Existing research suggests that being more multimodal (i.e. the use of more than one transport mode within a given period of time) increases the likelihood of changing travel behaviour over time. However, alternative explanations may have contributed to these findings. Many well-known psychological theories state that the actual demonstration of a behaviour is preceded by an intention to demonstrate this behaviour. Therefore, one essential step towards the determination of a causal relationship between multimodality and behaviour change is to investigate whether multimodality increases the intention to change. This paper explored to what extent multimodality was associated with the intention to change the level of cycling, walking, car use, and train use. Our findings showed that the more multimodal individuals were, the more likely they intended to decrease their car use. However, most associations between multimodality and the intention to change mode choice were non-significant. This could be interpreted to mean that there is no relationship between multimodality and the intention to change. However, the significant findings for car use, and the direction of most (non-significant) associations in our analyses were intuitive. Therefore, our analyses are not conclusive on whether or not the level of multimodality is associated with the intention to change and actual behavioural change. Additional research will be necessary to test the proposed link between multimodality and behavioural change. Three lines of additional research that focus on associations between multimodality and behavioural change, multimodality and the intention to change behaviour, and variability and stability of individual behaviour over time, respectively, are particularly important.

@en

Despite a large body of research suggesting that the built environment influences individual travel behaviour, uncertainty remains about the true nature and size of any causal relationships (strength) between the built environment and travel behaviour. Residential self-selection, the phenomenon whereby individuals or households select a residential area based on their transport attitudes, is a frequently proposed alternative explanation for the reported associations. To resolve the issue of residential self-selection, longitudinal studies are often recommended.In this paper, we argue that intervention study designs are insufficient to fully resolve the problem and that intervention studies on the built environment and travel behaviour may still be biased by residential self-selection. The aim of this paper is to extend existing conceptualisations of the relationship between the built environment, travel behaviour, and attitudes and to provide suggestions for how a causal relationship between the built environment and travel behaviour may be determined with more accurate estimates of effect sizes. We discuss the complexities of determining causal effects in intervention studies with participants who relocate, and the biases that may occur. We illustrate the complexities by presenting extended conceptualisations. Based on these conceptualisations, we provide considerations for future research. We suggest repeating analyses with and without individuals who relocated during the study, and with and without statistical controls for residential relocation. Additional quantitative and qualitative analyses will be necessary to obtain more accurate effect size estimates and a better understanding of the causal relationships.@en

Purpose: To strengthen our understanding of the impact of baseline variability in mode choice on the likelihood of travel behaviour change. Methods: Quasi-experimental analyses in a cohort study of 450 commuters exposed to a new guided busway with a path for walking and cycling in Cambridge, UK. Exposure to the intervention was defined using the shortest network distance from each participant's home to the busway. Variability in commuter travel behaviour at baseline was defined using the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index, the number of different modes of transport used over a week, and the proportion of trips made by the main (combination of) mode(s). The outcomes were changes in the share of commute trips (i) involving any active travel, (ii) involving any public transport, and (iii) made entirely by car. Variability and change data were derived from a self-reported seven-day record collected before (2009) and after (2012) the intervention. Separate multinomial regression models were estimated to assess the influence of baseline variability on behaviour change, both independently and as an interaction effect with exposure to the intervention. Results: All three measures of variability predicted changes in mode share in most models. The effect size for the intervention was slightly strengthened after including variability. Commuters with higher baseline variability were more likely to increase their active mode share (e.g. for HHI: relative risk ratio [RRR] for interaction 3.34, 95% CI 1.41, 7.89) and decrease their car mode share in response to the intervention (e.g. for HHI: RRR 7.50, 95% CI 2.52, 22.34). Conclusions: People reporting a higher level of variability in mode choice were more likely to change their travel behaviour following an intervention. Future research should consider such variability as a potential predictor and effect modifier of travel and physical activity behaviour change, and its significance for the design and targeting of interventions.

@en

Introduction Social and self-identities have been conceptualised to prevent travel behaviour change, as threats to one's identity may cause resistance to change. This study focuses on the role of social, transport, place, and self-identities on commute mode choice and intention to change mode choice. Method Data were collected in June 2015 in Utrecht, the Netherlands. Invitations to participate were distributed by mail using data from the municipality, resulting in 1062 adult participants. The outcome measures were the transport mode shares based on a 14-day travel-to-and-from-work record of trips (i) involving any car use, (ii) involving any bicycling, (iii) involving any walking, and (iv) involving any public transport use. The second series of outcome measures concerned the willingness to change the amount of car use, bicycle use and walking, determined by the question ‘to what extent do you intend to change the use of …?’. Identity was measured on a seven-point disagree/agree scale for 17 items by asking to what extent the respondent ‘sees him/herself as …’. Separate multinomial regression models were estimated stepwise adjusting for socioeconomic and transport characteristics. Results Multiple identity items were associated with the use of all commute modes. In the maximally adjusted models, identities associated with the respective modes remained significant. For example, whether someone identified themselves with being a cyclist corresponded with higher likelihood of cycling occasionally (relative risk ratio (RRR): 1.84; 95% confidence interval (CI):1.47–2.30), or always to work (RRR: 2.86; 95% CI: 2.16–3.79). In addition, we found that a family-oriented identity was negatively associated with occasional commuting by car, and a ‘sporty’ identity was negatively associated with always cycling to work. Transport identities were also associated with stated intentions to change as were several social, place, and self-identities. Identifying with being a car driver decreased the likelihood of intending to reduce car use, but it increased the likelihood of intending to increase car use, as did identifying with being career-oriented. Individuals that identified with being a cyclist were less likely to have an intention to reduce bicycle use, whereas countryside-lovers had greater intentions of increasing cycling. Individuals that identified themselves as pedestrians had a lower intention of decreasing their walking levels, and a higher intention of increasing them, as did those who identified themselves as being family-oriented. Discussion The results confirm limited previous findings that identifying with users of a transport mode correspond with its use. Nevertheless, questions around causality remain. The intention to change mode choice was associated with several identities, including transport-related identities, place-related identities, social/family-related identities, and self-identities. Future research should focus on the associations between identity and actual behaviour change to further our understanding of the effect of identity on travel behaviour.

@en