Beyond the flexibility narrative of automobility: How regular are car users’ mobility patterns?

IF 3.5 2区 工程技术 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Marc-Edouard Schultheiss, Vincent Kaufmann
{"title":"Beyond the flexibility narrative of automobility: How regular are car users’ mobility patterns?","authors":"Marc-Edouard Schultheiss,&nbsp;Vincent Kaufmann","doi":"10.1016/j.trf.2025.05.034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The widespread reliance on cars for daily mobility is often justified by a perceived need for flexibility, allowing travelers to adjust activities, schedules, and trips in response to everyday demands. However, beyond the dominant narrative of automobility as inherently flexible, to what extent is this flexibility observable in actual travel behavior? This study examines spatial and scheduling regularities in travel behaviors across three user typologies based on car dependency: exclusive car users, moderate car users, and mixed-mode users. Regularity is assessed through location choices and degrees of scheduling freedom. Using multi-day GPS tracking data from the Swiss-wide MOBIS study, we apply a graph-based approach to analyze both spatial and scheduling patterns. Our findings challenge the assumption that car users exhibit greater unpredictability. Instead, mobility regularity persists across modal groups: regular users remain regular, and irregular users remain irregular, regardless of car dependence. Intensive car users do not demonstrate greater locational innovation, while mixed-mode users exhibit more habitual spatial behaviors than exclusive or moderate car users. Moreover, pricing and nudging interventions had limited impact, reinforcing the persistence of established mobility patterns. These results contribute to research on habitual mobility and modal choice, showing that car use does not inherently enable more flexible travel. Rather, the perceived flexibility of automobility appears more ideological than behavioral, sustained by dominant transport narratives rather than observed mobility patterns. These findings suggest that shifting mobility behaviors requires more than financial incentives – calling for integrated policies that also reshape cultural narratives around accessibility and car use.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48355,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Part F-Traffic Psychology and Behaviour","volume":"114 ","pages":"Pages 230-245"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Part F-Traffic Psychology and Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847825001986","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The widespread reliance on cars for daily mobility is often justified by a perceived need for flexibility, allowing travelers to adjust activities, schedules, and trips in response to everyday demands. However, beyond the dominant narrative of automobility as inherently flexible, to what extent is this flexibility observable in actual travel behavior? This study examines spatial and scheduling regularities in travel behaviors across three user typologies based on car dependency: exclusive car users, moderate car users, and mixed-mode users. Regularity is assessed through location choices and degrees of scheduling freedom. Using multi-day GPS tracking data from the Swiss-wide MOBIS study, we apply a graph-based approach to analyze both spatial and scheduling patterns. Our findings challenge the assumption that car users exhibit greater unpredictability. Instead, mobility regularity persists across modal groups: regular users remain regular, and irregular users remain irregular, regardless of car dependence. Intensive car users do not demonstrate greater locational innovation, while mixed-mode users exhibit more habitual spatial behaviors than exclusive or moderate car users. Moreover, pricing and nudging interventions had limited impact, reinforcing the persistence of established mobility patterns. These results contribute to research on habitual mobility and modal choice, showing that car use does not inherently enable more flexible travel. Rather, the perceived flexibility of automobility appears more ideological than behavioral, sustained by dominant transport narratives rather than observed mobility patterns. These findings suggest that shifting mobility behaviors requires more than financial incentives – calling for integrated policies that also reshape cultural narratives around accessibility and car use.
在汽车出行的灵活性叙述之外:汽车用户的出行模式有多规律?
人们普遍依赖汽车作为日常出行的工具,理由往往是人们认为汽车需要灵活性,使旅行者能够根据日常需求调整活动、日程安排和行程。然而,除了汽车固有的灵活性这一主流叙事之外,这种灵活性在实际出行行为中可观察到的程度有多大?本研究考察了基于汽车依赖的三种用户类型:专用车用户、中度用车用户和混合模式用户的出行行为的空间和调度规律。规律性是通过地点选择和调度自由度来评估的。利用来自瑞士范围内的MOBIS研究的多日GPS跟踪数据,我们采用基于图形的方法来分析空间和调度模式。我们的研究结果挑战了汽车使用者表现出更大的不可预测性的假设。相反,出行的规律性在不同的模式组中持续存在:无论对汽车的依赖程度如何,经常使用的用户仍然是经常使用的,不经常使用的用户仍然是不规律的。密集型汽车用户没有表现出更大的空间创新,而混合模式用户比单一或中度汽车用户表现出更多的习惯性空间行为。此外,定价和推动干预的影响有限,强化了既定流动模式的持久性。这些结果有助于对习惯性移动性和模式选择的研究,表明汽车的使用本身并不意味着更灵活的旅行。更确切地说,人们对汽车出行灵活性的感知似乎更多地是意识形态上的,而不是行为上的,这是由主流交通叙事而不是观察到的出行模式维持的。这些发现表明,改变出行行为需要的不仅仅是财政激励,还需要制定综合政策,重塑围绕可达性和汽车使用的文化叙事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
14.60%
发文量
239
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour focuses on the behavioural and psychological aspects of traffic and transport. The aim of the journal is to enhance theory development, improve the quality of empirical studies and to stimulate the application of research findings in practice. TRF provides a focus and a means of communication for the considerable amount of research activities that are now being carried out in this field. The journal provides a forum for transportation researchers, psychologists, ergonomists, engineers and policy-makers with an interest in traffic and transport psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信