IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i17p4538-d259605.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

College Students’ Shared Bicycle Use Behavior Based on the NL Model and Factor Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Shuhong Ma

    (School of Highway, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710000, China)

  • Yechao Zhou

    (School of Highway, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710000, China)

  • Zhoulin Yu

    (Jiangshan City Transportation Bureau, Quzhou 324000, China)

  • Yan Zhang

    (School of Highway, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710000, China)

Abstract

The rise and rapid development of bicycle sharing brings great convenience to residents’ travel and transfer, and also has a profound impact on the travel structure of cities. As college students make up a major share of shared bicycle users, it is necessary to analyze the factors that influence their travel mode and riding frequency choice and to explore how these factors affect their riding behavior. To analyze the bicycle riding characteristics of college students, this paper processes many factors with unknown correlations by using a factor analysis method based on revealed preference (RP) questionnaire data. Then, taking the significant common factors as explanatory variables, a two-layer nested logit (NL) model combining riding frequency and travel mode is established to study college students’ riding behavior. The results suggest that the comprehensive hit rate of the upper and lower levels of the model (riding frequency and travel mode) are, respectively, 76.8% and 83.7%, and the two-layer NL model is applicable. It is also shown that environmental factors (“cheap,” “mixed traffic,” “signal lights at intersection,” and so on) have a significant impact on the choice of travel mode and riding frequency. Also, improving the level of bicycle service can increase the shift from walking to riding. Such findings are meaningful for policy-makers, planners, and others in formulating operational management strategies and policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Shuhong Ma & Yechao Zhou & Zhoulin Yu & Yan Zhang, 2019. "College Students’ Shared Bicycle Use Behavior Based on the NL Model and Factor Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:17:p:4538-:d:259605
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/17/4538/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/17/4538/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Faghih-Imani, Ahmadreza & Hampshire, Robert & Marla, Lavanya & Eluru, Naveen, 2017. "An empirical analysis of bike sharing usage and rebalancing: Evidence from Barcelona and Seville," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 177-191.
    2. Li, Zhibin & Wang, Wei & Yang, Chen & Jiang, Guojun, 2013. "Exploring the causal relationship between bicycle choice and trip chain pattern," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 170-177.
    3. Yanyong Guo & Jibiao Zhou & Yao Wu & Zhibin Li, 2017. "Identifying the factors affecting bike-sharing usage and degree of satisfaction in Ningbo, China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, September.
    4. de Jong, Gerard & Daly, Andrew & Pieters, Marits & Vellay, Carine & Bradley, Mark & Hofman, Frank, 2003. "A model for time of day and mode choice using error components logit," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 245-268, May.
    5. Eldad Davidov, 2007. "Explaining Habits in a New Context the Case of Travel-Mode Choice," Rationality and Society, , vol. 19(3), pages 315-334, August.
    6. Susan Handy & Yan Xing & Theodore Buehler, 2010. "Factors associated with bicycle ownership and use: a study of six small U.S. cities," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 967-985, November.
    7. Nankervis, Max, 1999. "The effect of weather and climate on bicycle commuting," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 417-431, August.
    8. Behrendt, Frauke, 2016. "Why cycling matters for Smart Cities. Internet of Bicycles for Intelligent Transport," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 157-164.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guangnian Xiao & Zihao Wang, 2020. "Empirical Study on Bikesharing Brand Selection in China in the Post-Sharing Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-16, April.
    2. Zhenzhen Xu & Chunfu Shao & Shengyou Wang & Chunjiao Dong, 2020. "Analysis and Prediction Model of Resident Travel Satisfaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Jun Li & Jiachao Shen & Bicen Jia, 2021. "Exploring Intention to Use Shared Electric Bicycles by the Extended Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-13, April.
