Comparison of passive versus active photo capture of built environment features by technology naïve Latinos using the SenseCam and Stanford healthy neighborhood discovery tool

Assessments designed to measure features of the built environment are challenging and have traditionally been conducted by trained researchers. The purpose of this study was to explore and compare both the feasibility and utility of having community residents use two different technological devices to assess their neighborhood built environment features: the Stanford Healthy Neighborhood Discovery Tool (which allows users to thoughtfully take photographs) and the SenseCam (which automatically takes photographs). Consented participants were low income, tech-naïve, Latino adolescents aged 11 to 14 years (n=8), and older adults aged 63 to 80 years (n=7) from North Fair Oaks, California. Participants used the devices while on a "usual" 45 to 60 minute walk through their neighborhood. Photos from each device were reviewed, coded, categorized into themes, and compared. Perceptual data regarding the use of the SenseCam were available for 15 participants and SenseCam photographs were available for 7 participants. There were 1,678 photos automatically captured by the SenseCam compared to 112 photos taken by participants with the Discovery Tool. Of the original 1,678 SenseCam photos there were 68 in which researchers coded built environment features that were not captured by the community residents using the Discovery Tool. Forty-two (62%) of these photos were of positive features; and 26 (38%) were of negative features. The SenseCam captured a greater number of images with positive features that were not captured by adolescents via the Discovery Tool; as well as a greater number of negative features not captured by the older adults via the Discovery Tool. There were two environmental elements (graffiti, dogs) captured by the Discovery Tool though not the SenseCam. Overall, study participants were receptive to both devices and indicated that they would be interested in using them again for a longer period of time. Older adults reported more positive perceptions about the SenseCam than adolescents. While the sample was small, study results indicate that the SenseCam may be useful in capturing built environment features that affect physical activity but that community residents don't notice, perhaps because they are habituated to certain conditions in their neighborhoods. The results suggest that this type of habituation may have different valences (positive or negative) for different age groups. Given the impact the built environment has on physical activity, particularly in low-income communities, further research regarding the use of the SenseCam to passively gather built environment data in tech-naïve populations is warranted.