Submitted:
13 January 2023
Posted:
16 January 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Socio-economic characteristics
2.2. Trip characteristics
2.3. Built/natural environment
2.4. Work conditions
2.5. Latent variables
3. Methodology
3.1. Area of study
3.2. The survey
4. Analysis
4.1. Individual characteristics (objective variables)
4.2. Latent variables (subjective variables)
5. Result
5.1. Confirmatory factor analysis
5.2. Correlation of variables
5.3. Examining fit indices
6. Discussion
| Type of relationship | Standardized beta | Un-standardized beta | standard error | T Value | P value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cycling | ← | Built/Natural environment |
-0.53 | -0.31 | 0.045 | 6.82 | <0.001 |
| Cycling | ← | Cost | -0.25 | -0.2 | 0.066 | 2.98 | 0.003 |
| Cycling | ← | Will | 0.71 | 0.49 | 0.067 | 7.33 | <0.001 |
| cycling | ← | Dignity | -0.23 | -0.21 | 0.063 | 3.41 | <0.001 |
| Cycling | ← | Limit by family |
-0.34 | -0.18 | 0.034 | 5.35 | <0.001 |
| cycling | ← | Unpleasant feeling |
-0.19 | -0.1 | 0.029 | 3.35 | <0.001 |
| Cycling | ← | Safety night | -0.26 | -0.29 | 0.073 | 3.93 | <0.001 |
7. Conclusions
- 1-
- Increasing the safety of cycling routes, especially in areas where the demand for cycling by women is higher. This gradually creates a positive mentality among the people of the society, which ultimately increases the attractiveness of this mode of transportation. On the other hand, it is possible that the banning of cycling by the family is in terms of the lack of understanding of security in society, and increasing security/safety can make the family satisfied with the cycling of its children or spouse. The main responsible for the development of cycling infrastructure is the deputy transportation department of Tehran Municipality. Its main beneficiary is the only company providing shared bicycles (BDOOD company) that can help Tehran Municipality in investing for developing the infrastructure.
- 2-
- Allocation of government subsidies to buy or apply discounts to the users of shared bicycles by benefits from reducing traffic and air pollution. Responsible for this issue is the transportation deputy of Tehran municipality.
- 3-
- Developing behavior and acculturalization of bicycle use in society via advertisements and the use of it by the senior transport managers of the countries. All decisions that are made in the field of transportation of Tehran city are made by the deputy transportation department of Tehran municipality. which also cooperates with the Deputy of Social and Cultural Affairs of Tehran Municipality in the field of cultural and behavioral development.
- 1-
- The information received from the variables in Table 1. is for comparison with 2018 census data to estimate the representativeness of the data collected by the surveys[71,72]. Except for the gender of the individuals, the correct data of other variables from this census were not available. The age of respondents to the questionnaire was not correctly answered in online survey, which was deleted due to incomplete information. However, the obtained data can be used in other researches.
- 2-
- We had limitations of face-to-face questionnaire because of spread of covid-19 pandemic and that’s why we had online survey as well.
- 3-
- There was no accurate data about income, car ownership and other variables (except gender) in table1 about the individuals.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Key characteristics and limitations of previous studies.
