding and breaking down results

that participants provide through the survey and interview questions.

SAFETY IN PARKS 8

Interview Guide

See attached “Appendix B”

Trustworthiness/Credibility

To ensure the research is credible, the researchers will work in a close collaboration to

effectively piece data together. This form of data triangulation would be to have researchers

review each other’s data to ensure all information is unbiased. This information will be collected

via the attached survey and interview questionnaires. Also, the use of the information from the

multiple forms of questions on the questionnaire will prove informative to the researchers and

create a sense of credibility. This will be the case by reviewing the data and finding patterns in

which the closed and open-ended questions along with the interview questions provide.

Dependability

To create an audit trail, documentation of all of the steps in which the researchers have

gone through to effectively complete the research process will be administered. This process will

involve the explanation of all of the steps taken to reach the finished product. This will provide

any individual that observes this research, a firm grasp of the steps that were taken to reach the

information in which the researchers concluded with.

Data Analysis

Survey Close-Ended

After information is collected from participants, multiple members from the research

team will review data to ensure the information is in the correct place and there is nothing

missing that might be detrimental to the study. There must be no coding errors and if there is, it

must be reviewed and corrected as this may mean there are other patterns or themes from the
SAFETY IN PARKS 9

survey questionnaire that may have been missed. This process will involve two other individuals

as stated above to ensure a valid check of the data rather than just one individual. Subsequent to

this step, a data matrix plan will be implemented to assess data in a numerical form. Each

question’s answer will be attached to a number which will then be used by researchers to

categorize the responses in a time effective manner. Refer to Appendix C for the data matrix

plan.

The data will be analyzed by using multiple forms of analysis including frequency

analysis and measures of central tendency. In order to conduct a frequency analysis, relative

frequency must be calculated. To calculate this step, the researchers will take the data from

individual categories and divide it by the sample size of the study. From this point, a percentage

frequency can be created by multiplying the relative frequency by the sample size (Flick, 2015).

For example, the number of individuals that take the survey that find the park to fit their safety

standards can be created into a percentage and reviewed much easier by the researchers. To

calculate central tendency, data will be split into mean, median, and mode. The mean (or

average) of the categories will be utilized to come to a conclusion on average response rates. The

mode will describe the most frequently selected response for purpose of finding most common

values. Finally, the median will be calculated to find distribution of responses and allows the

researchers to split the data into two parts at the 50% mark.

Survey Open-Ended

When analyzing the data from the open-ended questions from the survey, researchers will

develop a list containing words that are of key importance and relation to the study at hand and

the research question. These words will then be put into detailed categories in which the

researcher and coders can come back to in order to simplify the data. These categories will be
SAFETY IN PARKS 10

derived from the research question in which will describe and cluster the words by how it’s

relation is important to the study/question. A quantitative content analysis dictionary will be

created by researchers to provide definitions to the category names, definitions, and rules for

allocating words to categories (Flick, 2015). The list of words deemed important by the

researcher by recognizing words respondents used most or seemed to stress the most will be

defined by the context in which they were used. Also, a contingency analysis will be

implemented in order to identify themes between certain words. This will be used to identify

word combinations that may be of importance to the researchers. Words paired together by

respondents such as “safety” and “children” would be important for the researchers to note along

with how frequently the words are used together. Finally, coder reliability will be of importance

to the researchers as it is when two or more researchers are tasked with reviewing data and agree

on the information being presented as it pertains to the same coding scheme (Lavrakas, 2008).

To ensure reliability there will be three researchers with the responsibility of coding selected data

sets. The use of multiple researchers to analyze the data and coding enhances the reliability of

the categories as different researchers find the same sentences, words and word combinations

and place them in similar categories.

Qualitative Interview

The coding process for the qualitative interview involves three key parts, open coding,

axial coding, and selective coding. The first step in the process is open coding, during this

procedure the interviewee’s response is, “disentangled”, finding concepts from within and

breaking it down into smaller parts in order to code them and place them in categories (Flick,

2015). Next, axial coding is the process in which these categories are reviewed to find

differences and similarities and in turn to start to find and create themes that these codes have
SAFETY IN PARKS 11

formed (Flick, 2015). Lastly, selective coding is the final piece to the process. During this

procedure, researchers will fluctuate between developing concepts and categories to testing the

concepts and categories (Flick, 2015). This then will lead to the focus on the potential core

concepts or core variables. Subsequently, there will be an elaboration of the “story of the case”

which will lead the researchers to come to a conclusion of a central concept and category (Flick,

2015). In the process of coding the qualitative interview, there will be multiple researchers

undergoing this process as it is vital for the reliability. Having multiple researchers review data

ensures that the same themes are being noticed and brought up by the other individuals therefore

reinforcing the reliability and credibility of the process.

