Impact of Subjective and Objective Factors on Bus Travel Intention

Abstract

Given the lack of quantitative descriptions on the interaction between psychological factors and the built environment in existing urban bus travel behavior, this study examines the simultaneous influences of the objective-built environment and subjective psychological factors on bus travel intentions. An empirical study on the influence path of bus travel intention was conducted using structural equation modeling. Then, personal attribute factors were introduced, and a linear regression model was used to explore the influence of behavioral intentions. This study uses 410 investigated samples from the residents in Zhengzhou, China. The findings proved that psychological factors play mediating roles between the travel environment and its impact on travel behaviors and confirms the validity of the description of the measurement variable with respect to the bus travel intentions proposed in the study. We also found that the retirement factor among the personal attribute factors could significantly affect bus travel intentions, which means that the retired group prefers to use buses for traveling. This study shows innovations in catching the intermediary effect of psychological factors between the built environment and travel behavior while also quantifying the effects of both subjective and objective factors when choosing bus travel.

Impact of Subjective and Objective Factors on Subway Travel Behavior: Spatial Differentiation

“…This suggests that improved walkability and perception of subway stations could guide people to choose subway travel; (3) Hypothesis H9, referring to the path between TE and TBI, was not supported based on the SEM results. It can be inferred that the impact of TE on TBI could be explained by the intermediate effect of subjective psychological factors, which is also supported by other studies [ 34 , 35 ]; (4) The impact path of TE-TB is clear and has been confirmed by many empirical studies [ 13 , 14 ]. This indicates that people do not simply choose a travel method based on their subjective attitudes but also are restricted by their objective environment.…”

A Comparison in Travel Characteristics of Bike-Sharing between College Students and Office Workers Based on Theory of Planned Behavior

“…If p is less than 0.05, it is significant, and if p is less than 0.1, it is marginally significant, and the load coefficient should be greater than 0.4. As shown in Table 4 , except for the load coefficient of EA2 in the office workers group, which is slightly less than 0.4, the other indicators meet the requirements, and the significance of this coefficient is strong, which proves this proves that the model has good explanatory power [ 16 , 22 ].…”

“…After two months of investigation, a total of 900 questionnaires were issued; then, 676 valid questionnaires were collected, including 427 campus questionnaires and 249 off-campus questionnaires, which meet the basic requirements for AMOS [ 16 , 22 ]. Figure 3 shows the distribution of respondents.…”

“…Among them, the requirements of each index are: the RMSEA should be less than 0.08, CFI, GFI, and IFI should be greater than 0.9, and the other indexes should be greater than or close to 0.85 [ 15 , 54 ]. As shown in Table 5 , all indicators meet the standard requirements, the fitness index of the model meets the test standard, and the standardized path coefficient can be analyzed [ 16 , 22 , 56 ].…”

“…The first type is individual attributes, such as age, income, gender, car ownership and other factors [ 14 , 15 ]. Another type is psychological factors, such as travel attitudes, subjective norms, perceptual behavioral control and environmental awareness [ 16 ]. Social psychologists believe that human behavior is driven by behavioral intentions, which vary with influencing factors [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ].…”