| Reference number | Socio-Economic characteristics | Trip Characteristics | Built/Natural Environment Characteristics | Work condition | Latent variable | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Age | Gender | Student | Ability to bath | Cycling to work | Income | Education | Travel time | Travel distance | Cost | recreational/Socialpurpose | Density | Bus stop | Infrastructure | Season | Population density | Slope | Traffic light | Wind | Accessibility density | Employment status | Convenience | Social norms | Bicycle security | Perception of safety | Family relationship | Cycling ability | |
| 4 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 6 | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 7 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ֍ | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ֍ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ֍ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
References
- P. F. Rodrigues, M. C. M. Alvim-Ferraz, F. G. Martins, P. Saldiva, T. H. Sá, and S. I. V. Sousa, "Health economic assessment of a shift to active transport," Environmental Pollution, vol. 258, p. 113745, 2020. [CrossRef]
- B. Giles-Corti, S. Foster, T. Shilton, and R. Falconer, "The co-benefits for health of investing in active transportation," New South Wales Public Health Bulletin, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 122-127, 2010. [CrossRef]
- R. Buehler, J. Pucher, D. Merom, and A. Bauman, "Active travel in Germany and the U.S. Contributions of daily walking and cycling to physical activity," (in eng), American journal of preventive medicine, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 241-50, Sep 2011. [CrossRef]
- E. Heinen, K. Maat, and B. Van Wee, "The effect of work-related factors on the bicycle commute mode choice in the Netherlands," Transportation, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 23-43, 2012. [CrossRef]
- J. D. Hunt and J. E. Abraham, "Influences on bicycle use," Transportation, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 453-470, 2007. [CrossRef]
- G. Akar, N. Fischer, and M. Namgung, "Bicycling Choice and Gender Case Study: The Ohio State University," International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 347-365, 2013. [CrossRef]
- J. Liu, B. Wang, and L. Xiao, "Non-linear associations between built environment and active travel for working and shopping: An extreme gradient boosting approach," Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 92, p. 103034, 2021. [CrossRef]
- B. Muñoz, A. Monzon, and R. A. Daziano, "The Increasing Role of Latent Variables in Modelling Bicycle Mode Choice," Transport Reviews, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 737-771, 2016. [CrossRef]
- D. Borsboom, "Latent Variable Theory," Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, vol. 6, no. 1-2, pp. 25-53, 2008. [CrossRef]
- Y. Sun, A. Mobasheri, X. Hu, and W. Wang, "Investigating Impacts of Environmental Factors on the Cycling Behavior of Bicycle-Sharing Users," Sustainability, vol. 9, no. 6, p. 1060, 2017. [CrossRef]
- R. B. Noland and H. Kunreuther, "Short-run and long-run policies for increasing bicycle transportation for daily commuter trips," Transport Policy, vol. 2, 1995. [CrossRef]
- M. Wardman, M. Page, and l. siu, y, "cycling and urban commuting: results of behavioral mode and rout choice models," university of leeds, institute for transport policies, 2000. [Online]. Available: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/2074/.
- R. Cervero and M. Duncan, "Walking, Bicycling, and Urban Landscapes: Evidence From the San Francisco Bay Area," American journal of public health, vol. 93, pp. 1478-83, 2003. [CrossRef]
- D. A. Rodrı́guez and J. Joo, "The relationship between non-motorized mode choice and the local physical environment," Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 151-173, 2004. [CrossRef]
- L. Frank, M. Bradley, S. Kavage, J. Chapman, and T. K. Lawton, "Urban form, travel time, and cost relationships with tour complexity and mode choice," Transportation, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 37-54, 2007. [CrossRef]
- M. J. Roorda and D. Passmore, "Including Minor Modes of Transport in a Tour-Based Mode Choice Model with Household Interactions," JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, 2009. [CrossRef]
- G. Akar and K. J. Clifton, "Influence of Individual Perceptions and Bicycle Infrastructure on Decision to Bike," Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 2140, no. 1, pp. 165-172, 2009. [CrossRef]
- S. L. Handy, Y. Xing, and T. J. Buehler, "Factors associated with bicycle ownership and use: a study of six small U.S. cities," Transportation, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 967-985, 2010. [CrossRef]
- R. A. Acheampong and A. Siiba, "Examining the determinants of utility bicycling using a socio-ecological framework: An exploratory study of the Tamale Metropolis in Northern Ghana," Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 69, pp. 1-10, 2018. [CrossRef]
- G.-j. de Bruijn, S. P. Kremers, H. Schaalma, W. van Mechelen, and J. Brug, "Determinants of adolescent bicycle use for transportation and snacking behavior," Preventive medicine, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 658-67, 2005. [CrossRef]
- R. Maldonado-Hinarejos, A. Sivakumar, and J. W. Polak, "Exploring the role of individual attitudes and perceptions in predicting the demand for cycling: a hybrid choice modelling approach," Transportation, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1287-1304, 2014. [CrossRef]
- D. Taylor and H. Mahmassani, "Analysis of Stated Preferences for Intermodal Bicycle-Transit Interfaces," Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 1556, 1996. [CrossRef]
- J. Parkin, M. Wardman, and M. Page, "Estimation of the determinants of bicycle mode share for the journey to work using census data," Transportation, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 93-109, 2007. [CrossRef]
