Do frequent satisfying trips by public transport impact its intended use in later life?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Previous studies have indicated that factors such as the built environment, attitudes and past behaviour can influence travel behaviour. However, the possible effect of travel satisfaction on travel mode choice remains underexplored, despite many studies focusing on travel satisfaction over the past years. It is likely that individuals experiencing satisfying trips with a certain travel mode will use this mode (more) frequently for future trips. In this study—using data from 984 students from Laval University, Canada—we analyse how satisfaction with public transport and the frequency of public transport use affect the intention to use public transport in later life stages. Our results indicate that public transport frequency, public transport satisfaction and the interaction between these two factors (i.e., the frequency of (dis)satisfying public transport trips) significantly affect people’s intentions to use public transport in later life, although variations in effect sizes exist between different life stages. Making public transport more pleasant and increasing ridership of children and young adults (e.g., by giving them free public transport passes) may consequently result in a higher public transport frequency in later life stages. We argue that travel satisfaction can play an important role in the formation of habitual mode use, and that satisfying trips (if undertaken frequently) are likely to be repeated in the future.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it