Understanding How Individuals Make Travel and Location Decisions: Implications for Public Transportation (2008)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

110 This chapter presents a market segmentation of the respondents to the Phase 2 Internet survey. In line with the research objectives of this project, this chapter focuses on an examination of the power of the TPB to distinguish market sectors favorable to using public transportation and walking and to provide insight into motivating factors. The market segmentation is based on values of subgroups with differing intent to alter modal behavior in a variety of contexts. Four market segments have been defined to help explore the variety of values associated with the intent to change modal behavior toward a greater reliance on walking/ transit and a lesser reliance on the private car. As will be seen, the market segmentation based on values provides some in- teresting new insights to the results provided in Chapter 10. The market segmentation approach is similar to that taken in Chapter 7, which examined market segments for moving to a CN. Segments are based on variables that are related to the behavior of interest, in this case intent to change mode. A cluster analysis was undertaken based on the input of 56 sep- arate independent variables, which were found to be cor- related with the intent to change modal behavior with the assumption of new alternative services (termed final intent). The overall results for final intent were shown in Table 10-22. As part of the market segmentation process, candidate inde- pendent variables were reviewed for their correlation with the direct measure of final intent to change modal behavior. The 56 variables and their level of correlation with final intent are summarized in the addendum at the end of this chapter. For example, the variable with highest level of correlation with final intent was the belief that “I would rely on alternative transportation and walking to get me to my destination in a timely way.” All 56 of the variables associated with final intent were included as input to the clustering process. The process was undertaken several times, with manual specification of three, four, and five market segments. The clustering process resulting in four market segments was selected for further analysis, as it provided clear-cut differentiation for use in the analysis of shift between the initial direct measure of intent created at the beginning of the survey and the final intent created at the end of the survey. The four segments are cross- tabulated with each of the major attitudinal variables in the survey, presented in the order of the questionnaire. Summary Definition of the Four Segments for Modal Change Of the four market segments identified, two can be charac- terized as segments likely to change modal behavior (likely), and two can be characterized as unlikely to change modal behavior (unlikely). Of the total sample surveyed, (n = 501), approximately 43% were assigned by the clustering process to the two “likely” markets for modal change. The four segments for change in modal behavior are summarized here, ranked from highest initial intent to change to the lowest. The Transit Loyalists. This group is characterized by their current use and understanding of public transportation services. For them, issues such as the safety of transit services and the difficulty in paying the fare are not considered deter- rents, and therefore those issues need not be addressed with new products and services. This group tends to have a strong idea of what transit is and how it can improve. The Environmental Mode Changers. Members of this group are characterized by the belief that if certain conditions are improved, they could become transit users, even though transit does not now live up to their standards. They are fur- ther characterized by their belief in environmental causes as a motivator for change in modal behavior. The Happy Drivers. This group likes to drive, values its automobiles, and has no propensity to like the attributes of a transit-oriented life. This group should be considered as being moderately negative. C H A P T E R 1 1 Market Segments for Mode Choice

The Angry Negatives. This group is characterized by its low evaluation of just about every aspect of altering modal behavior and by the radically low intent of its members to alter their own transportation behavior. Illustrative Characteristics of the Four Segments for Modal Change Table 11-1 provides a quick introduction to the differenti- ating characteristics of the four market segments analyzed in this chapter. All data in this table have been taken from the full Phase 2 survey of 501 respondents. In the text that follows, some of the data have been taken from a sample of 380 of those respondents who also answered the Phase 1 survey. Each of the bolded numbers in Table 11-1 is an example of where the given market segment (row) has the highest scaling for the relevant variable (column). For the Angry Negative group, however, an example of extremely low scaling is shown. Some Demographics In terms of age, the Transit Loyalists are the youngest group, but the group does have some participation from the over-50 category. The Environmental Mode Changers are the oldest group, with good representation by people over 50, who