- P. O. Plaut, "Non-motorized commuting in the US," Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 347-356, 2005. [CrossRef]
- P. Hopkinson and M. Wardman, "Evaluating the demand for new cycle facilities," Transport Policy, vol. 3, no. 4, 1996. [CrossRef]
- C. J. Mendiate, J. A. Soria-lara, and A. Monzon, "Identifying clusters of cycling commuters and travel patterns: The case of Quelimane, Mozambique," International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 710-721, 2020. [CrossRef]
- G. Vandenbulcke et al., "Cycle commuting in Belgium: Spatial determinants and ‘re-cycling’ strategies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 118-137, 2011. [CrossRef]
- S. Zahran, S. D. Brody, P. Maghelal, A. Prelog, and M. Lacy, "Cycling and walking: Explaining the spatial distribution of healthy modes of transportation in the United States," Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 462-470, 2008. [CrossRef]
- C. R. Emond and S. L. Handy, "Factors associated with bicycling to high school: insights from Davis, CA," Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 71-79, 2012. [CrossRef]
- T. Ryley, "Estimating Cycling Demand for the Journey to Work or Study in West Edinburgh, Scotland," Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 1982, pp. 187-193, 2006. [CrossRef]
- G. Rose and H. Marfurt, "Travel behaviour change impacts of a major ride to work day event," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 351-364, 2007. [CrossRef]
- Lee, H. Park, and K. Sohn, "Increasing the number of bicycle commuters," Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Transport, vol. 165, no. 1, pp. 63-72, 2012. [CrossRef]
- R. Buehler, "Determinants of bicycle commuting in the Washington, DC region: The role of bicycle parking, cyclist showers, and free car parking at work," Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 525-531, 2012. [CrossRef]
- M. Börjesson and J. Eliasson, "The value of time and external benefits in bicycle appraisal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 673-683, 2012. [CrossRef]
- M. Wardman, R. Hatfield, and M. Page, "The UK national cycling strategy: can improved facilities meet the targets?," Transport Policy, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 123-133, 1997/04/01/ 1997. [CrossRef]
- R. katz, "Forecasting Demand For Bicycle Facilities," in "Austroads Project," 2001. [Online]. Available: https://trid.trb.org/view/718453.
- Hamre and R. Buehler, "Commuter Mode Choice and Free Car Parking, Public Transportation Benefits, Showers/Lockers, and Bike Parking at Work: Evidence from the Washington, DC Region," Journal of Public Transportation, vol. 17, pp. 67-91, 06/01 2014. [CrossRef]
- L. dell'Olio, A. Ibeas, and J. L. Moura, "Implementing bike-sharing systems," Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Municipal Engineer, vol. 164, no. 2, pp. 89-101, 2011. [CrossRef]
- P. Rietveld and V. Daniel, "Determinants of bicycle use: do municipal policies matter?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 531-550, 2004. [CrossRef]
- M. Winters, M. Brauer, E. M. Setton, and K. Teschke, "Built environment influences on healthy transportation choices: bicycling versus driving," Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, vol. 87, no. 6, pp. 969-93, 2010. [CrossRef]
- S. R. Gehrke and K. J. Clifton, "Operationalizing Land Use Diversity at Varying Geographic Scales and Its Connection to Mode Choice," Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 2453, no. 1, pp. 128-136, 2014. [CrossRef]
- Y. Xing, S. L. Handy, and P. L. Mokhtarian, "Factors associated with proportions and miles of bicycling for transportation and recreation in six small US cities," Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 73-81, 2010. [CrossRef]
- M. R. Baltes, "Factors Influencing Nondiscretionary Work Trips by Bicycle Determined from 1990 U.S. Census Metropolitan Statistical Area Data," Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 1538, no. 1, pp. 96-101, 1996. [CrossRef]
- F. Goetzke and T. Rave, "Bicycle Use in Germany: Explaining Differences between Municipalities with Social Network Effects," Urban Studies, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 427-437, 2010. [CrossRef]
- L. Ma and J. Dill, "Associations between the objective and perceived built environment and bicycling for transportation," Journal of Transport & Health, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 248-255, 2015. [CrossRef]
- L. dell’Olio, A. Ibeas, M. Bordagaray, and J. d. D. Ortúzar, "Modeling the Effects of Pro Bicycle Infrastructure and Policies Toward Sustainable Urban Mobility," Journal of Urban Planning and Development, vol. 140, no. 2, p. 04014001, 2014. [CrossRef]
- J. E. Schoner and D. M. Levinson, "The missing link: bicycle infrastructure networks and ridership in 74 US cities," Transportation, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1187-1204, 2014. [CrossRef]
- V. Moudon et al., "Cycling and the built environment, a US perspective," Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 245-261, 2005. [CrossRef]
- R. Buehler and J. Pucher, "Cycling to work in 90 large American cities: new evidence on the role of bike paths and lanes," Transportation, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 409-432, 2011. [CrossRef]
- Á. Fernández-Heredia, S. Jara-Díaz, and A. Monzón, "Modelling bicycle use intention: the role of perceptions," Transportation, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 1-23, 2014. [CrossRef]
- L. H. Engbers and I. J. Hendriksen, "Characteristics of a population of commuter cyclists in the Netherlands: perceived barriers and facilitators in the personal, social and physical environment," International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 2010.
