Car availability explained by the structural relationships between lifestyles, residential location, and underlying residential and travel attitudes

Transport Policy

Volumn 35, Issue , 2014, Pages 88-99

  Van Acker, Veronique ^a,b   Mokhtarian, Patricia L ^c   Witlox, Frank ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

Attitudes; Car availability; Land use; Lifestyles; Self selection; Structural equations model

Indexed keywords

CAR OWNERSHIP; CAR USE; LAND USE; LIFESTYLE; NEIGHBORHOOD; RESIDENTIAL LOCATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

BELGIUM; FLANDERS;

EID: 84901622405     PISSN: 0967070X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.05.006     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behaviour. Organ Behav. Hum. Decis. 1991, 50:179-211.
2. Babbie E.R. The Practice of Social Research 2010, Wadsworth, Belmont.
3. Bagley M.N., Mokhtarian P.L. The role of lifestyle and attitudinal characteristics in residential neighbourhood choice. Transportation and Traffic Theory 1999, Elsevier, New York. A. Ceder (Ed.).
4. Bagley M.N., Mokhtarian P.L. The impact of residential neighborhood type on travel behavior: a structural equation modeling approach. Ann. Regul. Sci. 2002, 36(2):279-297.
5. Bentler P.M., Dudgeon P. Covariance structure analysis: Statistical practice, theory and directions. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 1996, 47:563-592.
6. Bhat C.R., Guo J.Y. A comprehensive analysis of built environment characteristics on household residential choice and auto ownership levels. Transp. Res. B 2007, 41(5):506-526.
7. Bohte, W., Maat, K., van Wee, B., 2008. A preliminary analysis of the role of attitudes in analysing residential self-selection mechanisms: a case in the Netherlands. In: Anderson, B., (ed.). Proceedings of the 55th Annual North American Meetings of the Regional Science Association International. North American Regional Science, New York.
8. Bohte W., Maat K., van Wee B. Measuring attitudes in research on residential self-selection and travel behaviour: a review of theories and empirical research. Transp. Rev. 2009, 29(3):325-357.
9. Bollen K.A. Structural Equations with Latent Variables 1989, Wiley, New York.
10. Brehn S.S., Kassin S.M., Fein S. Social Psychology 2005, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
11. Cao X.Y., Mokhtarian P.L., Handy S.L. Neighborhood design and vehicle type choice: evidence from Northern California. Transp. Res. D 2006, 11(2):113-145.
12. Cao X.Y., Mokhtarian P.L., Handy S.L. Cross-sectional and quasi-panel explorations of the connection between the built environment and auto ownership. Environ. Plan. A 2007, 39(4):830-847.
13. Cervero R., Kockelman K. Travel demand and the 3 D[U+05F3]s: density, diversity and design. Transp. Res. D 1997, 2(3):199-219.
14. Chen C., Gong H., Paaswell R. Role of the built environment on mode choice decisions: additional evidence on the impact of density. Transportation 2008, 35(3):285-299.
15. Choo S., Mokhtarian P.L. What type of vehicle do people drive? The role of attitude and lifestyle in influencing vehicle type choice. Transp. Res. A 2004, 38(3):201-222.
16. De Maesschalck R., Jouan-Rimbaud D., Massart D.L. The Mahalanobis distance. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 2000, 50:1-18.
17. Dieleman F.M., Dijst M., Burghouwt G. Urban form and travel behaviour: micro-level household attributes and residential context. Urban Stud. 2002, 39(3):507-527.
18. Dobson R., Dunbar F., Smith C.J., Reibstein D., Lovelock C. Structural models for the analysis of traveller attitude-behavior relationships. Transportation 1978, 7(4):351-363.
19. Fishbein M., Ajzen I. Attitudes and opinions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1972, 23:487-544.
20. Ganzeboom, H., 1988. Leefstijlen in Nederland: Een Verkennende Studie. Sociaal Cultureel Planbureau, Rijswijk.
21. Gao S., Mokhtarian P.L., Johnston R.A. Exploring the connections among job accessibility, employment, income, and auto ownership using structural equation modelling. Ann. Regul. Sci. 2008, 42(2):341-356.
22. Gärling T., Gillhom R., Gärling A. Reintroducing attitude theory in travel behaviour research. The validity of an interactive interview procedure to predict car use. Transportation 1998, 25(2):129-146.
23. Ghosh-Dastidar B., Schafer J.L. Outlier detection and editing procedures for continuous multivariate data. J. Off. Stat. 2006, 22:487-506.
24. Golledge R.G., Stimson R.J. Spatial Behavior: A Geographic Perspective 1997, The Guildford Press, New York.
25. Golob T.F., Horowitz A.D., Wachs M. Attitude-behavior relationships in travel demand modelling. Behavioural Travel Demand Modeling 1979, Croom Helm, London. D.A. Hensher, P.R. Stopher (Eds.).
26. Gorham R. Comparative neighborhood travel analysis: An approach to understanding the relationship between planning and travel behaviour. In Perpetual Motion: Travel Behavior Research Opportunities and Application Challenges 2002, Pergamon, Amsterdam. H.S. Mahmassani (Ed.).
