Social Psychological Determinants of Bicycle Commuting in Russia: An Empirical Examination of the Model of Goal-Directed Behavior

This paper reports on the outcomes of verification of Perugini and Bagozzi’s model of goal-directed behavior, according to which determinants of bicycle commuting include one’s intention to behave this way, perceived behavioral control and frequency of past behavior, and the individual’s intention is, in turn, influenced by attitudes, perceived social approval and emotions associated with this behavior. The model was tested on a sample of 814 subjects living in several regions of Russia (av- erage age 31 years, 70.6% males) using a survey. The scales of social psychological determinants were translated and adapted from the surveys used in previous studies. Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling confirmed the initial hypotheses only partially. It was proved that positive attitudes, perceived social ap- proval, expected positive emotions and frequency of past behavior result in greater desire to commute by bicycle; and that this desire and frequency of past behavior positively affect the subjects’ intention, whereas perceived behavioral control (i.e. perceived difficulties with behaving this way) affects their intention negatively. In contrast to our expectations negative emotions and perceived behavioral control don’t seem to predict desire to commute by bicycle. The paper puts forward and ex- plores some new hypotheses on possible reasons for the absence of such correlations in the Russian context.

1. A summary  of the liveability  ranking  and overview.  Economist. August 2013. URL:http://www.eiu.com/Handlers/WhitepaperHandler.ashx?fi=WEB_Liveabil- ity_rankings_Promotional_August_2013.pdf&mode=wp&campaignid=Liveability2013 (Accessed 26.05.2014)
2. Behavioural Challenges for Urban Cycling. Copenhagenize blog. November 2009. http://www.copenhagenize.com/2009/11/behaviour-is-tricky-subject-and-getting.html (Accessed 26.05.2014)
3. Behavioural Insights Toolkit. London: Department for Transport. DfT, 2011. URL: http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/behavioural-insights-toolkit   (Accessed   07.11.2014)
4. Bamberg S., Ajzen I., Schmidt P. Choice of Travel Mode in the Theory of Planned Be- havior: The Roles of Past Behavior, Habit, and Reasoned Action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology.2003. Vol. 25:3, P. 175—187. doi: 10.1207/S15324834BASP2503_01
5. Chatterjee K., Sherwin H., Jain J. Triggers for changes in cycling: the role of life events and modifications to the external environment. Journal of Transport Geography. 2013. No 30. P.183—19. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.02.007
6. De Geus B., De Bourdeaudhuij I., Jannes C., Meeusen R. Psychosocial and environ- mental factors associated with cycling for transport among a working population. Health Education Research. 2008. 23 (4), 697—708. doi: 10.1093/her/cym055
7. Dill J. and Voros K. (2007) Factors Affecting Bicycling Demand: Initial Survey Find- ings from the Portland Region // http://web.pdx.edu/~jdill/Dill-Voros_TRB_11-15-06. pdf (Accessed 26.05.2014)
8. Eriksson L., Forward S.E. 2011. Is the intention to travel in a pro-environmental man- ner and the intention to use the car determined by different factors? Transportation Re- search Part D 16(5): 372—376. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2011.02.003
9. Gatersleben B., Katherine M. Appleton. Contemplating cycling to work: Attitudes and perceptions in different stages of change. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Prac- tice. 2007. Volume 41, Issue 4. p. 302—312. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2006.09.002
10. Gatersleben B., Haddad H. Who is the typical bicyclist? Transportation Research Part F. 2010. No13. P.41—48. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2009.10.003
11. De Geus B., De Bourdeaudhuij I., Jannes C., Meeusen R. Psychosocial and environ- mental factors associated with cycling for transport among a working population. Health Education Research. 2008. 23 (4), 697—708. doi: 10.1093/her/cym055
12. Handy S., Bert van Wee, Kroesen M.  Promoting  cycling  for  transport:  re- search needs and challenges. Transport Reviews. 2014. Vol. 34, No. 1. P. 4—24. doi: 10.1080/01441647.2013.860204
13. Heinen E.,  Bert  van  Wee,  Kees  Maat.  Commuting  by  Bicycle:  An  Over- view of the Literature. Transport Reviews. 2010. Vol. 30, No. 1. P. 59—96. doi: 10.1080/01441640903187001
14. Hopkinson P., Wardman M., 1996. Evaluating the demand for new cycle facilities.
15. Transport Policy 3, 241—249. doi: 10.1016/S0967-070X(96)00020-0
16. Milakis D., Vlastos T., Barbopoulos N. 2008. Relationships between urban form and trav- el behavior in Athens, Greece: A comparison with Western European and North American results. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 8(3): 201—215.
17. Passafaro P., Rimano A., Piccini M.P., Metastasio R., Gambardella V., Lettieri C. The bicycle and the city: Desires and emotions versus attitudes, habits and norms. Journal of Environmental Psychology.2014. No 38. P. 76—83 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.12.011
18. Perugini M., Bagozzi R.P. The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal-directed behaviors: Broadening and deepening the theory of planned behavior. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2001. No 40. P. 79—98. doi: 10.1348/014466601164704
19. Rietveld P., Daniel V. Determinants of bicycle use: do municipal policies mat- ter? Transportation Research Part A. 2004. No 38. P. 531—550. doi: 10.1016/j. tra.2004.05.003
20. Wardman M., Tight M. and Page M. Factors influencing the propensity to cycle to work. Transportation Research Part A. 2007. No 41(4). P. 339—350.