Article Data

  • Views 752
  • Dowloads 117

Original Research

Open Access


  • Eun-Ju Choi1
  • Byoung-Wook Yoo2
  • Wi-Young So3
  • Seyong Jang4

1Assistant Professor, Division of Sport Science, College of Science and Technology, Konkuk University, Chungju-si, Republic of Korea

2CEO, Department of Sports Science, SPKOREA, Busan, Republic of Korea

3Associate professor, Sports and Health Care Major, College of Humanities and Arts, Korea National University of Transportation, Chungju-si, Republic of Korea

4Senior Researcher, Department of Sport Science, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Republic of Korea

DOI: 10.22374/1875-6859.13.1.5 Vol.13,Issue 1,May 2017 pp.37-44

Published: 25 May 2017

*Corresponding Author(s): Seyong Jang E-mail:

PDF (284.85 kB)



The relationship between socioeconomic status and physical fi tness level is unclear. Therefore, this study examined the relationship between socioeconomic factors and physical fi tness among Korean adults.


A retrospective analysis of the physical fi tness and demographic data extracted from the 2013 National Fit-ness Award project conducted in Korea. The data from 1,690 men and 1,982 women, 19–64 years-old, were included. Sampling strategy, using 14 clusters and stratifi cation levels, ensured a national representation of the Republic of Korea. The following physical fi tness variables were included in the analysis: time on the 50 metre dash run, repetitions of shuttle run, distance of standing long jump, distance of sit-and-reach, number of sit-ups in 1 minute, and grip strength. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to examine whether physical fi tness levels were related to occupation (physically active, non-active and other), household income (divided into quartiles) and location of residence (rural or urban), adjusting for age and sex.


Participants with physically active occupations had higher fi tness levels than those with non-active and other occupations. As the household income increased, the fi tness levels also tended to increase. Participants living in a small city had higher fi tness levels than those living in a large city, except on the 50 metre dash run.


Physical fi tness variables could be aff ected by socioeconomic status.


household income, occupation, region, physical fi tness, socioeconomic factors

Cite and Share



1. Bouchard C, Blair SN, Haskell W: Physical activity and health (2nd Edition). Human Kinetics; 2012.

2. Hu FB, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ, et al. Diet: Lifestyle, and the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus in women. N Engl J Med 2001;345:790–97.

3. Manson JE, Greenland P, LaCroix AZ, et al. Walking compared with vigorous exercise for the prevention of cardiovascular events in women. N Engl J Med 2002;347:716–25.

4. Ojiambo RM, Easton C, Casajús JA, et al. Eff ect of urbanization on objectively measured physical activ-ity levels, sedentary time, and indices of adiposity in Kenyan adolescents. J Phys Act Health 2012;9:115–23.

5. Assah FK, Ekelund U, Brage S, Mbanya JC, Wareham NJ. Urbanization, physical activity, and metabolic health in sub-Saharan Africa. Diabetes Care 2011;34(2):491–96.

6. Hakeem R, Thomas J, Badruddin SH: Urbanisation and activity pattern of south Asian children. J Pak Med Assoc 2002;52:402–407.

7. Andrade S, Ochoa-Avilés A, Lachat C, et al. Physical fi tness among urban and rural Ecuadorian adolescents and its association with blood lipids: a cross sectional study. BMC Pediatrics 2014;14:106.

8. Jiménez Pavón D, Ortega FP, Ruiz JR, et al. Socioeco-nomic status infl uences physical fi tness in European adolescents independently of body fat and physical activity: the HELENA study. Nutr Hosp 2010:25:311–16.

9. Jin Y, Jones-Smith JC. Associations between family income and children’s physical fi tness and obesity in California, 2010-2012. Prev Chronic Dis 2015;12:E17.

10. Freitas D, Maia J, Beunen G, et al. Socioeconomic sta-tus, growth, physical activity and fi tness: the Madeira Growth Study. Ann Hum Biol 2007;34:107–22.

11. Lachat C, Otchere S, Roberfroid D, et al. Diet and physical activity for the prevention of noncommunicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a sys-tematic policy review. PLoS Med 2013;10(6):e1001465.

12. Wang Y, Tuomilehto J, Jousilahti P. Occupational, com-muting, and leisure-time physical activity in relation to heart failure among Finnish men and women. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56(14):1140–48.

13. Wennberg P, Lindahl B, Hallmans G. The eff ects of commuting activity and occupational and leisure time physical activity on risk of myocardial infarction. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2006;13(6):924–30.