may be empty nesters. In terms of the two negative groups, the Angry Negatives are somewhat older, with the Happy Drivers appearing disproportionately in both their 20s and their 40s. Age characteristics are shown in Table 11-2; the age-groups with the highest proportion for each market seg- ment are shown in bold. There are only minor differentiations in the income level of the four groups; the Transit Loyalists have lower household incomes, but their household sizes are smaller. The Transit Loyalists are disproportionately male, while the Environ- mental Mode Changers are disproportionately female. The Structure of the Survey As discussed in earlier chapters, the Phase 2 survey instru- ment was constructed with three clearly definable phases. First, a “pre-intervention” application of the full TPB was undertaken concerning one’s intention to change personal transportation patterns. Second, an “intervention” was un- dertaken, in which the respondents were first exposed to different messages and then to seven separate potential strategies/services that might improve the marketability of the alternative transportation mode. For example, the re- spondents were asked to consider the implications of a modified cell phone that would (a) tell the user when the next bus would arrive, (b) tell the user how to make a transit trip home from any location if he or she were lost, and (c) have a “911” button that could be used to report the user’s exact location to the police. Finally, another applica- tion of the TPB was undertaken to allow the documentation of any shift that might have occurred due to the messages or the alternatives. At the commencement of the survey, the Transit Loyalists displayed the highest level of intent to change their trans- portation behavior to become more reliant on transit and walking. After the intervention was completed, the Environ- mental Mode Changers had shifted their level of intent to the 111 Four Segments for Mode Change Number of Cases Initial Measure of Intent Final Measure of Intent Transit to Work (%) For me to reduce pollution by using my car less would be IMPORTANT For me to walk and take public transportation more would be DESIRABLE Transit Loyalists 68 5.2 5.5 65.6 5.5 5.5 Environmental Mode Changers 150 4.0 5.4 20.1 6.4 5.1 Happy Drivers 132 3.7 4.3 26.8 5.2 4.3 Angry Negatives 151 2.3 2.9 16.9 4.3 2.9 Total 501 3.6 4.4 27.1 5.3 4.3 Numbers in bold are examples where the given market segment (row) has the highest scaling for the relevant variable (column), except for Angry Negatives, where an example of an extremely low scaling is shown. Table 11-1. Market segment characteristics.

point where their stated intent was about as strong as that of Transit Loyalists. The first part of this chapter will document the nature of the four market segments. The second part of this chapter will document the nature of the change in ratings between the initial and final applications of the TPB. The final part will review the role of the four segments in response to the two alternative messages presented to the survey participants. Understanding the Two Most Likely Groups to Change Modal Behavior The two most promising market segments are character- ized by radically different motivations for changing their behavior. The first group appears pleased with the role of public transportation services in their lives and is positive about having additional services to create a better version of their existing experience. The second group is motivated by external considerations (their belief in the logic of improving the environment) and is quite unsatisfied with many aspects of the products and services currently offered. It was the sec- ond group that most increased its reported level of intent in response to strategies to deal with the perceived unsatisfac- tory conditions. The scale of the difference between the Tran- sit Loyalists and the other groups in terms of present modal behavior is shown in Table 11-3. The numbers in bold indi- cate the market segments with the highest mode share for walking, driving, and taking public transit. Transit Loyalists The Transit Loyalists use transit to work at a rate more than three times that for the other positive group, the Environmen- tal Mode Changers. For that reason, they already understand 112 Percentage by Age, for Each Segment Under 30 years old 30–39 years old 40–49 years old 50-Plus years old Total Transit Loyalists 29.4 29.4 14.7 26.5 100.0 Environmental Mode Changers 23.3 22.7 23.3 30.7 100.0 Happy Drivers 27.3 26.5 27.3 18.9 100.0 Angry Negatives 19.2 32.5 20.5 27.8 100.0 All Respondents 24.0 27.5 22.4 26.1 100.0 Age-groups with the highest proportion for each market segment are shown in bold. Table 11-2. Market segments for mode change by age. Which ONE of the following is YOUR PRIMARY means of getting to work? Walking (%) Bicycle (%) Car (%) Public transit (e.g., bus, train, trolley) (%) Other (%) Transit Loyalists (n = 61) 14.8 15.2 65.6 4.4 Environmental Mode Changers (n= 139) 2.9 0.7 74.3 20.1 2.0 Happy Drivers (n = 123) 4.1 0.8 67.5 26.8 0.8 Angry Negatives (n = 130) 1.5 81.6 16.9 All Respondents (n = 453) 4.4 0.4 66.7 27.1 1.4 Numbers in bold indicate market segments with the highest mode share for walking, driving, and taking public transit Table 11-3. Primary mode choice for work by market segment.

