Pedestrian and bicyclist motivation: an assessment of influences on pedestrians’ and bicyclists’ mode choice in Mt. Pleasant, Vancouver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of short distance travel in North America is completed by single occupancy vehicles. Substituting walking and bicycling for these trips would reduce energy use and environmental pollution, while improving quality of life. Therefore, understanding influences on non-automotive travel behavior is crucial. Researchers and planners have touted specific factors for encouraging walking and biking, but the body of work remains fragmented. Previous studies have focused on a smaller number of factors and most of them relate to physical design. This study tests the relative importance of a range of factors, both physical and perceptual that could influence one’s choice to walk or bike. The Mt. Pleasant neighborhood in Vancouver, B.C., Canada was chosen as the location for this study as all of the pedestrian-motivating factors identified in a literature review were present. A questionnaire-based survey addressing distance, sidewalks/bike lanes, pedestrian/bicycle traffic signals, buffering from auto traffic, sense of security, cleanliness, opportunities to talk with others, enforcement of traffic laws, concern for the environment, weather, terrain, saving money, opportunities for exercise, and a visually appealing environment as influential factors was administered in person and online yielding 774 responses. All factors were shown to influence the decision to walk or bike, but some proved more significant than others, especially opportunities for exercise.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".