    4. Shuo Zhang & Li Chen & Yingzi Li, 2021. "Shared Bicycle Distribution Connected to Subway Line Considering Citizens’ Morning Peak Social Characteristics for Urban Low-Carbon Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Downward, Paul & Rasciute, Simona, 2015. "Assessing the impact of the National Cycle Network and physical activity lifestyle on cycling behaviour in England," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 425-437.
    2. Verma, Meghna & Rahul, T.M. & Reddy, Peesari Vamshidhar & Verma, Ashish, 2016. "The factors influencing bicycling in the Bangalore city," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 29-40.
    3. Esther Fasan & Miles Tight & Harry Evdorides, 2021. "Factors Influencing Cycling among Secondary School Adolescents in an Ethnically Diverse City: The Perspective of Birmingham Transport Stakeholders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Liu, Hung-Chi & Lin, Jen-Jia, 2019. "Associations of built environments with spatiotemporal patterns of public bicycle use," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 299-312.
    5. Senes, Giulio & Rovelli, Roberto & Bertoni, Danilo & Arata, Laura & Fumagalli, Natalia & Toccolini, Alessandro, 2017. "Factors influencing greenways use: Definition of a method for estimation in the Italian context," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 175-187.
    6. Lanzendorf, Martin & Busch-Geertsema, Annika, 2014. "The cycling boom in large German cities—Empirical evidence for successful cycling campaigns," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 26-33.
    7. Li, Aoyong & Zhao, Pengxiang & Huang, Yizhe & Gao, Kun & Axhausen, Kay W., 2020. "An empirical analysis of dockless bike-sharing utilization and its explanatory factors: Case study from Shanghai, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    8. Stanislav Kubaľák & Alica Kalašová & Ambróz Hájnik, 2021. "The Bike-Sharing System in Slovakia and the Impact of COVID-19 on This Shared Mobility Service in a Selected City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, June.
    9. Tae San Kim & Won Kyung Lee & So Young Sohn, 2019. "Graph convolutional network approach applied to predict hourly bike-sharing demands considering spatial, temporal, and global effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, September.
    10. Yuanyuan Zhang & Yuming Zhang, 2018. "Associations between Public Transit Usage and Bikesharing Behaviors in The United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    11. Elżbieta Macioszek & Paulina Świerk & Agata Kurek, 2020. "The Bike-Sharing System as an Element of Enhancing Sustainable Mobility—A Case Study based on a City in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-29, April.
    12. Cheng, Yung-Hsiang & Liu, Kuo-Chu, 2012. "Evaluating bicycle-transit users’ perceptions of intermodal inconvenience," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1690-1706.
    13. Fabio Kon & Éderson Cássio Ferreira & Higor Amario Souza & Fábio Duarte & Paolo Santi & Carlo Ratti, 2022. "Abstracting mobility flows from bike-sharing systems," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 545-581, October.
    14. Maas, Suzanne & Nikolaou, Paraskevas & Attard, Maria & Dimitriou, Loukas, 2021. "Examining spatio-temporal trip patterns of bicycle sharing systems in Southern European island cities," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    15. Olafsson, Anton Stahl & Nielsen, Thomas Sick & Carstensen, Trine Agervig, 2016. "Cycling in multimodal transport behaviours: Exploring modality styles in the Danish population," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 123-130.
    16. Yao Yao & Linwei Liu & Zibin Guo & Ziheng Liu & Huiyu Zhou, 2018. "Experimental Study on Shared Bike Use Behavior under Bounded Rational Theory and Credit Supervision Mechanism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, December.
    17. Tomasz Bieliński & Agnieszka Kwapisz & Agnieszka Ważna, 2019. "Bike-Sharing Systems in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, April.
    18. Pucher, John & Buehler, Ralph & Seinen, Mark, 2011. "Bicycling renaissance in North America? An update and re-appraisal of cycling trends and policies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 451-475, July.
    19. Jie Gao & Dick Ettema & Marco Helbich & Carlijn B. M. Kamphuis, 2019. "Travel mode attitudes, urban context, and demographics: do they interact differently for bicycle commuting and cycling for other purposes?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2441-2463, December.
    20. Radzimski, Adam & Dzięcielski, Michał, 2021. "Exploring the relationship between bike-sharing and public transport in Poznań, Poland," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 189-202.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:17:p:4538-:d:259605. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.