- S. S. Mahdi Rashidi, Ali Nadran, "Do People Desire to Cycle More During the COVID-19 Pandemic? Investigating the Role of Behavioural Characteristics through a Structural Model " The open civil engineering journal, vol. 16, 2022. [CrossRef]
- S. Titze, W. J. Stronegger, S. Janschitz, and P. Oja, "Association of built-environment, social-environment and personal factors with bicycling as a mode of transportation among Austrian city dwellers," Preventive Medicine, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 252-9, 2008. [CrossRef]
- S. Titze, W. J. Stronegger, S. Janschitz, and P. Oja, "Environmental, social, and personal correlates of cycling for transportation in a student population," (in eng), Journal of physical activity & health, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 66-79, 2007. [CrossRef]
- J. R. Panter, A. P. Jones, E. M. van Sluijs, and S. J. Griffin, "Attitudes, social support and environmental perceptions as predictors of active commuting behaviour in school children," Journal of epidemiology and community health, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 41-8, 2010. [CrossRef]
- B. de Geus, I. De Bourdeaudhuij, C. Jannes, and R. Meeusen, "Psychosocial and environmental factors associated with cycling for transport among a working population," Health education research, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 697-708, 2008. [CrossRef]
- Bigazzi, F. Ausri, L. Peddie, D. Fitch, and E. Puterman, "Physiological markers of traffic-related stress during active travel," Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 84, pp. 223-238, 2022. [CrossRef]
- S. LaJeunesse, P. Ryus, W. Kumfer, S. Kothuri, and K. Nordback, "Measuring Pedestrian Level of Stress in Urban Environments: Naturalistic Walking Pilot Study," Transportation Research Record, vol. 2675, no. 10, pp. 109-119, 2021. [CrossRef]
- W. G. Cochran, Sampling techniques. John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
- D. George and P. Mallery, SPSS for Windows step by step : a simple guide and reference, 17.0 update, 10th ed. ed. Boston : Allyn & Bacon (in eng), 2010.
- K. Wright, "An Introduction to Cronbach's α: It's the GLM (Again)!," presented at the Annual Meeting of Southwest Educational 2013.
