Navigating urban mobility: Mobility attitudes and travel mode choices in Dubai and Lahore
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the complexities of urban travel behaviors is essential for fostering sustainable mobility systems. This study examines the impact of socio-economic factors, attitudinal variables, and urban characteristics on travel mode choices for multipurpose trips in Dubai and Lahore. The comparative analysis broadens the body of travel mode choice research by analyzing shared mobility modes' influence in less studied diverse urban contexts. Using multinomial logistic regression on surveys data from 1,653 residents of Dubai and 1,603 residents of Lahore. The findings reveal that stronger pro-public transport attitudes, frequent commuting, and lower travel costs substantially increase transit use—particularly when travel times remain below 30 minutes. In contrast, each additional street connectivity, higher driving license ownership, strong pro-car attitudes, and a premium on comfort lower transit adoption. Individuals with longer commutes who value safety prefer shared mobility modes, but higher costs and pro-car attitudes deter them. Active travel accounts for only 14% (Dubai) and 5% (Lahore) of all trips, indicating that substantial improvements in local connectivity are required to shift behavior. These findings suggest creating specific policies for each city. In Dubai, improve public transit accessibility and city design. In Lahore, improve safety and reliability of local transit connections and regulate ridesharing modes. This will help create equitable mobility ecosystems in cities.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".