the limitations of this modal behavior, and they have learned to deal with them. They thus report the lowest concern about needing a car to make spur-of –the-moment trips or trips that involve carrying heavy things. More than any other group, their destination is downtown, which is the traditional desti- nation for transit services. They have less of a need for a car to get where they want to go than any other segment. The Transit Loyalists tend to understand the conditions that are associated with the use of public transportation services and to accept those conditions. As such, they are not particularly susceptible to strategies designed to deal with ameliorating those conditions. Compared with all other groups, the Transit Loyalists are less worried about crime while they are riding a transit vehicle or while they are walking, about being stranded if they miss the bus, or about dealing with fare payments. They are less concerned with the idea of traveling with those they do not know, and they are more accepting of being dependent upon others to get them to their destination on time. On the other hand, they have the highest propensity to believe that if they used transit more, it would be easier to get to local destinations, to downtown, or to the rest of the region. As will be discussed below, the Transit Loyalists are less optimistic about new services/products designed to deal with the perceived negative attributes of the transit lifestyle. Compared with the Environmental Mode Changers, the Transit Loyalists are less likely to say that new services would make paying the fare simpler, would make it easy to know when the bus would arrive, or would make them feel safer from crime or less fearful of being stranded. In comparison with the Happy Drivers (the other market segment with overrepresentation by those under 30 years of age), the Transit Loyalists are much more likely to increase their walking and use of transit. Environmental Mode Changers The Environmental Mode Changers’ positive disposition toward increased use of transit and walking is associated more with their belief in the potential for improvement than with their own day-to-day commitment to transit as it exists today. In terms of values, this group has the highest propensity of any to place a positive value on reducing pollution by driving less, improving their health, meeting more neighbors, and reducing the time spent driving. A review of variables only included in the Phase 1 survey reveals that this group is nearly always more concerned than the other three groups about environmental issues. This group has a greater propensity to see the environ- mental improvements from their proposed acts. They feel, more than any other group, that using transit more and walk- ing more would reduce pollution, reduce the time spent driving, help them to meet more neighbors, and improve their health. They think that higher levels of transit use would save them money. At the same time, this group needs a car for a variety of rea- sons; more than any other group, they say they need a car to make spur-of-the-moment trips and to carry heavy things. Their need for a car to get them where they need to go is sec- ond only to the Angry Negative group. The Environmental Mode Changers currently view public transportation with some trepidation and caution. Compared with the Transit Loyalists, the Environmental Mode Changers are more worried about crime, being stranded, and paying the fare. They think, more than all but the most negative group, that increased reliance on transit would make it more difficult to get to local, downtown, and regional destinations. Given their largely negative assessment of using public trans- portation, this group has the highest potential to believe that various strategies could indeed improve those conditions. Once this group experienced the intervention of comparing and pri- oritizing possible strategies for an improved transit-reliant lifestyle, the Environmental Mode Changers emerged as the most optimistic in responding to nearly every question that assumed that all new services and strategies would be available for use. Among the positive responses, they thought they would: save money, improve their health, reduce pollution, reduce the time spent driving, and find the new services dependable. The Environmental Mode Changers have the highest propensity to say that the new services and products would make it easier to pay the fare, easier to know when a train would be arriving, and make them less fearful of crime or of being abandoned. (In this world of assumed new products and services, it is still the Transit Loyalists who report the highest level of belief that it would be easier to get to destinations, to overcome the problem of carrying heavy things, and to accommodate spur- of-the-moment trips. The Environmental Mode Changers have less personal experience with actual use of transit and more concerns about it.) In comparison with the Angry Negatives (the other older market segment), the Environmental Mode Changers are much more likely to increase their walking and use of transit. Understanding the Behavior of the Two Least Likely Groups to Change Modal Behavior Happy Drivers The Happy Drivers group is characterized by the propensity to be less likely than average to change modal behavior, but the group should not be seen as a carbon copy of the Angry Nega- tives. From the questions in the Phase 2 survey, this group does not produce either the highest or lowest score on any major 113

