This study developed a dynamic model for individuals’ commute mode choice over their lifetime by using retrospective survey data. The study conceptualized that individuals reassessed their choice of commute mode when they relocated to a new residential location. Following the re-appraisal, people either continued using the same mode, which was considered mode loyalty, or made a transition to a new mode, which was considered mode transition in this study. The study developed a panel-based random-parameters logit model. One key feature of this study is a life-oriented approach to accommodate the effects of life-cycle events, longer-term changes, life-oriented sociodemographic transitions, and accessibility transitions. The model results suggest that the high-income group tends to be car loyal. No car ownership over the lifetime and the addition of a job increase the probability of transit loyalty. Individuals with no children in the household and residing in an area with high walk and bike usage have a higher probability to be loyal to active transportation. A decrease in household income and tenure transition from owned to rental are likely to trigger a transition from car to transit. However, the presence of children and the addition of a car increase the transition propensity from transit to car. The model results suggest that the use of life-oriented characteristics to explain longer-term commute mode loyalty and transition behavior provides important behavioral insights into the dynamics of individuals’ travel behavior over their lifetime.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
PinjariA. R., PendyalaR. M., BhatC. R., and WaddellP. A.. Modeling Residential Sorting Effects to Understand the Impact of the Built Environment on Commute Mode Choice. Transportation, Vol. 34, No. 5, 2007, pp. 557–573.
2.
ChenC., GongH., and PaaswellR.. Role of the Built Environment on Mode Choice Decisions: Additional Evidence on the Impact of Density. Transportation, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2008, pp. 285–299.
3.
ClarkB., ChatterjeeK., and MeliaS.. Changes to Commute Mode: The Role of Life Events, Spatial Context, and Environmental Attitude. Presented at 94th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2015.
4.
van der WaerdenP. J. H. J., BorgersA. W. J., and TimmermansH. J. P.. Key Events and Critical Incidents Influencing Transport Mode Choice Switching Behavior: An Exploratory Study. Presented at 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2003.
5.
ZhangM.Travel Choice with No Alternative: Can Land Use Reduce Automobile Dependence?Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 25, No. 3, 2006, pp. 311–326.
6.
OakilA. M., EttemaD., ArentzeT., and TimmermansH.. A Longitudinal Analysis of the Dependence of the Commute Mode Switching Decision on Mobility Decisions and Life Cycle Events. Presented at 16th International Conference of Hong Kong Society for Transportation Studies, Hong Kong, 2011.
7.
PortogheseA., SpissuE., BhatC. R., EluruN., and MeloniI.. A Copula-Based Joint Model of Commute Mode Choice and Number of Non-Work Stops During the Commute. International Journal of Transport Economics, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2011, pp. 337–362.
8.
GardnerB.Modelling Motivation and Habit in Stable Travel Mode Contexts. Transportation Research Part F, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2009, pp. 68–76.
9.
BambergS., AjzenI., and SchmidtP.. Choice of Travel Mode in the Theory of Planned Behavior: The Roles of Past Behavior, Habit, and Reasoned Action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 25, No. 3, 2010, pp. 175–187.
10.
KenyonS., and LyonsG.. The Value of Integrated Multimodal Traveler Information and Its Potential Contribution to Modal Change. Transportation Research Part F, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2003, pp. 1–21.
11.
StanbridgeK., LyonsG., and FarthingS.. Travel Behaviour Change and Residential Relocation. Presented at 3rd International Conference on Traffic and Transport Psychology, Nottingham, United Kingdom, 2004.
12.
VerhoevenM., ArentzeT., TimmermansH. J. P., and van der WaerdenP.. Modeling the Impact of Key Events on Long-Term Transport Mode Choice Decisions: Decision Network Approach Using Event History Data. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1926, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 106–114.
13.
SchwanenT., and MokhtarianP. L.. What Affects Commute Mode Choice: Neighborhood Physical Structure or Preferences Toward Neighborhoods?Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2005, pp. 83–99.
14.
StanbridgeK., and LyonsG.. Travel Behaviour Considerations During the Process of Residential Relocation. Presented at 11th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research, Kyoto, Japan, 2006.
15.
DargayJ., and HanlyM.. Volatility of Car Ownership, Commuting Mode, and Time in the UK. Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2007, pp. 934–948.
16.
ClarkW. A. V., HuangY., and WithersS.. Does Commuting Distance Matter? Commuting Tolerance and Residential Change. Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol. 33, No. 2, 2003, pp. 199–221.
17.
FatmiM. R., and HabibM. A.. Modeling Mode Switching Behavior Associated with the Change of Residential Location Using Longitudinal Data. Presented at 13th World Conference on Transport Research, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013.
18.
HessS., PolakJ. W., DalyA., and HymanG.. Flexible Substitution Patterns in Models of Mode and Time of Day Choice: New Evidence from the UK and the Netherlands. Transportation, Vol. 34, No. 2, 2007, pp. 213–238.
19.
NurdeenA., RahmatR. A. O. K., and IsmailA.. Modeling of Transportation Behavior for Coercive Measures for Car Driving in Kuala Lumpur. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2007, pp. 18–23.
20.
AthenaT., AmaliaP., and ConstantinosA.. Development of a Latent Variable Model to Capture the Impact of Risk Aversion on Travelers’ Switching Behavior. Journal of Choice Modelling, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2010, pp. 127–148.
21.
WangT., and ChenC.. Attitudes, Mode Switching Behavior, and the Built Environment: A Longitudinal Study in the Puget Sound Region. Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 46, No. 10, 2012, pp. 1594–1607.
22.
IdrisA. O., Nurul HabibK. M., and ShalabyA.. Evaluating Transit Ridership Overestimation in Mode Shift Modeling. Presented at 94th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2015.
23.
MohammadianA., and MillerE. J.. Dynamic Modeling of Household Automobile Transactions. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1831, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 98–105.
24.
HarounA., and MillerE. J.. Retrospective Surveys in Support of Dynamic Model-Building. Presented at International Conference on Travel Survey Methods, Costa Rica, 2004.
25.
HabibM. A., and MillerE. J.. Reference-Dependent Residential Location Choice Model Within a Relocation Context. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2133, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009, pp. 92–99.
26.
ReveltD., and TrainK.. Mixed Logit with Repeated Choices: Households’ Choices of Appliance Efficiency Level. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 80, No. 4, 1998, pp. 647–657.
27.
FatmiM. R., ChowdhuryS., and HabibM. A.. A Two-Stage Panel Model of Residential Search and Location Choice Decisions. Presented at 95th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2016.
28.
TrainK.Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2003.
29.
BhatC. R.Simulation Estimation of Mixed Discrete Choice Models Using Randomized and Scrambled Halton Sequences. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 37, No. 9, 2003, pp. 837–855.
30.
SchoettleB., and SivakM.. The Reasons for the Recent Decline in Young Driver Licensing in the United States. Traffic Injury Prevention, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2014, pp. 6–9.
