MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408723920 · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2025.135745

Behavioural nudging for greener travel: A discrete choice experiment in the Greater Toronto Area

2025· article· en· W4408723920 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kaili Wang, Melvyn Li, Junshi Xu, Marianne Hatzopoulou, Khandker Nurul Habib

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsDiscrete choiceEconomicsAdvertisingTransport engineeringEconometricsEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental management through greenhouse gas (GHG) emission mitigation strategies is a collective responsibility shared by governments, communities, and individuals. Vehicular traffic is one of the leading causes of GHG emissions. Therefore, accelerating the shift from private vehicles to greener alternatives is crucial for achieving carbon neutrality . This study conducts controlled stated preference (SP) choice experiments on travellers' mode choices to nudge sustainable travel behaviours. The experiment aims to provide a quantitative understanding of the effectiveness of nudging for greener behaviour through environmental externality information (GHG emissions) and self-interest information (health implications). The SP experiment was conducted in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada, and had 606 valid samples. An error-component mixed logit model is empirically estimated to capture respondents' behavioural changes during various experiment stages. Based on parameter estimation results, the study also reports the Value of Greener (VOGer), defined as the willingness to pay for comparative GHG emission reductions achieved through greener travel modes. The study finds that the design of nudging interventions plays a crucial role in maximizing individuals’ VOGer. Travellers simultaneously aware of environmental and health-related implications are more likely to use greener travel modes (e.g., transit, biking, and walking).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.153 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergySame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207