variable. For the purposes of this study, the group can be catego- rized having a low rate of hostility toward the concepts associated with a change of mode; for example, the group has a slightly higher than average response to the survey question, “For me to walk and take public transportation more would be desirable.” However, this pattern of near-average support of concepts never translates into active support on any key variable. A review of questions asked in the Phase 1 survey shows those members of this group who responded to both surveys had the highest propensity to say that they liked to drive, with high scorings on the freedom and independence that comes from owning several cars. The Happy Drivers are the least likely of the two younger segments to change mode. Angry Negatives In the Phase 2 survey, the Angry Negative group places lowest on ratings of almost every variable associated with sup- port of a change in modal behavior. This group emphasizes its auto dependency, with the highest propensity of any group to say they need a car to get where they need to go. In the sce- nario in which there is more reliance on transit and walking, this group has the lowest propensity to say they would reduce time spent driving. Two of the few exceptions to the most negative role came in response to questions concerning worry about crime. This group reports less worry than some other groups about crime while using transit or while walking; perhaps they do not worry about it because they do not think about it, having no intention to use either mode. In addition, the group has the second highest belief that lowering the cost of transportation would be desirable. In general, the Angry Negative group places the lowest rat- ing on virtually all aspects of a transit-reliant life. From the responses of those who took both surveys (Phase 1 and Phase 2), a generally negative mood in such responses is noted, as not making new friends and not getting more exercise. This group tends to assign negative ratings even to “neutral” con- cepts, including the importance of street lighting or places to ride a bike. They seem to be suggesting that they just want to be left alone. They have the highest feeling of freedom and independence that comes from owning several cars, and the highest need to control the things that they do. Of the two older groups, the Angry Negatives are the least likely to change mode. What Groups Shifted and Why? In this section, the concerned is with the shifts in answers from the initial set of TPB questions to the final set of ques- tions, after the respondents were presented with the messages and the descriptions of alternative services. Table 11-4 shows the extent of shift in the direct measures of intent, ATT, SCF, and SN. Table 11-5 shows the data from which each of the values in Table 11-4 were derived. 114 Four Market Segments for More Walking and Transit Shift in Intent Shift in Attitude Shift in Self- Confidence Shift in Subjective Norm (from four beliefs)† Transit Loyalists 0.26 0.17 0.11 1.38* Environmental Mode Changers 1.42* 0.28 0.96* 2.34* Happy Drivers 0.58* 0.17 0.39* 1.49* Angry Negatives 0.61* 0.01 0.42* 1.30* Full Sample (N = 501) 0.80* 0.16 0.53* 1.67* Interpretation: The Environmental Mode Changers provide the highest rating increase in every category. The current Transit Loyalists have a very small shift for self-confidence: they already know how to walk and ride transit and do not show much increase in self-confidence as the result of our improved strategies and products. * Significant change at the p < .05 level †Note that the average of the normative beliefs is substituted for subjective norm since there was only one measure of subjective norm in the final set of TPB questions. The magnitude of change is thus not directly comparable with the change for the other direct measures. However, looking only at the change in the one direct measure of subjective norm, the change is still larger than for the other measures (see Table 10-23). Table 11-4. Shifts in answers from initial to final TPB questions.

Four Market Segments for More Walking and Transit Initial Intent Final Intent Shift in Intent Initial Attitude Final Attitude Shift in Attitude Initial Self- Confidence Final Self- Confidence Shift in Self- Confidence Initial Subjective Norm from Four Beliefs Final Subjective Norm from Four Beliefs Shift in Subjective Norm Transit Loyalists 5.19 5.45 0.26 5.25 5.42 0.17 5.38 5.49 0.11 3.10 4.48 1.38 Environmental Mode Changers 4.02 5.44 1.42 4.93 5.21 0.28 3.88 4.84 0.96 2.66 5.01 2.34 Happy Drivers 3.71 4.30 0.58 4.20 4.37 0.17 3.84 4.23 0.39 2.53 4.02 1.49 Angry Negatives 2.26 2.87 0.61 2.93 2.95 0.01 2.28 2.70 0.42 1.44 2.74 1.30 Full Sample (501) 3.57 4.36 0.80 4.18 4.34 0.16 3.59 4.12 0.53 2.32 3.99 1.67 Table 11-5. Shift in direct measures of the TPB by market segment.

116 The Transit Loyalists showed the smallest level of increase in intent of any of the four segments—smaller even than that of the Angry Negative group. By contrast, the Environmental Mode Changers showed by far the highest level of shift in intent. The Environmental Mode Changers showed the great- est increase in all categories. The Shift in Attitude For the sample as a whole and for each of the market seg- ments, the increase in the scores for direct measure of attitude was not significant. This suggests that the seven services tended to increase the belief that one could make the change in behavior, and that one’s immediate social network would be supportive of the change in behavior, to a greater extent than the belief that the proposed behavior was desirable, pleasurable, or interesting. The Shift in Self-Confidence The TPB suggests that the extent to which behavior actu- ally follows from intent is constrained (negatively) by the reapplication of the factor of SCF after intent has been formed and is being translated into behavior. Thus, it is worthwhile to review the content of Table 11-5 with respect to final SCF. The final SCF of the Transit Loyalists remains stronger than the final SCF of the Environmental Mode Changers, even as the level of intent increases for the environmental group. In short, the SCF for the Transit Loyalists was strong before the intervention and remained strong after the inter- vention. Looking both at shift in attitude and shift in SCF, the Transit Loyalists do not expect that the strategies offered to them would allow them to increase their use