Do Residents Living in Transit-Oriented Development Station Catchment Areas Travel More Sustainably? The Impacts of Life Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transit-oriented development (TOD) is an urban designed model aimed at attracting more sustainable travellers. However, not all TOD projects succeed in maintaining a high rate of sustainable travel behaviour. To examine the impacts of TOD on residents’ travel behaviour, this paper applies binary logistic regression to analyse survey data for 1,298 residents living in the TOD areas in Hangzhou collected in 2020. The results show that socioeconomic characteristics, built environment factors, and travel attitudes play important roles in influencing their travel mode choices. Furthermore, the number of children in households and higher levels of car ownership significantly influence residents’ sustainable travel behaviours. However, it appears that only a limited number of factors can convince car users to shift to sustainable modes of travel, such as their workplace being accessible by metro and attitudes towards changes in accessibility. This research study contributes to the existing literature in terms of enhancing the understanding of travel mode choice behaviours, particularly with regard to people who live near public transport infrastructure, as well as formulating evidence-based TOD policies to achieve more sustainable transport systems.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".