In the context of improving understanding and modeling the capabilities of activity-scheduling processes in travel behavior, this paper explores the role of social networks in the start time and the duration of social activities. The study was performed with a trivariate joint econometric model that was capable of capturing the correlation between unobserved influential factors causing the endogeneity of these three key decisions. The model captures the relevance not only of sociodemographic variables but also of the social network dimension for travelers, or the with whom variable, that is, individuals with whom travelers perform social activities. A particularly relevant case is the role of travel time to social activities, which has a positive effect on longer durations and late start times and which acts as a link between these two basic dimensions (start time and duration) of activity scheduling. The results confirm the relevance of the social context in an episode's temporal characteristics and illustrate aspects that future activity-based travel demand models should incorporate to be able to capture the socializing side of mobility decisions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
RoordaM., MillerE. J., and HabibK. M. N.Validation of TASHA: A 24-Hour Travel Activity Microsimulation Model. Transportation Research, Part A, Vol. 42, 2008, pp. 360–375.
2.
ArentzeT., and TimmermansH.A Learning-Based Transportation Oriented Simulation System. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 38, No. 7, 2004, pp. 613–633.
3.
AxhausenK. W.Social Networks and Travel: Some Hypotheses. In Social Aspects of Sustainable Transport: Transatlantic Perspectives (DonaghyK., ed.), Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot, United Kingdom, 2005.
4.
MarinA., and WellmanB.Social Network Analysis: An Introduction. In Handbook of Social Network Analysis (CarringtonP., and ScottJ., eds.), Sage, London, 2010.
5.
UrryJ.Social Networks, Travel, and Talk. British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 54, No. 2, 2003, pp. 155–175.
6.
CarrascoJ. A., MillerE. J., and WellmanB.How Far and with Whom Do People Socialize? Empirical Evidence About Distance Between Social Network Members. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2076, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 114–122.
7.
Van den BergP., ArentzeT. A., and TimmermansH. J. P.Size and Composition of Ego-Centered Social Networks and Their Effect on Geographic Distance and Contact Frequency. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2135, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009, pp. 1–9.
8.
KowaldM., FreiA., HackneyJ., IllenbergerJ., and AxhausenK.The Influence of Social Contacts on Leisure Travel: A Snowball Sample of Personal Networks. Proc. 12th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research, Jaipur, India, 2009.
9.
HabibK. M. N., CarrascoJ. A., and MillerE. J.Social Context of Activity Scheduling: Discrete–Continuous Model of Relationship Between “with Whom” and Episode Start Time and Duration. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2076, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 81–87.
10.
CarrascoJ. A., and MillerE. J.The Social Dimension in Action: A Multilevel, Personal Networks Model of Social Activity Frequency. Transportation Research, Part A, Vol. 43, No. 1, 2009, pp. 90–104.
11.
SenerI. N., BhatC. R., and PendyalaR. M.When, Where, How Long, and with Whom Are Individuals Participating in Physically Active Recreational Episodes? Presented at 90th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2011.
12.
RoordaM. J., and MillerE. J.Toronto Activity Panel Survey: Demonstrating the Benefits of a Multiple Instrument Panel Survey. Presented at 7th International Conference on Travel Survey Methods, Costa Rica, 2004.
13.
BhatC. R.A Generalized Multiple Duration Proportional Hazard Model with an Application to Activity Behavior During the Evening Work-To-Home Commute. Transportation Research, Part B, Vol. 30, No. 6, 1996, pp. 465–480.
14.
BhatC. R.Analysis of Travel Mode and Departure Time Choice for Urban Shopping Trips. Transportation Research, Part B, Vol. 32, No. 6, 1998, pp. 361–371.
15.
BhatC. R.A Model of Post Home Arrival Activity Participation Behavior. Transportation Research, Part B, Vol. 32, No. 6, 1998, pp. 384–400.
16.
KieferN. M.Econometric Duration Data and Hazard Function. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. XXVI, 1988, pp. 646–679.
17.
MunizagaM. A., CorreiaR., Jara-DiazS., and OrtuzarJ. D.Valuing Time with a Joint Mode Choice-Activity Model. International Journal of Transport Economics, Vol. XXXIII, No. 2, 2006, pp. 193–210.
18.
McFaddenD.Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior. In Frontiers in Econometrics (ZaremmbkaG. S., ed.), Academic Press, New York, 1973.
19.
HensherD. A., and ManneringF. L.Hazard-Based Duration Models and Their Application to Transport Analysis. Transport Reviews, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1994, pp. 63–82.
20.
LeeB., and TimmermansH. J. P.A Latent Class Accelerated Hazard Model of Activity Episode Durations. Transportation Research, Part B, Vol. 41, 2007, pp. 426–447.
21.
LeeL. F.Notes and Comments on Generalized Econometric Models with Selectivity. Econometrica, Vol. 51, No. 2, 1983, pp. 507–512.
22.
GAUSS User's Manual.Aptech Systems, Maple Valley, Calif., 2006.
23.
TommasoM. L. D.A Trivariate Model of Participation, Fertility and Wages: The Italian Case. Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 23, 1999, pp. 623–640.
24.
PendyalaR. M., and BhatC. R.An Exploration of Relationship Between Timing and Duration of Maintenance Activity. Transportation, Vol. 31, 2004, pp. 429–456.
25.
MillerE. J., and RoordaM. J.Prototype Model of Household Activity–Travel Scheduling. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1831, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 114–121.
26.
DohertyS. T., NemethE., RoordaM., and MillerE. J.Computerized Household Activity-Scheduling Survey for Toronto, Canada, Area: Design and Assessment. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1894, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. 140–149.
MarsdenP.Networks Data and Measurement. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 16, 1990, pp. 435–463.
29.
MarsdenP.Recent Developments in Network Measurement. In Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis (CarringtonP., ScottJ., and WassermanS., eds.), Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005.
30.
CarrascoJ. A., HoganB., WellmanB., and MillerE. J.Collecting Social Network Data to Study Social Activity–Travel Behavior: An Egocentered Approach. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 35, No. 6, 2008, pp. 961–980.
31.
LarsenJ., UrryJ., and AxhausenK. W.Mobilities, Networks, Geographies.Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot, United Kingdom, 2006.
32.
FuY.-C.Measuring Personal Networks with Daily Contacts: A Single-Item Survey Question and the Contact Diary. Social Networks, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2005, pp. 169–186.
33.
VovshaP., and BradleyM.Hybrid Discrete Choice Departure-Time and Duration Model for Scheduling Travel Tours. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1894, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. 46–56.
34.
ArentzeT., and TimmermansH.Social Networks, Social Interactions, and Activity–Travel Behavior: A Framework for Microsimulation. Environment and Planning B, Vol. 35, No. 6, 2008, pp. 1012–1027.
35.
HackneyJ., and AxhausenK. W.An Agent Model of Social Network and Travel Behavior Interdependence. Presented at 11th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research, Kyoto, Japan, 2006.