of green modes. In essence, they already are high users of green modes and don’t have much room to further increase mode share. By comparison, the Environmental Mode Changers in- creased their ratings for attitude and SCF more than any of the other segments. Because the SCF for the Transit Loyalists is still stronger than the SCF for the environmental group, the TPB suggests that the Environmental Mode Changers will be more constrained (negatively) in the path from intent to behavior than will the Transit Loyalists. Table 11-5 also provides some insight about the difference between the Happy Drivers and the Angry Negatives. With the final TPB questions, the Happy Drivers show a SCF that is somewhat above the average for the sample as a whole, while the Angry Negatives reveal a SCF that is vastly lower than average. The Happy Drivers have some belief that they could alter their behavior, if they wanted to. Their final intent is somewhat lower than the sample average, reflecting only a lukewarm interest in actually wanting to change the behavior. The Shift in Subjective Norm A significant shift, however, occurred for all market seg- ments in the change of ratings of the SN, which looks at the impact of one’s personal social network in one’s formation of intent to change behavior. This pattern is most dominant for the Environmental Mode Changers segment. To better understand what might have caused the im- provement in SN, correlations between the final SN for all respondents and each of the other rating statements were ex- amined as well as correlations between the change in SN and each rating statement. The top correlations with either final SN or the change in SN are shown in Table 11-6, ranked by final SN. As can be seen, the statement with the greatest cor- relation with final SN was “With the new services available, I Statement Correlations with Final SN Correlations with Change in SN With the new services available, I would have less concern about being lost or stranded by missing the bus or train 0.49 0.28 I would rely on alternative transportation and walking to get me to my destination in a timely way 0.45 0.27 If I were to use the new services, I would feel safer from crime and other disturbing behavior 0.45 0.22 I would improve my health by walking more to public transportation 0.44 0.27 I would improve my health by walking more 0.41 0.27 Table 11-6. Statements with greatest correlation with final subjective norm (full sample).

would have less concern about being lost or stranded by miss- ing the bus or train.” This statement was also the most highly correlated with the change in SN. Also in the top group of statements were “I would rely on alternative transportation and walking to get me to my destination in a timely way” and “If I were to use the new services, I would feel safer from crime and other disturbing behavior.” There are differences when the correlations are developed for the two positive market sectors, as shown in Table 11-7. The correlation between final SN and “being lost or stranded” is greatest for the Environmental Mode Changers. For this group, the second ranked correlation is for “feel safer from crime and other disturbing behavior.” This is very different from the response for the Transit Loyalists, where the highest correlation is with “I would rely on alternative transportation and walking to get me to my destination in a timely way.” The correlation for being stranded was also significant, but was the lowest of the top five statements. Correlations do not imply cause, but do provide hypotheses for what might cause an improvement in SN. Desired Attributes for a Change in Modal Behavior This project explored the unmet desires and requirements of future transit riders in several ways. First, the question of desired attributes was explored through an unconstrained method, by asking the respondent to rate each alternative on a scale of one to seven, and second with a method that required trade-offs between a limited number of options, denying the respondent the ability to give high ratings to all options. In this section, the attitudes of the full sample and the four market segments for modal change toward the at- tributes and functionalities they would like to see addressed by specific products and strategies first will be reviewed. Then the rankings assigned to specific products that could be pro- duced by the public transportation manager will be reviewed. Ranking the Desired Attributes for a Change in Modal Behavior After the completion of the initial TPB exercise in the Phase 2 research, the respondents were asked to think about an imaginary neighborhood that already had good sidewalks and good walking destinations. A stated requirement of that imaginary neighborhood was living with fewer cars than at present. The survey question was posed as follows: Thinking about this imaginary neighborhood, which trans- portation options would you need to live with fewer cars in your household? Table 11-8 presents the results of this set of questions, presenting the rank order (left to right) of the attributes offered for the full sample and the mean ratings given by each market segment. The respondents gave the highest rating to “I would want to know exactly when the bus or train would arrive.” The second most desired function was 117 Correlation with Final Subjective Norm Statement Transit Loyalist (n = 68) Environmental Mode Changers (n = 150) With the new services available, I would have less concern about being lost or stranded by missing the bus or train 0.37 0.43 I would rely on alternative transportation and walking to get me to my destination in a timely way 0.52 0.16 If I were to use the new services, I would feel safer from crime and other disturbing behavior 0.41 0.37 I would improve my health by walking more to public transportation 0.40 0.11 I would improve my health by walking more 0.43 0.14 Table 11-7. Statements correlating with final subjective norm by the positive market segments.