27. Groves R.M. Survey Errors and Survey Costs 1989, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
28. Handy S.L., Cao X.Y., Mokhtarian P.L. Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transp. Res. D 2005, 10(6):427-444.
29. Hu L., Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis. Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999, 16(1):1-55.
30. Johansson M.V., Heldt T., Johansson P. The effects of attitudes and personality traits on mode choice. Transp. Res. A 2006, 40(6):507-525.
31. Kitamura, R., 1988. Life-style and travel demand. In: Special Report 220: A Look Ahead: Year 2020. Transportation Research Board National Research Council, Washington D.C.
32. Kitamura R., Mokhtarian P.L., Laidet L. A micro-analysis of land use and travel in five neighborhoods in the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation 1997, 24(2):125-158.
33. Kline R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling 2005, Guilford Press, New York.
34. Kockelman K. Travel behavior as function of accessibility, land use mixing, and land use balance. Evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area. Transp. Res. Rec. 1997, 1607:116-125.
35. Kuppam A.R., Pendyala R.M., Rahman S. Analysis of the role of travel attitudes and perceptions in explaining mode-choice behavior. Transp. Res. Rec. 1999, 1676:68-76.
36. Lane B., Potter S. The adoption of cleaner vehicles in the UK: Exploring the consumer attitude-action gap. J. Clean. Product. 2007, 15(11-12):1085-1092.
37. Lanzendorf M. Mobility styles and travel behavior. Application of a lifestyle approach to leisure travel. Transp. Res. Rec. 2002, 1807:163-173.
38. Levinson D.M., Kumar A. Density and the journey to work. Growth Change 1997, 28(2):147-172.
39. McNally M.G., Kulkarni A. Assessment of influence of land use-transportation system on travel behavior. Transp. Res. Rec. 1997, 1607:105-115.
40. Mokhtarian P.L., Cao X. Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: a focus on methodologies. Transp. Res. B 2008, 42(3):204-228.
41. Munters Q.J. Bestaan leefstijlen (nog) wel?. Sociol. Gids 1992, 39:179-185.
42. Muthén L.K., Muthén B.O. Mplus User[U+05F3]s Guide 2006, Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles. Fourth Edition.
43. Naess P. Residential location affects travel behavior-but how and why? The case of Copenhagen metropolitan area. Prog. Plann. 2005, 63:167-257.
44. Parkany E., Gallagher R., Viveiros P. Are attitudes important in travel choice?. Transp. Res. Rec. 2004, 1984:127-139.
45. Raykov T., Marcoulides G.A. A First Course in Structural Equation Modeling 2000, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah.
46. Salomon I. Life style as a factor in explaining travel behavior. (PhD thesis) 1981, Massachusettes Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
47. Scheiner J., Holz-Rau C. Travel mode choice: affected by objective or subjective determinants?. Transportation 2007, 34(4):487-511.
48. Schwanen T., Dijst M., Dieleman F.M. A microlevel analysis of residential context and travel time. Environ. Plan. A 2002, 34(8):1487-1507.
49. Schwanen T., Mokhtarian P. What affects commute mode choice: neighborhood physical structure or preferences toward neighbourhoods?. J. Transp. Geogr. 2005, 13(1):83-99.
50. Simma A., Axhausen K.W. Interactions between travel behaviour, accessibility and personal characteristics: the case of Upper Austria. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 2003, 3(2):179-197.
51. SPSS Inc SPSS 15.0 Brief Guide 2006, SPSS Inc, Chicago.
52. Steiner R.L. Residential density and travel patterns: review of the literature. Transp. Res. Rec. 1994, 1466:37-43.
53. Tardiff T.J. Causal inferences involving transportation attitudes and behaviour. Transp. Res. 1977, 11(6):397-404.
54. Thogersen J. Understanding repetitive travel mode choices in a stable context: a panel study approach. Transp. Res. A 2006, 40(8):621-638.
55. Van Acker V., van Wee B., Witlox F. When transport geography meets social psychology: toward a conceptual model of travel behaviour. Transp. Rev. 2010, 30(2):219-240.
56. Van Acker V., Mokhtarian P.L., Witlox F. Going soft: on how subjective variables explain modal choices. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 2011, 11(2):115-147.
57. Van Acker V., Witlox F. Car ownership as a mediating variable in car travel behaviour research using a structural equation modelling approach to identify its dual relationship. J. Transp. Geogr. 2010, 18(1):65-74.
58. Van Acker V., Witlox F. Commuting trips within tours: how is commuting related to land use?. Transportation 2011, 38(3):465-486.
59. van Wee B. Self-selection: a key to a better understanding of location choices, travel behaviour and transport externalities?. Transp. Rev. 2009, 29(3):279-292.
60. van Wee B., Holwerda H., van Baren R. Preferences for modes, residential location and travel behaviour: the relevance for land-use impacts on mobility. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 2002, 2(3-4):305-316.