- D. R. Bassett, J. Pucher, R. Buehler, D. L. Thompson, and S. E. Crouter, "Walking, Cycling, and Obesity Rates in Europe, North America, and Australia," (in English), Journal of Physical Activity and Health, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 795-814, 2008. [CrossRef]
- Semenescu and D. Coca, "Why people fail to bike the talk: Car dependence as a barrier to cycling," Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 88, pp. 208-222, 2022. [CrossRef]
- J. Werneke, M. Dozza, and M. Karlsson, "Safety–critical events in everyday cycling – Interviews with bicyclists and video annotation of safety–critical events in a naturalistic cycling study," Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 35, pp. 199-212, 2015. [CrossRef]
- J. M. Wood, A. A. Black, and R. A. Tyrrell, "Increasing the conspicuity of cyclists at night by using bicycle lights and clothing to highlight their biological motion to oncoming drivers," Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 90, pp. 326-332, 2022. [CrossRef]
- Heeremans, E. Rubie, M. King, and O. Oviedo-Trespalacios, "Group cycling safety behaviours: A systematic review," Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 91, pp. 26-44, 2022. [CrossRef]
- W. Raza, B. Forsberg, C. Johansson, and J. N. Sommar, "Air pollution as a risk factor in health impact assessments of a travel mode shift towards cycling," Global Health Action, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 1429081, 2018. [CrossRef]
- J. Gelb and P. Apparicio, "Cyclists’ exposure to atmospheric and noise pollution: a systematic literature review," Transport Reviews, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 742-765, 2021. [CrossRef]
- C. Liu, A. Tapani, I. Kristoffersson, C. Rydergren, and D. Jonsson, "Appraisal of cycling infrastructure investments using a transport model with focus on cycling," Case Studies on Transport Policy, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 125-136, 2021. [CrossRef]
- F. Spotswood, T. Chatterton, A. Tapp, and D. Williams, "Analysing cycling as a social practice: An empirical grounding for behaviour change," Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 29, pp. 22-33, 2015. [CrossRef]
- Y. Hatamzadeh, M. Habibian, and A. Khodaii, "Measuring walking behaviour in commuting to work: investigating the role of subjective, environmental and socioeconomic factors in a structural model," International Journal of Urban Sciences, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 173-188, 2020. [CrossRef]
- Y. Hatamzadeh, M. Habibian, and A. Khodaii, "Walking behavior across genders in school trips, a case study of Rasht, Iran," Journal of Transport & Health, vol. 5, pp. 42-54, 2017. [CrossRef]



| Number | Percent (%) | ||
| Gender | Male | 189 | 45.2 |
| Female | 156 | 54.8 | |
| Marital status | Single | 176 | 51 |
| Married | 169 | 49 | |
| Employment status | Employed | 149 | 43.2 |
| Student | 74 | 21.4 | |
| Working student |
79 | 22.9 | |
| Unemployed | 43 | 12.5 | |
| Education | Under-diploma | 39 | 11.3 |
| Diploma | 68 | 19.7 | |
| Bachelor | 98 | 28.5 | |
| Master | 114 | 33 | |
| PhD | 26 | 7.5 | |
| Income | No income | 15 | 4.3 |
| less than 75 $ | 53 | 15.4 | |
| 75-200 $ | 128 | 37.1 | |
| 200-300$ | 112 | 32.5 | |
| More than 300 $ | 37 | 10.7 | |
| Car ownership | Do not have | 116 | 33.6 |
| Having 1 car | 72 | 20.9 | |
| Having 2 car | 98 | 28.4 | |
| 3 cars or more | 59 | 17.1 | |
| Purpose of trip | work | 70 | 20.3 |
| Education | 63 | 18.3 | |
| Leisure | 59 | 17.1 | |
| socializing | 78 | 22.6 | |
| Shopping and weekend | 75 | 21.7 | |
| BMI | Less than 20 | 28 | 8.1 |
| 20-25 | 126 | 36.5 | |
| 25-30 | 124 | 35.9 | |
| more than 30 | 67 | 19.5 | |
| Main factor | Standard deviation | Average |
|---|---|---|
| cycling | 2.55 | 0.79 |
| Cost | 2.19 | 0.81 |
| Built/Natural environment | 3.52 | 0.98 |
| Will | 3.59 | 0.88 |
| Dignity | 3.4 | 0.87 |
| Limit by family | 3.53 | 1.10 |
| Unpleasant feeling | 2.45 | 1.11 |
| Safety night | 2.37 | 0.92 |
| Main factor | Skewness | kurtosis |