in Modal Behavior I would want to know exactly when the bus or train would Four Segments to change arrive I would want a transit pass so that I never had to worry about having cash I would want to be able to walk to a nearby store or coffee shop I would want a transit service that connects me with the rest of the region I would want to be sure that a taxi would come at any hour I would want a shuttle service to take me to the community center and other activities within the neighborhood I would want frequent transit service (rail or express bus) to the downtown I would want a car on my block that I could rent by the hour (car- sharing) Transit Loyalists 6.01 6.28 6.29 6.22 5.35 5.57 5.97 4.00 Environmental Mode Changers 6.56 6.55 6.58 6.48 5.95 6.07 5.95 5.22 Happy Drivers 5.69 5.60 5.61 5.55 5.01 5.08 5.08 4.39 Angry Negatives 5.86 5.74 5.54 5.57 5.13 4.83 4.48 3.84 Total 6.05 6.02 5.97 5.92 5.37 5.37 5.28 4.42 Attribute’s Rank 1 (Highest) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (Lowest) Table 11-8. Mean ranking of desired attributes and functionalities.

“I would want a transit pass so that I never had to worry about having cash.” Ranking third among the list of desired attributes was “would want to be able to walk to a nearby store or coffee shop.” The least desired service concept was that for car sharing. Looking at the bolded numbers in Table 11-8, it is clear that the most enthusiastic segment for most of these concepts was the Environmental Mode Changers, who even gave the lowly rated car-sharing option a scaling above 5. Only the Transit Loyalists rated any option higher than the Environmental Mode Changers—they rated “good transit to downtown” higher than all other market segments. This survey method produces an unconstrained descrip- tion of what services/attributes are desired by the survey respondents. Purposefully omitted from this method is any question of cost or trade-off. A different method to see how customers would react to descriptions of products was ap- plied, based on whatever understanding they had concerning that product, through a prioritization process that forced trade-offs among products. Table 11-9 shows the rank order- ing of services by market segment. The bolded cells indicate where any market segment ranks services differently from the sample as a whole. Ranking the Specific Products and Services When forced to prioritize over seven described products/ services, respondents’ rankings changed. The Transit Loy- alists assigned the highest value to transit service to down- town. By contrast, neither the Happy Drivers nor the Angry Negatives gave highest ranking to service to downtown. For all segments, the smart card payment mechanism gets a higher ranking than either the community shuttle bus or the community door-to-door service. The smart phone and car sharing ended up in the lowest levels of the ranking scheme. The rankings of the Transit Loyalists showed a variation from the sample norm, placing a number-two priority on the smart card, ranking it higher than the highly ranked regional transit service. Less importantly, the Angry Negatives also liked the smart card. The Transit Loyalists actually ranked the community door-to-door service somewhat lower than the smart phone; perhaps the idea of sharing a small vehicle is not particularly valued by those with wide experience in fixed- route and scheduled services. Comparison with Other Research The application of a program of market segmentation to augment the analysis undertaken for the full sample has proven productive. The use of post hoc categories signifi- cantly increases the ability to identify groups on the basis of the commonality of their attitudes and beliefs. And, as has been seen in this chapter, the TPB provides a structure with which to organize a wide variety of attitudes and beliefs in a consistent, interpretable format. A brief review of the con- clusions of two other recent segmentation studies suggests some consistency of findings, while identifying some areas for further research. Given the complexity of the study design, (designed to track changes between the two applications of the TPB), only four market segments were selected for the analysis. The clus- tering process assigned 43% of the full sample to the two groups most likely to increase use of transit and walking. Most studies reviewed tended to create five or more segments in this process. The use of market segmentation in the analysis of increase in transit share is examined in TCRP Report 36: A Handbook— 119 Four Segments to Change in Modal Behavior Transit to Downtown Regional Transit Smart Card Com- munity Shuttle Community Door to Door Smart Phone Car Sharing Transit Loyalists Highest Rank 3 2 4 6 5 Lowest Environmental Mode Changers Highest Rank 2 3 4 5 6 Lowest Happy Drivers 2 Highest Rank 3 4 5 6 Lowest Angry Negatives 2 3 Highest Rank 4 5 6 Lowest Product’s Rank (Full Sample) 1 (Highest) 2 3 4 5 6 7 (Lowest) Bolded cells highlight where any segment has a ranking different from the sample average Table 11-9. Products tanked by MaxDiff exercise, highest to lowest.