Results

Survey Results

When the research team entered the data collection phase of the research process, the

researchers encountered several difficulties when trying to find participants for the survey. Due

to the specialization of the park and its focus on baseball and softball, the weather was unsuitable

for the sports to be played. With a lack of individuals to participate in the survey, the team had to

create an online survey and upload it to Centre Region Parks and Recreation’s social media

platforms. The research team also traveled to surrounding neighborhoods to try to gather

information from participants.

From the research, 53 surveys were collected from participants are of sound data to be

used to further this study. Within the results, researchers found that Women were of majority

when completing the survey and made up 75.5% of the sample size compared to men whom

were at 22.6% (1.9% preferred not to answer) [Table 1]. Slightly over half of the individuals that

participated in the survey were in the age range of 35-50 (50.9%). The top two other age groups,
SAFETY IN PARKS 12

ages 28-35 and 50+, were both respectively 18.9% and 22.6%. [Table 2]. All 51 of the

individuals whom participated, categorized themselves as white/Caucasian [Table 3]. The

average individual was married/dating with children at home (66%) [Table 4]. When speaking on

distance from participants homes to Oak Hall Regional Park, 62.3% of individuals lived under 5

miles away. The second highest answer selected was 5-10 miles from the park [Table 5].

Table 1 N = 53
What is your gender?
Statement Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Male (1) 12 0.2264 22.6%
Female (2) 40 0.7547 74.5%
Prefer not to answer 1 0.0188 1.9%

Table 2. N = 53
What is your age?
Statement Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
18 – 22 (1) 3 0.0566 5.7%
23 – 27 (2) 1 0.0188 1.9%
28 – 35 (3) 10 0.1886 18.9%
36 – 50 (4) 27 0.5094 50.9%
50 + (5) 12 0.2264 22.6%

Table 3. N = 53
What is your race/ethnicity?
Statement Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Asian or Pacific Islander (1) 0 0 0
Hispanic/Latino (2) 0 0 0
White/Caucasian (3) 53 1 100
African American (4) 0 0 0
American Indian/Native American (5) 0 0 0
Other (6) 0 0 0
SAFETY IN PARKS 13

Table 4. N = 50
Which of the following best describes you?
Statement Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Single with children at home (1) 1 0.02 2%
Single without children at home (2) 5 0.10 10%
Married/dating with children at home (3) 35 0.7 70%
Married/dating without children at home (4) 9 0.18 18%

Table 5. N = 53
Approximately how far do you live from Oak Hall Regional Park?
Statement Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Under 5 miles away (1) 33 0.6226 62.3%
5 – 10 miles away (2) 12 0.2264 22.64%
11 - 15 miles away (3) 6 0.1132 11.3%
15+ miles away (4) 2 0.0377 3.8%

Frequencies

With a sample size of 53, there was enough information gathered to create a frequency of

responses. This allows the researchers to determine the occurrence in which participants mention

concepts. The frequency, relative frequency, and percent frequency were calculated to allow

researchers to gain a clear view of the data in which it was received. A brief overview of the data

gathered from the surveys shows that a large majority of participants viewed Oak Hall Regional

Park to be safe for them and their children. Also, when speaking on the proximity of the park to

Route 322, individuals had not viewed the route to be a safety hazard and most have not even

thought of it as such.

Table 6. N = 53
Rate your agreement with the following statement: Do you find that this park meets your
standards when it comes to safety?

Statement Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency

Yes (1) 48 .9056 90.6%
No (2) 5 0.094 9.4%
N/A (3) 0 0 0%
SAFETY IN PARKS 14

Table 7. N = 53
Rate your agreement with the following statement: Does the proximity of Rt. 322, influence
your feelings about the safety of your children at the park?
Statement Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Not at all (1) 26 0.4905 49.1%
Not much (2) 16 0.3018 30.2%
Indifferent (3) 6 0.1132 11.3%
Somewhat (4) 4 0.0754 7.5%
Very Much (5) 1 0.0188 1.9%

Table 8. N = 53
Rate your agreement with the following statement: How important is lighting within the
confines of the park to you?
Statement Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Not at all (1) 8 0.1509 15.1%
Not much (2) 4 0.0754 7.5%
Indifferent (3) 7 0.1320 13.2%
Somewhat (4) 17 0.3207 32.1%
Very Much (5) 17 0.3207 32.1%

Central Tendency

To create a better understanding of the data, researchers developed a central tendency.

