What Affects Millennials’ Mobility? PART II: The Impact of Residential Location, Individual Preferences and Lifestyles on Young Adults’ Travel Behavior in California
Circella, Alemi, Tiedeman, Berliner, Lee, Fulton, Mokhtarian, Handy, 2017, in National Center for Sustainable Transportation Research Report
doi:nan
Location |
California, USA |
Population |
Other (specify) |
Sample size |
2400 |
Factor analysis type |
exploratory factor analysis, Oblique rotation |
Stepwise regression |
no |
Removal of insignificant variables |
yes |
Reviewed by |
LCM |
Abstract
Young adults (“millennials”, or members of “Generation Y”) are increasingly reported to have different lifestyles and travel behavior from previous generations at the same stage in life. They postpone the time at which they obtain a driver’s license, often choose not to own a car, drive less if they own one, and use alternative non-motorized means of transportation more often. Several explanations have been proposed to explain the behaviors of millennials, including their preference for urban locations closer to the vibrant parts of a city, changes in household composition, and the substitution of travel for work and socializing with telecommuting and social media. However, research in this area has been limited by a lack of comprehensive data on the factors affecting millennials’ residential location and travel choices (e.g. information about individual attitudes, lifestyles and adoption of shared mobility is not available in the U.S. National Household Travel Survey and most regional household travel surveys).View the NCST Project Webpage
Factors
Models
Dependent variable |
Weekly VMT |
Model type |
Log-linear |
Sample size |
1801.0 |
R2 |
0.48 |
Adjusted R2 |
|
Pseudo R2
(nan)
|
nan |
AIC |
nan |
BIC |
nan |
Log-likelihood at zero |
nan |
Log-likelihood at constants |
nan |
Log-likelihood at convergence |
nan |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Intercept |
0.487
|
0.302 |
Occupation: student only |
0.437
|
0.004 |
Occupation: student and worker |
0.73
|
<0.001 |
Occupation: works only |
0.687
|
<0.001 |
Sex (male) |
0.271
|
<0.001 |
Age |
0.038
|
0.163 |
Age squared |
-0.001
|
0.138 |
Household income > $100k |
0.291
|
<0.001 |
Household income $35k-$100k |
0.155
|
0.031 |
Lives with parents |
-0.235
|
0.003 |
Lives with children |
0.206
|
0.001 |
Car availability (%) |
0.027
|
<0.001 |
Telecommuting frequency |
-0.506
|
0.001 |
Population density |
-0.007
|
<0.001 |
Diversity |
-0.557
|
<0.001 |
Pro-suburban |
0.054
|
0.064 |
Responsive to environmental effect and price of travel |
-0.055
|
0.047 |
Established in life |
0.107
|
0.001 |
Must own car |
0.106
|
<0.001 |
Time/mode constrained |
0.165
|
<0.001 |
Dependent variable |
Weekly VMT |
Model type |
Log-linear |
Sample size |
976.0 |
R2 |
0.448 |
Adjusted R2 |
|
Pseudo R2
(nan)
|
nan |
AIC |
nan |
BIC |
nan |
Log-likelihood at zero |
nan |
Log-likelihood at constants |
nan |
Log-likelihood at convergence |
nan |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Intercept |
-5.253
|
<0.001 |
Occupation: student only |
0.818
|
<0.001 |
Occupation: student and worker |
0.839
|
<0.001 |
Occupation: works only |
0.742
|
<0.001 |
Sex (male) |
0.205
|
0.014 |
Age |
0.453
|
<0.001 |
Age squared |
-0.008
|
<0.001 |
Household income > $100k |
0.462
|
<0.001 |
Household income $35k-$100k |
0.194
|
0.042 |
Lives with parents |
-0.176
|
0.083 |
Lives with children |
0.314
|
0.001 |
Car availability (%) |
0.026
|
<0.001 |
Diversity |
-0.325
|
0.072 |
Established in life |
0.091
|
0.057 |
Must own car |
0.119
|
0.003 |
Time/mode constrained |
0.153
|
<0.001 |
Uber/Lyft frequency |
-1.407
|
0.05 |
Dependent variable |
Weekly VMT |
Model type |
Log-linear |
Sample size |
825.0 |
R2 |
0.517 |
Adjusted R2 |
|
Pseudo R2
(nan)
|
nan |
AIC |
nan |
BIC |
nan |
Log-likelihood at zero |
nan |
Log-likelihood at constants |
nan |
Log-likelihood at convergence |
nan |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Intercept |
1.162
|
<0.001 |
Occupation: student only |
-0.441
|
0.155 |
Occupation: student and worker |
0.608
|
0.001 |
Occupation: works only |
0.711
|
<0.001 |
Sex (male) |
0.305
|
<0.001 |
Household income > $100k |
0.342
|
0.004 |
Household income $35k-$100k |
0.21
|
0.062 |
Lives with parents |
-0.383
|
0.004 |
Car availability (%) |
0.029
|
<0.001 |
Telecommuting frequency |
-0.693
|
<0.001 |
Population density |
-0.013
|
<0.001 |
Diversity |
-0.9
|
<0.001 |
Pro-suburban |
0.066
|
0.085 |
Established in life |
0.066
|
0.122 |
Must own car |
0.073
|
0.082 |
Dependent variable |
Vehicle type |
Model type |
Multinomial logit model |
Sample size |
529.0 |
R2 |
nan |
Adjusted R2 |
|
Pseudo R2
(nan)
|
nan |
AIC |
nan |
BIC |
nan |
Log-likelihood at zero |
-947.84 |
Log-likelihood at constants |
-801.05 |
Log-likelihood at convergence |
-708.53 |
Large cars |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Age |
0.252
|
0 |
Age squared |
-0.003
|
0.001 |
Constant |
-6.181
|
0 |
Luxury |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Number of children under 18 years old in the household |
-0.521
|
0.014 |
Established in life |
0.5
|
0.025 |
Household income |
0.22
|
0.014 |
Interaction HH income with urban neighborhood type |
0.121
|
0.026 |
Constant |
-2.561
|
0 |
Luxury SUV |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Age |
1.176
|
0 |
Age squared |
-0.014
|
0 |
Female |
0.603
|
0 |
Time/mode constrained (reversed) |
-0.584
|
0.047 |
Household income |
0.479
|
0.001 |
Interaction HH income with urban neighborhood type |
-0.16
|
0.078 |
Constant |
-29.696
|
0 |
SUV |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Age |
0.222
|
0 |
Age squared |
-0.002
|
0 |
Number of children under 18 years old in the household |
0.488
|
0 |
Constant |
-5.646
|
0 |
Small/compact |
Variable |
Coefficient |
p-value |
Age |
0.059
|
0.013 |
Age squared |
-0.001
|
0.045 |
Number of children under 18 years old in the household |
-0.266
|
0.048 |
Car as a tool |
0.355
|
0.005 |
Time/mode constrained (reversed) |
-0.35
|
0.007 |
Established in life |
-0.242
|
0.067 |
Household income |
0.109
|
0.084 |
Constant |
-0.911
|
0 |