Using Market Segmentation to Increase Transit Ridership (49). That study concluded with the creation of five workable mar- ket segments for potential change of modal behavior. They concluded that two segments were positive, and that three were less promising. Their analysis resulted in 37% of the sam- ple population being assigned to the two positive groups and 63% being assigned to the negative groups. Note that the sur- veys in TCRP Report 36 were of a randomized variety in specific transit districts, so the percentages of positive groups is more reflective of the broader population in a transit district than this study, which is purposely enriched with transit users. Although a detailed comparison of the groups is not sup- portable because of the difference in methods used, some “high level” observations can be made. TCRP Report 36 found that one positive group was dis- proportionately male and had the greatest use of transit in their lives. They were young, unmarried, and dispropor- tionately students. This group bears a clear resemblance to our Transit Loyalists. Among their salient attributes were the following: • They are the most likely segment to find the idea of using transit appealing—notably for commute travel. • They see the least gaps between what is important in the mode choice decision and transit’s ability to deliver. • They have transit service available from where they live to where they work or go to school. They are the most likely to work in a central city or downtown area. • They place low value on security, sense of belonging, and being well respected. • They are mostly single; if married, their spouses often work. • They moved or changed jobs in the past several years. (49, p. 129) In all of these anecdotal areas, the Report 36 transit-oriented group was similar to the this project’s Transit Loyalists. TCRP Report 36 found that the second most positive group for mode change was disproportionately female, similar to the Environmental Mode Changers. The group was analyzed in terms of the higher standards they want sat- isfied before proceeding with a positive change of modal be- havior. Report 36 describes their second positive group as follows: • They feel transit is high risk and are unsure of transit’s abil- ity to perform as they require. • While not particularly demanding in terms of benefits they seek in the mode choice decision, they see gaps in transit’s ability to perform as required. • If they are married, they are the most likely segment to have children at home. (49, p. 128) On other issues, comparability is more difficult, as that study went into psychographic issues concerning optimism and outlook on life not emphasized in the present study. The report described three other groups with varying reasons for their car dependency. Another chance to cross check the logic of our results of the segmentation comes in the paper, “‘Complacent Car Addicts’ or ‘Aspiring Environmentalists’? Identifying Travel Behaviour Segments Using Attitude Theory,” by Jillian Anable, which undertook a market segmentation procedure for change in modal behavior based on the con- struct of the TPB, as expanded (52). In her segmentation, she found some 25% of the sample could be described as the most likely to use alternative modes to visit historic sites; this was a combination of transit-dependent persons (no cars) and environmental activists with cars. At the other end of the spectrum, two strongly negative groups were identified, one of which seems directly hostile, while the other simply sees no reason to change. In the middle, roughly one-third of the sample is assigned to a group char- acterized by high commitment to environmental change, but holding the belief that they cannot pull it off. Anable writes, “This suggests that although they could be willing to reduce car use for altruistic motives and to avoid con- gestion, they are held back by weak perceptions of be- havioral control.” Of the market segments reviewed in this research, her group is most similar to the Conflicted/ Contented group, one of the five segments described in the discussion in Chapter 7 concerning propensity to change neighborhoods. In sum, it was found that the combination of market segmentation methods and the overarching construct of the TPB could play a significant role in the analysis of trans- portation issues, such as the propensity to increase walking and transit. Anable summed up her conclusions on this combination in this way: Altogether, the possibility of explaining travel behaviour by attitudinal factors, with the use of market segmentation was confirmed. Segmentation provided a way of finding naturally occurring coherent and meaningful groups and left precon- ceptions aside. More specifically, the utilisation of an expanded version of an established theory of behaviour (TPB) has pro- vided a practical, theoretical and useful basis to explain the mode choice decision. . . . Interpretable in the context of the TPB, the attitudinal segments help us to identify the factors underlying a decision to perform or not to perform a given behaviour. They essentially provide an indication of how hard people are willing to try to 120