Within this section, a mean, median, and mode were developed in order to give readers a look

into the data so that they can quickly grasp and understand the questions in which were in Likert

scale format. In the Likert scale format, 1 = Not at all, 2 = Not much, 3 = Indifferent, 4=

Somewhat, and 5 = Very much. The average response for the first question was roughly

equivalent to not much with the most responses being not much also. The highest selected

answer was Not at all. The average response for the second question was roughly equivalent to

Somewhat important. The median being also of somewhat and the mode was concluded to be

that lighting was very much important within the park.

SAFETY IN PARKS 15

Table 9. N = 53
Mean, Median, Mode for Questions
Statement Mean Median Mode
Rate your agreement with the following statement: Does the 1.8 2 1
proximity of Rt. 322, influence your feelings about the safety of
your children at the park?
Rate your agreement with the following statement: How 3.6 4 5
important is lighting within the confines of the park to you?

Quantitative Content Analysis

During the evaluation of the data recorded from the short answers of the survey,

researchers created categories in which they fit other key words into in order to find the

frequency of each category. For example, whenever a participant mentioned that they believed

there should be better trails or paved trails the response would be recorded and put under the

amenities category. These keywords were put under three different categories, Not Applicable,

Lighting, and Amenities. The meaning for each category and the words in which the researcher

deemed to fit under each category can be found in Appendix D.

Table 10. N = 53
Quantitative Content Analysis: To better fit Oak Hall Regional Park in terms of safety, to you
and your fellow visitor’s needs, what might be some considerations/changes you would like
Centre Region Parks and Recreation to make?
Category Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Not Applicable 20 0.3774 37.7%
Lighting 5 0.0943 9.43%
Amenities 24 0.4528 45.3%

Table 11. N = 53
Quantitative Content Analysis: Given the proximity of Rt. 322 to the park, what are some
changes that you believe might be effective?
Category Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Not Applicable 29 0.5472 54.7%
Lighting 2 0.0377 3.8%
Amenities 20 0.3774 37.7%
SAFETY IN PARKS 16

Contingency Analysis

A contingency analysis was used to develop themes between the categories created by the

researcher. Within this analysis, the researcher did not find much of a theme between the

categories. A correlation between lighting and amenities when mentioned in the short answer

question asking, “To better fit Oak Hall Regional Park in terms of safety, to you and your fellow

visitor’s needs, what might be some considerations/changes you would like Centre Region Parks

and Recreation to make?” was found as it was mentioned 5.7% of the time. Another correlation

was found from the second short answer question between not applicable and amenities. With

the respondents mentioning that they weren’t sure but a possible barrier or fixture could be

placed to create more of a separation between the park and route 322.

Table 12. N = 53
Contingency Analysis: To better fit Oak Hall Regional Park in terms of safety, to you and your
fellow visitor’s needs, what might be some considerations/changes you would like Centre
Region Parks and Recreation to make?
Category Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Not Applicable & Lighting 1 0.0189 1.9%
Not Applicable & Amenities 0 0 0
Lighting & Amenities 3 0.0566 5.7%

Table 13. N = 53
Contingency Analysis: Given the proximity of Rt. 322 to the park, what are some changes that
you believe might be effective?
Category Frequency Relative Frequency Percent Frequency
Not Applicable & Lighting 0 0 0
Not Applicable & Amenities 4 0.0755 7.6%
Lighting & Amenities 0 0 0
SAFETY IN PARKS 17

Interview Results

During the process of collecting information from participants, there was 3 interviews

administered. Using this information, the researchers compiled the data and made several

conclusions.

Codes

Within this section researchers will speak upon codes being established and the relationships

between the said codes. These codes will be developed from researchers by reviewing the data

and determining the most frequently used words by individuals.

When the researchers reviewed the data, the most commonly brought up theme when

individuals spoke on safety within Oak Hall Regional Park, was the remoteness of the park and

the process of getting to the park. A bridge was proposed in one interview which would connect

the surrounding neighborhoods to the park. One participant mentioned the “need for access to

emergency vehicles” to all parts of the park. Another topic that was brought up frequently was

the idea of child supervision and the need for supervision at different age groups. A participant

mentioned that children should be able to run around and “bounce off the ground sometimes”.

When asked about the proximity of the park to route 322, participants responded with answers

ranging from, that it isn’t a safety hazard, to, barriers should be put in place to reduce noise or

even the addition of signs to warn drivers.

Content Analysis

After the researchers have concluded with developing the codes, they will then begin bundling

the data to effectively summarize this information and make conclusions based on this analysis.