14. Menotti A, Lanti M, Maiani G. Forty-year mortality from cardiovascular diseases and their risk factors in men of the Italian rural areas of the seven countries study. Acta Cardiol 2005;60(5):521–31.

15. Andersen LB, Schnohr P, Schroll M. All-cause mortality associated with physical activity during leisure time, work, sports, and cycling to work. Arch Intern Med 2000;160(11):1621–28.

16. Holtermann A, Mortensen OS, Burr H. Physical demands at work, physical fi tness, and 30-year ischaemic heart disease and all-cause mortality in the Copenhagen Male Study. Scand J Work Environ Health 2010;36(6):466–72.

17. Korean Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism and Korea Institute of Sport Science: Promotion plan for National Fitness Award 100. Korean Ministry of Cul-ture, Sports and Tourism and Korea Institute of Sport Science (in Korean); 2013.

18. Burton NW, Turrell G, Oldenburg B. Participation in recreational physical activity: why do socioeconomic groups diff er? Health Educ Behav 2003;30(2):225–44.

19. Macintyre S, Mutrie N. Socio-economic diff erences in cardiovascular disease and physical activity: stereotypes and reality. J R Soc Promot Health 2004;124(2):66–69.

20. Fahlman MM, Hall HL, Lock R. Ethnic and socio-economic comparisons of fi tness, activity levels, and barriers to exercise in high school females. J Sch Health 2006;76(1):12–17.

21. Mutunga M, Gallagher AM, Boreham C, et al. So-cioeconomic diff erences in risk factors for obesity in adolescents in Northern Ireland. Int J Pediatr Obes 2006;1(2):114–19.

22. Duncan M, Woodfi eld L, Al-Nakeeb Y, Nevill A. The impact of socio-economic status on the physical activity levels of British secondary school children. Eur J Phys Educ 2002;7(1):30–44.

23. Federico B, Falese F, Capelli G. Socio-economic in-equalities in physical activity practice among Italian children and adolescents: a cross sectional study. Z Gesundh Wiss 2009;17(6):377–84.

24. Hanson MD, Chen E. Socioeconomic status and health behaviors in adolescence: a review of the literature. J Behav Med 2007;30(3):263–85.

25. Lämmle L, Worth A, Bös K. Socio-demographic correlates of physical activity and physical fi tness in German children and adolescents. Eur J Public Health 2012;22(6):880–84.

26. Mobley LR, Root ED, Finkelstein EA, et al. Environment, obesity, and cardiovascular disease risk in low-income women. Am J Prev Med 2006;30(4):327–32.

27. Centers for Disease Control and prevention. Strength training among adults aged 65 years United States, 2001. Morbid Mortal Weekly Rep 2004;53(2):25–28.

28. Park JJ, Hong YJ. The study on depression in elderly women according to physical exercise (in Korean). J Korean Soc Aerob Exercise 2000;4(1):13–27.

29. Ojiambo RM, Easton C, Casajús JA, et al. Eff ect of urbanization on objectively measured physical activ-ity levels, sedentary time, and indices of adiposity in Kenyan adolescents. J Phys Act Health 2012;9:115–23.

30. Smith LP, Ng SW, Popkin BM. No time for the gym?Housework and other non-labor market time use pat-terns are associated with meeting physical activity recommendations among adults in full-time, sedentary jobs. Soc Sci Med 2014;120:126–34.

31. Ozdirenç M, Ozcan A, Akin F, Gelecek N. Physical fi tness in rural children compared with urban children in Turkey. Pediatr Int 2005;47(1):26–31.

32. Campos H, Bailey SM, Gussak LS, et al. Relations of body habitus, fi tness level, and cardiovascular risk factors including lipoproteins and apolipoproteins in a rural and urban Costa Rican population. Arterioscler Thromb 1991;11(4):1077–88.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,200 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Social Sciences Citation Index Social Sciences Citation Index contains over 3,400 journals across 58 social sciences disciplines, as well as selected items from 3,500 of the world’s leading scientific and technical journals. More than 9.37 million records and 122 million cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Current Contents - Social & Behavioral Sciences Current Contents - Social & Behavioral Sciences provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in the social and behavioral sciences.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

SCOPUS Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

DOAJ DOAJ is a community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals.

CrossRef Crossref makes research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. Crossref committed to open scholarly infrastructure and collaboration, this is now announcing a very deliberate path.

Portico Portico is a community-supported preservation archive that safeguards access to e-journals, e-books, and digital collections. Our unique, trusted process ensures that the content we preserve will remain accessible and usable for researchers, scholars, and students in the future.

Submission Turnaround Time