leave the car at home for day trip travel and under what circum- stances. Most significantly, each of the six groups identified rep- resented a unique combination of each type of belief, proving that different groups need to be served in different ways to opti- mize the chance of realising changes in behaviour. The evidence clearly shows that the same behaviour can take place for different reasons and that the same attitudes (e.g. positive attitudes to the environment) can lead to different behaviour (e.g. a reduction or no reduction in car use). (52) Addendum: Fifty-Six Variables Correlated with Final Intent The variables used in the Chapter 11 market segmentation are shown in the table below, along with a measure of the cor- relation. The table also indicates a number of variables that have been reworded and recoded so that the correlations are positive. 121 Fifty-Six Variables Correlated with Final Intent (Rank Ordered) Variable Name Correlation with Final Measure of Intent * Changed to Make a Positive Correlation ** Significance Level † I would rely on alternative transportation and walking to get me to my destination in a timely way 0.543 0.000 I would reduce pollution 0.454 0.000 I'd save money (WITH ALL NEW SERVICES AVAILABLE) 0.448 0.000 I would improve my health by walking more to public transportation 0.444 0.000 For me to reduce pollution by using my car less would be IMPORTANT 0.443 0.000 With the new services available, I would have less concern about being lost or stranded by missing the bus or train 0.441 0.000 I would improve my health by walking more 0.439 0.000 I would reduce the amount of time I spend driving 0.421 0.000 I would improve my health by walking more 0.402 0.000 IN THE IMAGINARY NEIGHBORHOOD, I could live with fewer cars (OR ALREADY DO) 0.397 0.000 I'd save money (IF I TOOK TRANSIT MORE) 0.391 0.000 I would rely on public transportation and walking to get me to my destination in a timely way 0.380 0.000 I would reduce pollution 0.379 0.000 If I took more transit, my household could get by with fewer cars (OR ALREADY DOES) 0.377 0.000 I would improve my health by walking more to public transportation 0.376 0.000 With the new services, my household could own fewer cars (OR ALREADY DOES) 0.371 0.000 For my household to own fewer cars would be DESIRABLE (OR ALREADY DOES) 0.357 0.000 I would meet more of my neighbors 0.351 0.000 If I were to use the new services, I would feel safer from crime and other disturbing behavior 0.345 0.000 I would reduce the amount of time I spend driving 0.339 0.000 For me to be able to leave the driving to someone else would be DESIRABLE 0.330 0.000 If I were to use the new services, it would be easy to know when the bus or would be easy to know when the bus or train would arrive 0.328 0.000 ** ** ** For me to ride with people I don't know while traveling would be DESIRABLE 0.327 0.000 I DO NOT need a car to get where I need to go 0.323 0.000 If I were to walk and take public transportation more it would be EASY to make local trips to reach destinations such as the library, post office, restaurant, or coffee shop 0.294 0.000 For me to improve my health by walking more would be IMPORTANT 0.291 0.000 If I were to use the new services, paying the fare would be simple 0.287 0.000 I would be able to leave the driving to someone else 0.285 0.000

122 Fifty-Six Variables Correlated with Final Intent (Rank Ordered) Variable Name Correlation with Final Measure of Intent * Changed to Make a Positive Correlation ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Significance Level † For me to meet my neighbors while walking is DESIRABLE 0.260 0.000 If I were to use the new services, it would be EASIER for me to make spur of the moment trips 0.259 0.000 If I were to use the new services, it would be EASIER for me to get to other parts of the region 0.255 0.000 If I were to use the new services it would be EASIER for me to get to downtown 0.253 0.000 I need to travel downtown 0.245 0.000 It would be easier to take public transportation more if it were simple to pay the fare 0.242 0.000 It would be EASY for me to get downtown if I were to walk and take public transportation more 0.225 0.000 For me to be dependent on someone else to get me to my destination on time would be DESIRABLE 0.222 0.000 If I were to walk and take public transportation more it would be EASY forme to get to other parts of the region 0.210 0.000 For me to reduce the amount of time I spend driving would be IMPORTANT 0.192 0.000 If I were to use the new services, it would be EASIER for me when I have to carry heavy things 0.187 0.000 I DO NOT need access to a car to make spur of the moment trips 0.183 0.000 I DO NOT worry about crime or other disturbing behavior on public transportation 0.179 0.000 I would ride more with people I don't know 0.171 0.000 I DO NOT find that dealing with the fare for public transportation is a bother 0.158 0.000 I need to travel to other parts of the region 0.157 0.000 I DO NOT worry ABOUT encountering crime or other disturbing behavior when walking 0.142 0.001 It would be easier for me to walk or take public transportation more if I was sure of not being lost or stranded by missing the bus or train 0.129 0.004 I would be dependent upon someone else to get me to my destination on time 0.128 0.004 For me to reduce the cost of my daily transportation would be DESIRABLE 0.128 0.004 I DO NOT worry about being stranded if I rely on public transportation and miss the bus or train 0.125 0.005 I need to make local trips to reach destinations such as the library, post office, restaurant, or coffee shop 0.125 0.005 If I were to walk or take public transportation more it would be EASIER for me to carry heavy things 0.109 0.015 I DO NOT find that waiting for the bus or train and not knowing when it is coming is a bother 0.103 0.022 * Correlations are rank ordered by their absolute value. ** Variable with negative correlation from original phrasing. Variable recoded & name rephrased as positive. † Correlations with significance less than 0.05 have been excluded from this table. N = 501 for all variables. ** ** If I were to use the new services, it would be EASIER to make local trips to reach destinations such as the library, post office, restaurant, or coffee shop 0.275 0.000 It would be easier to take public transportation more if I knew when the bus or train would arrive 0.274 0.000 If I were to walk or take public transportation more it would be EASIER for me to make spur of the moment trips 0.274 0.000