Abstract
A reevaluation of cross-sectional versus longitudinal models of residential mobility confirms the general results of earlier cross-sectional analysis and casts doubt on the study by Davies and Pickles in 1985 in which it was argued that cross-sectional analysis is inadequate and that cross-sectional analysis in behavioral geography “must be viewed with suspicion”. However, it is true that the results from models of time-series data reveal additional complexities not obvious in cross-sectional analysis of mobility and migration.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
