MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7070712226

Preference Planning and Unsustainable\nDesires: A Hypothesis toward 'How'\nContextual and Psychological Factors\nInfluence Travel Attitudes through\nQualitative and Quantitative Measures

2012· article· en· W7070712226 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueResearchArchive–Te Puna Rangahau (Victoria University of Wellington) · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMaterials Science
ThématiqueClay minerals and soil interactions
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAssociation (psychology)PreferenceTravel behaviorNeighbourhood (mathematics)Travel surveyTravel time
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Counter to the prevailing view that sees travel attitudes as influencing neighbourhood\nlocation decisions, this dissertation sets out to examine if where individuals choose to live\nhas an effect on travel attitudes. To achieve this, both a quantitative and qualitative\nanalysis of the relationship between travel attitudes, place attachment and length of tenure\nis performed. An association between place attachment and travel attitudes would suggest\nthat travel attitudes, and subsequent travel behaviours, are a result of neighbourhood\nlocation considerations rather than an influencing factor on them. This too is the case for\nan association between length of tenure and travel attitudes. While previous research\nidentifies associations between contextual physical factors or psychological factors and\ntravel behaviour, how these factors exert their influence is relatively undefined. With the\nproposition of an association between travel attitudes, place attachment and length of\ntenure, an underlying mechanism to these previous associates is tested. Because place\nattachment occurs over time and after a decision has been made to reside in a particular\nneighbourhood, and likewise because length of tenure is time dependent, a connection\nbetween either of these factors and travel attitudes supports the hypothesis that travel\nattitudes may just as likely be a result of residential location choices as they are an\ninfluence on them. For this reason, both of these variables are referred to as post-decision\nreasoning factors and are perceived as the mechanisms through which decisions are\njustified after they have been made.\nWhile travel behaviour literature is currently focused on the role latent travel attitudes have\non residential location choices, housing choice literature consistently finds travel attitudes\nor neighbourhood factors a distant second to dwelling considerations. Dwelling size\nversus price, housing quality, yard and overall house size all have a greater influence on\nresidential location decisions. Even when neighbourhood considerations are made in\naddition to dwelling characteristic factors, travel attitudes again rank lower than school\nquality, perceived safety and even the image of the neighbourhood. This dissertation is\nplaced to add clarity to the discrepancy between travel behaviour and housing choice\nliterature.\nAn initial pilot study examined the relation between liveability and density and guided this\ndissertation toward travel behaviour, neighbourhood location decisions and the important\nrole of attitudes to these two domains. Typically travel behaviour is compared between two\nneighbourhood typologies. These are either conventional or traditional. The former reflects\nstatus-quo land development with long winding cul-de-sacs, separated uses, a lack of\ncenteredness and low connectivity. The latter is more akin to neighbourhoods developed\nbefore the Second World War and have higher densities, mixed uses, and are generally\ndirected towards pedestrians rather than the automobile. Two traditional and two\nconventional neighbourhoods from Canada and New Zealand were used as case studies for\nthe main research. Three-hundred households in each of the four case studies received a\nsurvey that inquired about residents' preferences toward travel modes and neighbourhood\ntypes and included psychological variables used for the prediction of travel behaviour as\nwell as typical socio-demographic variables and the two post-decision reasoning factors of\nplace attachment and length of tenure. This survey was analysed using multiple regression\nto determine the influence of post-decision reasoning variables. In addition to this\nquantitative survey, an on-line qualitative survey assessed residents' opinions for what\nmotivates their travel and neighbourhood location decisions. The relative discourse\npatterns that developed from the qualitative survey provide a context against which the\nquantitative findings are interpreted. This provides validation to the quantitative findings as\nwell as a theoretically robust method to infer causation.\nFindings indicated that attitudes were not correlated to post-decision reasoning variables\nbut that they may still have formed after a neighbourhood selection decision was made and\nnot prior. Here an unanticipated correlation between perceived behavioural control and\ntravel attitudes was observed. Likewise, another unanticipated result suggests a greater\nmismatch between travel preferences and behaviours than previous studies have found.\nWhile the focus in environmental psychology is on segmenting survey populations into\npersonality cohorts, with the aim of tailoring policy to these subgroups, the findings from\nthe present study suggest a greater concentration should be paid to the context within\nwhich diverse populations develop. Here, both the qualitative and quantitative results\nindicate that rather than attitudes informing environmentally supportive behaviours, such\nas travel behaviour, an individual's social and physical context may afford them\nopportunities to hold environmentally supportive attitudes instead of the other way around.\nWhile the vast majority of research within this field appears satisfied with correlating\nvarying attitudes to positive environmental behaviour rather than explaining why these\ndifferences exist, the present study explores a hypothesis toward this rationalization. Here,\npost-decision reasoning provides a reliable explanation of travel behaviour and this\nunderstanding further informs how to more effectively engage with groups and individuals\ntoward increased sustainable behaviour.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,503
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,254
Tête enseignante GPT0,363
Écart entre enseignants0,109 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResearchArchive–Te Puna Rangahau (Victoria University of Wellington)Même sujetClay minerals and soil interactionsTravaux en français237 207