An empirical test of the competing destinations model

Journal of Geographical Systems

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 301-323

  Hu, Pingzhao ^a   Pooler, Jim ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

Author keywords

Competing destinations model; Distance decay parameter; Map pattern; Origin specific models; Spatial autocorrelation Z test; Spatial structure

Indexed keywords

NUMERICAL MODEL; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; SPATIAL DATA;

EID: 27344435893     PISSN: 14355930     EISSN: 14355949     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s101090200088     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Akwawua S (1995) Intervening opportunities in the modeling of migration: A new approach to the spatial definition of opportunities and application to US state-to-state migration, 1975-1980. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Geography, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon
2. Akwawua S, Pooler J (2001) The development of an intervening opportunities model with spatial dominance effects. Journal of Geographical Systems 3:69-86
3. Batty M, Mackie S (1972) The calibration of gravity, entropy and related models of spatial interaction. Environment and Planning 4:205-233
4. Baxter MJ (1983) Model misspecification and spatial structure in spatial interaction models. Environment and Planning A 15:319-327
5. Baxter MJ (1985) Misspecification in spatial interaction models: Future results. Environment and Planning A 15:319-327
6. Cesario FJ (1973a) A generalized trip distribution model. Journal of Regional Science 13:233-247
7. Cesario FJ (1973b) More on the generalized trip distribution model. Journal of Regional Science 14:389-397
8. Cliff AD, Martin L, Ord JK (1974) Evaluating the friction of distance parameter in gravity models. Regional Studies 8:281-286
9. Curry L, Griffith DA, Sheppard ES (1975) Those gravity parameters again. Regional Studies 9:289-296
10. Desta E, Pigozzi BWM (1991) Further experiments with spatial structure measures in gravity model. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie 82:220-226
11. Ebdon D (1985) Statistics in Geography. Basil Blackwell Oxford, pp. 133-141
12. Evans AW (1971) The calibration of trip distribution models with exponential or similar cost of functions. Transportation Research 5:15-38
13. Ewing G (1986) Spatial pattern in distance-deterrence parameters and Fotheringham's theory of competing destinations. Environment and Planning A 18:547-551
14. Fik TJ, Mulligan GF (1990) Spatial flows and competing central places: Towards a general theory of hierarchical interaction. Environment and Planning A 22:527-549
15. Fik TJ, Mulligan GF (1999) Functional form and spatial interaction models. Environment and Planning A 30:1497-1507
16. Fik TJ, Robert GA, Mulligan GF (1992) Labor migration amongst hierarchically competing and intervening origins and destinations. Environment and Planning A 24:1271-1290
17. Fotheringham AS (1983a) A new set of spatial interaction models: The theory of competing destination. Environment and Planning A 15:15-36
18. Fotheringham AS (1983b) Some theoretical aspects of destination choice and their relevance to production constrained gravity models. Environment and Planning A 15:1121-1132
19. Fotheringham AS (1984) Spatial flows and spatial patterns. Environment and Planning A 16:529-543
20. Fotheringham AS (1986) Modeling hierarchical destination choice. Environment and Planning A 18:401-418
21. Fotheringham AS (1991) Migration and spatial structure: The development of the competing destinations model. In: Stillwell J, Congdon P (eds) Migration and Models: Macro and Micro Approaches. Balhaven Press, London, pp. 57-72
22. Fotheringham AS, O'Kelly ME (1989) Spatial Interaction Models: Formulations and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston
23. Gensch DH, Svestka JA (1979) An exact hierarchical algorithm fro determining aggregate statistics from individual choice data. Management Science 10:939-952
24. Griffith DA (1976) Spatial structure and spatial interaction: A review. Environment and Planning A 18:731-740
25. Guldmann JM (1999) Competing destinations and intervening opportunities interaction models of inter-city telecommunication flows. Papers in Regional Science 78:179-194
26. Guy CM (1987) Recent advances in spatial interaction modeling: an application to the forecasting of shopping travel. Environment and Planning A 17:173-186
27. Haynes KE, Fortheringham AS (1984) Gravity and Spatial Interaction Models. SAGE Publications, Inc., Beverly Hill, California
28. Harwitz M, Lentnek B, Rogerson P, Smith TE (1998) Optimal search on spatial paths with recall: theoretical foundations. Papers in Regional Science 3:301-327
29. Ishikawa Y (1987) An empirical study of the competing destinations model using Japanese interaction data. Environment and Planning A 19:1359-1373
30. Ishikawa Y (1990) Explorations into the two-stage destination choice. Geographical Review of Japan 62:75-85
31. Knudsen CD, Fotheringham AS (1986) Matrix comparison, goodness-of-fit and spatial interaction modeling. International Regional Science Review 10:127-147
32. Lo L (1991) Spatial structure and spatial interaction: A simulation approach. Environment and Planning A 23:1279-1300
33. Okabe A, Tagashira N (1996) Spatial aggregation bias in a regression model containing a distance variable. Journal of Geographical Systems 3:77-99
34. Openshaw S (1976) An empirical study of some spatial interaction models. Environment and Planning A 8:23-41
35. Plane DA, Rogerson PA (1986) Dynamic flow modeling with interregional dependency effect: An application to structural change in the U.S. migration system. Demography 23:91-104
36. Pooler J (1992) Spatial uncertainty and spatial dominance in interaction modeling: A theoretical perspective on spatial competition. Environment and Planning A 24:995-1008
37. Pooler J (1998) Competition among destinations in spatial interaction models: A new point of view. Chinese Geographical Science 8:212-224
38. Raphael S (1998) Intervening opportunities, competing searches, and the intra-metropolitan flow of male youth labor. Journal of Regional Science 38:43-5
39. Thomas RM (1967) Introduction to Numerical Methods and Fortran Programing. Wiley, New York
40. Thorsen I, Gitlesen JP (1998) Empirical evaluation of alternative model specification to predict computing flows. Journal of Regional Science 38:273-292
41. Tversky A (1972). Elimination by aspects: a theory of consumer choice. Psychological Review, 79:281-298
42. Wilson AG (1967) A statistical theory of spatial distribution models. Transportation Research, 1:253-269