EXPANDING THE CONTINUUM OF TRAVEL ASSIMILATION: UNCOVERING NEW MEASURES AND SOCIAL PRACTICE THEORY INSIGHTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Immigrant transportation patterns are observed to change over time. Their initial travel patterns are typically more sustainable than the native-born population; engaging in higher rates of walking, biking, and public transit. However, immigrant travel patterns begin to mimic that of their native-born counterparts over time. This phenomenon is called travel assimilation. The study contains two chapters of research which contribute to the conceptualization of travel assimilation and factors that may cause this process to occur. Semi-structured interviews were conducted (n=11) with immigrants who were past participants of Bike Host, a cycling mentorship program in Toronto, facilitated by CultureLink, a settlement organization. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the interview data through NVivo. The results in the first chapter highlight four new findings. First, travel assimilation exists on a continuum; it is not a binary experience as immigrants often do not fully transition towards auto-centric lifestyles, nor do they stay completely car-free either. Second, travel assimilation is a non-linear process, as transportation patterns can shift between sustainable and auto-centric ones. Third, travel assimilation is not always experienced the same in a single household. Fourth, implementing multiple variables helps best measure travel assimilation. The second chapter used a theoretical framework of Social Practice Theory (SPT) to understand why transportation patterns of immigrants are evolving, or not. Four interconnected factors were found to shape travel assimilation. First, the built environment directly impacts immigrants’ access to different forms of transportation. Second, changes in income impact which modes of transportation are available to newcomers. Third, the presence of children introduces mobility of care trips, especially for mothers, impacting travel mode. Finally, community programs like Bike Host can increase the longevity of sustainable transport. Results from both chapters can help inform future research and policies, focused on immigrant communities in increasing the use of sustainable transport.
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 | 0.014 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".