Immobility in travel diary surveys

Madre, Jean‐Loup; Axhausen, Kay W.; Brög, Werner

doi:10.1007/s11116-006-9105-5

Cited by 79 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The higher shares of immobile travel diary respondents among the elderly are consistent with this pattern. Madre et al [2007] assume that best estimate for the true share of immobile persons is about 10-15%, which is within the interval yielded by the two timeuse numbers. TUS immobility rates seem more realistic than those yielded by NTS, provided that travel activity has been carefully encoded.…”

Section: Immobility According To the Different Kinds Of Surveysmentioning

confidence: 94%

Immobility and Mobility Seen Through Trip‐Based Versus Time‐Use Surveys

Hubert

Armoogum²,

Axhausen

et al. 2008

Transport Reviews

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Immobility According To the Different Kinds Of Surveysmentioning

confidence: 94%

Immobility and Mobility Seen Through Trip‐Based Versus Time‐Use Surveys

Hubert

Armoogum²,

Axhausen

et al. 2008

Transport Reviews

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the following, we review the literature on TUS/NTS comparisons regarding travel time and number of trips. For comparisons regarding immobility see Madre et al (2007), Hubert et al (2008) or Gerike et al (2013).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time use in travel surveys and time use surveys – Two sides of the same coin?

Gerike

Gehlert

Leisch

2015

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tAn in-depth understanding of travel behaviour determinants, including the relationship to non-travel activities, is the foundation for modelling and policy making. National Travel Surveys (NTS) and time use surveys (TUS) are two major data sources for travel behaviour and activity participation. The aim of this paper is to systematically compare both survey types regarding travel activities and non-travel activities. The analyses are based on the German National Travel Survey and the German National Time Use Survey from 2002.The number of trips and daily travel time for mobile respondents were computed as the main travel estimates. The number of trips per person is higher in the German TUS when changes in location without a trip are included. Location changes without a trip are consecutive non-trip activities with different locations but without a trip in-between. The daily travel time is consistently higher in the German TUS. The main reason for this difference is the 10-min interval used. Differences in travel estimates between the German TUS and NTS result from several interaction effects. Activity time in NTS is comparable with TUS for subsistence activities.Our analyses confirm that both survey types have advantages and disadvantages. TUS provide reliable travel estimates. The number of trips even seems preferable to NTS if missed trips are properly identified and considered. Daily travel times are somewhat exaggerated due to the 10-min interval. The fixed time interval is the most important limitation of TUS data. The result is that trip times in TUS do not represent actual trip times very well and should be treated with caution.We can use NTS activity data for subsistence activities between the first trip and the last trip. This can potentially benefit activity-based approaches since most activities before the first trip and after the last trip are typical home-based activities which are rarely substituted by out-of-home activities.

show abstract

“…In the literature, this finding is primarily seen as the result of a problem of survey methodology called "soft refusal". Madre et al (2007) estimate, on the basis of the 1993-1994 FTS, that immobility levels should lie between 8 and 12%, rather than the 16% measured.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The spatial dimensions of immobility in France

Motte-Baumvol

Bonin

2017

Transportation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In travel surveys, immobility is often approached as a technical issue that needs to be dealt with in order to measure mobility more accurately. By covering mobility patterns over a full week, the 2008 French Travel Survey allows immobility to be analysed other than as a marginal and random phenomenon. For working days alone, 28.8% of the adults in the survey had experienced one or more immobility episodes. By considering the intensity of immobility, and by introducing latent variables into Structural Equation Modelling (SEM), we have been able to propose a model with reasonable explanatory power. Our findings agree with previous studies and also show that within suburban or rural areas, access to shops or the type of local residential fabric are also factors that influence the number of immobile days. In addition, our findings show that the effects of the determinants differ between categories of individuals, notably between working adults and students on the one hand, and between retired and non-working people on the other.

show abstract

Immobility in travel diary surveys

Cited by 79 publications

References 6 publications

Immobility and Mobility Seen Through Trip‐Based Versus Time‐Use Surveys

Immobility and Mobility Seen Through Trip‐Based Versus Time‐Use Surveys

Time use in travel surveys and time use surveys – Two sides of the same coin?

The spatial dimensions of immobility in France

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About