|---|---|---|
| Cycling | 0.085 | -0.227 |
| Cost | 0.595 | -0.037 |
| Built/Natural environment | -0.813 | 0.134 |
| Will | -0.65 | 0.456 |
| Dignity | -0.518 | 0.061 |
| Limit by family | -0.605 | -0.409 |
| Unpleasant feeling | 0.667 | -0.137 |
| Safety night | 0.488 | -0.438 |
| Main factor | Item | F.L | AVE | C.R | Cronbach’s a |
| Cycling | Travel time by bicycle per trip | 0.53 | 0.34 | 0.71 | 0.61 |
| The distance you cycle | 0.64 | ||||
| Cost | The cost of cycling (buying a personal bike) is one of my main reasons for not using a bike. | 0.66 | 0.52 | 0.73 | 0.68 |
| The cost of cycling (the cost of using a shared bike) is one of my main reasons for not using a bike | 0.78 | ||||
| Built/Natural environment | In secluded places, I am more interested in cycling | 0.81 | 0.53 | 0.79 | 0.77 |
| I also use a bicycle on days when the weather is polluted | 0.78 | ||||
| I also use a bicycle in places where there is a lot of noise pollution | 0.58 | ||||
| Will | If there is something I don't like, I will still deal with it | 0.52 | 0.44 | 0.72 | 0.68 |
| If I want to understand something, I will definitely try to understand it | 0.78 | ||||
| If I start something, I will definitely finish it | 0.67 | ||||
| Dignity | I always appear outside the house in formal clothes | 0.82 | 0.47 | 0.81 | 0.80 |
| I never leave the house in sports clothes, even to exercise | 0.79 | ||||
| I think cycling is for those who don't have a car | 0.83 | ||||
| I think that cycling is reserved for the wealthy classes of society with lower job stress | 0.43 | ||||
| I think cycling is for those who are in their teens or younger | 0.44 | ||||
| Limit by family | My family does not pay me to buy a bicycle | 0.89 | 0.77 | 0.91 | 0.91 |
| I feel that my family is upset about my cycling | 0.87 | ||||
| I feel that my family will not allow me to ride a bicycle | 0.87 | ||||
| Unpleasant feeling | Other people pay more attention to me when I ride a bike (in a bad way) | 0.85 | 0.84 | 0.95 | 0.96 |
| While cycling, other people make fun of my clothing | 0.92 | ||||
| When cycling, other people object to my clothing | 0.97 | ||||
| While cycling, other people make fun of me because of my gender | 0.93 | ||||
| Safety night | Accidents are more likely to occur while cycling at night | 0.89 | 0.61 | 0.92 | 89/0 |
| There is a higher chance of harassment while cycling at night | 0.96 | ||||
| There are few police at night in the city | 0.93 | ||||
| More thefts occur from cyclists at night | 0.54 | ||||
| I have more anxiety while cycling at night. | 0.46 |
| Variables | Cycling | Cost | Built/Natural environment | Will | Dignity | Limit by family | Unpleasant feeling | Safety night |
| Cycling | 0.58 | |||||||
| Cost | -0/34** | 0/72 | ||||||
| Built/Natural environment | -0/49** | /21** 0 |
0/73 | |||||
| Will | 0/57** | /23** -0 |
-0/31** | 0/66 | ||||
| Dignity | -0/45** | 0.06 | 0/27** | /18** 0 |
0/68 | |||
| Limit by family | -0/39** | /33** 0 |
0/45** | /30** -0 |
0/31** | 0/88 | ||
| Unpleasant feeling | -0/19** | /24** 0 |
0.05 | 0.08 | 0/33** | 0/48** | 0/92 | |
| Safety night | -0/25** | 0.07 | 0/25** | 0.07 | 0/24** | 0/37** | 0/16** | 0/78 |
| Interpretation | Result | range Acceptable | Indicator |
| Acceptable fit | 0.91 | > 0.90 ( Greater than 0.90 ) |
GFI (index goodness-of-fit) |
| Acceptable fit | 0.072 | < 0.80 (smaller than 0.80) |
RMSEA (Root mean square error of approximation) |
| Acceptable fit | 0.93 | > 0.90 ( Greater than 0.90 ) |
CFI (fit index comparative) |
| Acceptable fit | 0.92 | > 0.90 ( Greater than 0.90 ) |
NFI (fit index Normed) |
| Acceptable fit | 0.89 | > 0.90 ( Greater than 0.90 ) |
IFI (fit index Incremental) |
| Acceptable fit | 0.71 | > 0.50 ( Greater than 0.50 ) |
AGFI (goodness-of-fit index Adjusted) |
| Acceptable fit | 0.56 | > 0.50 ( Greater than 0.50 ) |
PGFI (goodness-of-fit index Parsimonious) |
| Acceptable fit | 2.56 | 5 ≥ Indicator ≥1 (between 1-5) |
chi-square/DF (Chi-square ratio on the degree of freedom) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
