The role emotion and gender play in the choice of commuting by bicycle: A preliminary study from Christchurch,New Zealand

Abstract

In this study, 35 women and 18 men completed a detailed questionnaire in order to determine the possible role emotion and individual differences have on the decision to commute by bicycle. Measured affect regarding cycling did not significantly correlate with support for pro-cycling policies. There was, however, a significant interaction between affect regarding cycling and gender when predicting actual time spent using bicycles. Positive affect towards cycling was significantly related to riding time for men, r = .56, but not women, r = .03. This result is intriguing given that men expressed less support for pro-cycling policies, less support for the environmental-social benefits of cycling, but actually spent more time commuting by bicycle than women. Marketing bicycle commuting may need to be considered in light of these gender differences. For some users, a lofty pro-sustainability message may not be as persuasive as advertising the thrills associated with bike commuting.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

J.R.

(2000). Reasoning and Decision Making. Cognitive psychology and its Implications (5th ed). (pp349–350). New York: Worth Publishers.

Collins

C. M.

Chambers

S. M.

(2005). Psychological and situational influences on commuter-transport-mode choice. Environment and Behavior, 37, 640–661.

Damasio

A.R.

(1994). Descarte's error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. New York: Grosset/Putnam.

Finucane

M. L.

Alhakami

Slovic

Johnson

S. M.

(2000). The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 1–17.

Harris

C.R.

Jenkins

Glaser

(2006). Gender differences in risk assessment: Why do women take fewer risks than men? Judgement and Decision Making, 1, 48–63.

Hine

D.W.

Marks

A.D.G.

Malte

Gifford

Heath

(2007). Keeping the home fires burning: The affect heuristic and wood smoke pollution. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 26–32.

Hodgkinson

S. P.

Innes

J. M.

(2001). The attitudinal influence of career orientation in 1st-year university students: Environmental attitudes as a function of degree choice. Journal of Environmental Education, 32, 37–40.

Kahneman

(2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697–720.

Kollmuss

Agyeman

(2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8, 239–260.

10.

Peters

Slovic

(1996). The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1427–1453.

11.

Slovic

Finucane

Peters

MacGregor

D. G.

(2002). The affect heuristic. In Gilovich

Griffin

Kahneman

(Eds.), Heuristics and biases (pp. 397–420). New York: Cambridge University Press.

12.

Wen

L.M.

Rissel

(2008). Inverse associations between cycling to work, public transport, and overweight and obesity: Findings from a population based study in Australia. Preventive Medicine: An International Journal Devoted to Practice and Theory, 46(1), 29–32.

13.

Wooliscroft

Ganglmair

(2009). Mean Street. HE KITENGA: 2008 University of Otago Research Highlights. Retrieved June 10, 2009, from http://www.otago.ac.nz/research/he_kitenga/meanstreets.html .

14.

Zajonc

R. B.

(1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151–175.