With the information that was gathered from conducting these interviews, participants were

most focused on the need for safe passage to and from the park, access for safety vehicles, and a
SAFETY IN PARKS 18

need for creating a barrier between the park and route 322. These conclusions made by the

participants within the interviews are outliers as most of the survey data collected by researchers

concluded that a majority of participants whom visit the park feel safe. Also, most, if not all of

the participants, felt the parks proximity to route 322 was irrelevant and a none issue.

Transferability

Due to the quantitative nature of this study, the researches will use generalizations to

encompass the area surrounding Oak Hall Regional Park as this data will reflect on all of the

individuals within said area.

This information will be of value to the CRPR due to the generalization of how safe

individuals view the park and what the CRPR could do to make improvements.

Confirmability

With the results coming from a variety of different individuals in the area, the researchers

picked up on the varying degree in which respondents mentioned certain words. Within this

section, the researchers will find validity in the responses by comparing it with other responses

from within the sample.

By looking at the frequency charts and quantitative analysis charts, one can conclude that

many participants had the same responses. With the charts being pretty weighted towards one

side on the close ended, Likert scale, questions. The quantitative analysis charts gave insight in

the amount of times participants said key words, these key words were then fit into selected

categories. The participants which were interviewed mentioned information that correlated

closely with the information participants filled out their surveys with. Either mentioning that the

park was fine the way it was in terms of safety or that there should be barriers put in place

between route 322.

SAFETY IN PARKS 19

Discussion

Limitations

When reviewing this research study, it is important to note that when researchers conducted

data collection there were implications in finding individuals at the park. Due to these

implications, the sample size of the study is of a small size, due to this small size, data might be

skewed and unreliable. A few suggestions for future researchers who are going to conduct this

study would include the planning for weather and low usage times during the year. When trying

to conduct a study on an outdoor park, plan to conduct the data collection process during the

warmer seasons of the year. If suggestions were to be made on how to make the study more

legitimate, one might recommend the study last longer than several weeks and also make the data

collection period last longer than two-three weeks. Also, all surveys from all of the parks should

be put on Centre Region Park and Recreation websites and social media platforms to gain as

many participants as possible. In order to conduct research in this manner, one must be prepared

to give participants a different question phrased in a manner as if they had no idea about your

initial focus of your research. For example, if a participant had never been to the park you are

studying, one might rephrase the question to relate to other parks.

Conclusions

Within the study conducted by researchers, it was found that in the realm of safety, a majority

of participants found the park to be of sound safety standards. At the beginning of the study there

wasn’t much the research team could expect as the park is relatively remote not many people

visit it. While there were not many people that visited the park while the researchers attended to

conduct data collection, researchers were unsure of the data that would be received. After finding

a new way to conduct the research study, the researchers were able to collect valuable data from
SAFETY IN PARKS 20

participants that lived in the surrounding area of Oak Hall Regional Park. In this data it was

concluded that 90% of the participants whom attend the park believe the park is safe for them

and their children. Also, participants did not find the proximity of route 322 to the park to be a

concern in which 49.1% and 30.2% responded with not at all influencing and not much,

respectively. With participants also responding to the short answer questions with “not

applicable” when asked about considerations they believe should be taken to make the park a

safer place. It certain that a large majority of participants believe it is a safe place. Although the

responses are overwhelmingly in favor of leaving the park as it is in terms of safety, there were

other considerations including amenities and lighting which could be brought to attention.

With the data collected and the researchers effectively sorting through and analyzing the

information, the researchers could recommend that officials with Centre Region Parks and

Recreation keep the park maintained as it is. Although there should not be drastic changes made,

there also could be changes including several of the key words mentioned by participants in their

surveys.
SAFETY IN PARKS 21

Appendix A

Survey Questionnaire

We’re conducting research on implementing a playground at Oak Hall Regional Park. Our

Research team would love to hear from you about what thoughts or concerns you have regarding

this hypothetical situation. This will help the research team prioritize the expansion of Oak Hall

Regional Park’s amenities, safety, and access considerations to the Centre Region Park and

Recreation board and secure funding. The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your responses

are completely anonymous. You can only take this survey once.

1.) Do you find that this park meets your standards when it comes to safety?

a.) Yes

b.) No

c.) N/A

2.) Does the proximity of Rt. 322, influence your feelings about the safety of your children at the

park?

1 2 3 4 5

Not at all Not Much Indifferent Somewhat Very Much

3.) How important is lighting within the confines of the park to you?

1 2 3 4 5

Not at all Not Much Indifferent Somewhat Very Much

SAFETY IN PARKS 22

4.)To better fit Oak Hall Regional Park in terms of safety, to you and your fellow visitor’s needs,

what might be some considerations/changes you would like Centre Region Parks and Recreation

to make?

