Gender differences in the distribution of children's physical activity: evidence from nine countries.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity in childhood is thought to influences health and development. Previous studies have found that boys are typically more active than girls, yet the focus has largely been on differences in average levels or proportions above a threshold rather than the full distribution of activity across all intensities. We thus examined differences in the distribution of physical activity between girls and boys in a multi-national sample of children. METHODS: We used the harmonised International Children Accelerometry Database (ICAD), including waist-worn accelerometry data from 15,461 individuals (Boys: 48.3%) from 9 countries. Employing Generalised Additive Models of Location, Shape, and Scale (GAMLSS) we investigated gender differences in the distribution of individuals, including comparisons of variability (SD) and average physical activity levels (mean and median) and skewness. We conducted this analysis for each activity intensity (Sedentary, Light, and Moderate-to-Vigorous (MVPA)) and a summary measure (counts per minute (CPM)). RESULTS: Sizable gender differences in the distribution of activity were found for moderate to vigorous activity and counts per minute, with boys having higher average levels (38% higher mean volumes of MVPA, 20% higher CPM), yet substantially more between-person variability (30% higher standard deviation (SD) for MVPA, 17% higher SD for CPM); boys' distributions were less positively skewed than girls. Conversely, there was little to no difference between girls and boys in the distribution of sedentary or light-intensity activity. CONCLUSIONS: Inequality in activity between girls and boys was driven by MVPA. The higher mean volumes of MVPA in boys occurred alongside greater variability. This suggests a need to consider the underlying distribution of activity in future research; for example, interventions which target gender inequality in MVPA may inadvertently lead to increased inequality within girls.

How evolutionary behavioural sciences can help us understand behaviour in a pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought science into the public eye and to the attention of governments more than ever before. Much of this attention is on work in epidemiology, virology and public health, with most behavioural advice in public health focusing squarely on 'proximate' determinants of behaviour. While epidemiological models are powerful tools to predict the spread of disease when human behaviour is stable, most do not incorporate behavioural change. The evolutionary basis of our preferences and the cultural evolutionary dynamics of our beliefs drive behavioural change, so understanding these evolutionary processes can help inform individual and government decision-making in the face of a pandemic. Lay summary: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought behavioural sciences into the public eye: Without vaccinations, stopping the spread of the virus must rely on behaviour change by limiting contact between people. On the face of it, "stop seeing people" sounds simple. In practice, this is hard. Here we outline how an evolutionary perspective on behaviour change can provide additional insights. Evolutionary theory postulates that our psychology and behaviour did not evolve to maximize our health or that of others. Instead, individuals are expected to act to maximise their inclusive fitness (i.e, spreading our genes) - which can lead to a conflict between behaviours that are in the best interests for the individual, and behaviours that stop the spread of the virus. By examining the ultimate explanations of behaviour related to pandemic-management (such as behavioural compliance and social distancing), we conclude that "good of the group" arguments and "one size fits all" policies are unlikely to encourage behaviour change over the long-term. Sustained behaviour change to keep pandemics at bay is much more likely to emerge from environmental change, so governments and policy makers may need to facilitate significant social change - such as improving life experiences for disadvantaged groups.