5.) Given the proximity of Rt. 322 to the park, what are some changes that you believe might be

effective?
SAFETY IN PARKS 23

Appendix B

Interview Questions

1.)When considering your own personal safety standards, how do you believe Oak Hall Regional

Park compares to other parks you have been to in the past?

2.) Do you believe Centre Region Parks and Recreation has done what is necessary to create a

safe environment for you and all its visitors? If so, please explain, if not, please explain.
SAFETY IN PARKS 24

Appendix C

Data Matrix Plan

1. What is your gender?

_____ Male (1)
_____ Female (2)
_____ Prefer not to answer (3)

2. What is your age?

_____ 18-22
_____ 23-27
_____ 28-35
_____ 35-50
_____ 50+

3. What is your race/ethnicity?

_____ Asian or Pacific Islander (1)
_____ Hispanic/Latino (2)
_____ White/Caucasian (3)
_____ African American (4)
_____ American Indian/Native American (5)
_____ Other: ___________________ (6)

4. Which of the following best describes you?

_____ Single with children at home (1)
_____ Single without children at home (2)
_____ Married/dating with children at home (3)
_____ Married/dating without children at home (4)

5. Approximately how far do you live from Oak Hall Regional Park?
_____ under 5 miles away (1)
_____ 5-10 miles away (2)
_____ 11-15 miles away (3)
_____ 15+ miles away (4)

1.) Do you find that this park meets your standards when it comes to safety?

a.) Yes (1)

b.) No (2)

c.) N/A (3)

SAFETY IN PARKS 25

2.) Does the proximity of Rt. 322, influence your feelings about the safety of your children at the

park?

1 2 3 4 5

Not at all Not Much Indifferent Somewhat Very Much

3.) How important is lighting within the confines of the park to you?

1 2 3 4 5

Not at all Not Much Indifferent Somewhat Very Much

SAFETY IN PARKS 26

Appendix D

Quantitative Content Analysis Dictionary

Category: Not Applicable – Respondents did not find any issues with the safety of the park.

None: Respondent had nothing to share about the topic of safety within the park.

N/A: Respondents did not find any issues with the safety of the park.

Category: Lighting – The addition of more lighting to the park would make visitors feel

more comfortable.

Lighting: The addition of more lighting to the park would make visitors feel more comfortable.

Category: Amenities – Anything involving what individuals can use within the park.

Playground equipment: The construction of a playground which provides a safe area to play for

children.

Trails: Areas marked specifically for individuals to walk or ride bikes.

Bathrooms: The addition of bathrooms for individuals to use and feel comfortable doing so.

Universal Design: The design of a playground in which all children can use safely and

comfortably.

First Aid Kit: An area specifically marked off for a first aid kit to be located.

Barriers: A fence or trees put in an area in which might block off unwanted entities (noise,

traffic, etc.)
SAFETY IN PARKS 27

References

Centre Region Parks and Recreation (CRPR). (2016)

Esteban-Cornejo, I., Carlson, J. A., Conway, T. L., Cain, K. L., Saelens, B. E., Frank, L. D., . . .

Sallis, J. F. (2016). Parental and adolescent perceptions of neighborhood safety related to

adolescents' physical activity in their neighborhood. Research Quarterly for Exercise and

Sport, 87(2), 191-199.

Flick, U. (2015). Introducing research methodology. Los Angeles, Calif: Sage.

Ishaudina, A. N., & Masrom, M. (2017). Level of Parents’ Awareness on Children’s Safety at

Public Playground Taman Tasik Titiwangsa. In Symposium on Occupational Safety &

Health. Vol. 13, p. 24.

Lavrakas, P. (2008). Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods - Volume 1. London [etc.]: Sage

Publications.

Santos, M. P., Pizarro, A. N., Mota, J., & Marques, E. A. (2013). Parental physical activity,

safety perceptions and children's independent mobility. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 584-

584.

Valentine, G. and McKendrick, J. (1997). Children’s Outdoor Play: Exploring Parental Concerns

About Children’s Safety and the Changing Nature of Childhood. Geoforum, Vol. 28, No.

2 pp. 219-235.

Vincenten, J. A., Sector, M. J., Rogmans, W., & Bouter, L. (2005). Parents' perceptions, attitudes

and behaviors towards child safety: A study in 14 European countries. International

Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion, 12(3), 183-189.

10.1080/17457300500136557
SAFETY IN PARKS 28

U.S. Census Bureau. (2016). Retrieved from:

https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF