IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/uctcwp/qt29z267km.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Modeling the Desire to Telecommute: The Importance of Attitudinal Factors in Behavioral Models

Author

Listed:
  • Mokhtarian, Patricia L.
  • Salomon, Ilan

Abstract

This paper begins to operationalize a previously published conceptual model of the individual decision to telecommute. Using survey data from 628 employees of the City of San Diego, hypothesized drives to telecommute and constraints on/facilitators of telecommuting are measured. A binary logit model of the preference to telecommute from home is estimated, having a p2 of 0.68. The explanatory variables include attitudinal and factual information. Factor analysis is performed on two groups of attitudinal questions, identifying a total of 17 (oblique) factors which can be classified as drives and constraints. Additional measures are created from other data in the survey, usually objective sociodemographic characteristics. Variables representing at least four of the five hypothesized drives (work, family, independence/leisure, and travel) are significant in the final model. Variables from four of the ten groups of constraints (job suitability, social/professional and household interaction concerns, and a perceived benefit of commuting) are significant, primarily representing internal rather than external constraints. The results clearly demonstrate the importance of attitudinal measures over sociodemographic ones, as the same demographic characteristics (such as the presence of children, commute time) will have different effects on preference for different people.

Suggested Citation

  • Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Salomon, Ilan, 1997. "Modeling the Desire to Telecommute: The Importance of Attitudinal Factors in Behavioral Models," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt29z267km, University of California Transportation Center.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:uctcwp:qt29z267km
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/29z267km.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Novaco, Raymond W. & Kliewer, Wendy & Broquet, Alexander, 1991. "Home Environment Consequences of Commute Travel Impedance," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt1d5742g7, University of California Transportation Center.
    2. P L Mokhtarian & I Salomon, 1996. "Modeling the Choice of Telecommuting: 2. A Case of the Preferred Impossible Alternative," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 28(10), pages 1859-1876, October.
    3. Mokhtarian, Patricia L, 1992. "Defining Telecommuting," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt7k47f97v, University of California Transportation Center.
    4. P L Mokhtarian & I Salomon, 1996. "Modeling the Choice of Telecommuting: 3. Identifying the Choice Set and Estimating Binary Choice Models for Technology-Based Alternatives," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 28(10), pages 1877-1894, October.
    5. John R. Hauser, 1978. "Testing the Accuracy, Usefulness, and Significance of Probabilistic Choice Models: An Information-Theoretic Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 406-421, June.
    6. Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Salomon, Ilan, 1993. "Modeling the Choice of Telecommuting: Setting the Context," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt0js2m5s7, University of California Transportation Center.
    7. I Salomon & M Ben-Akiva, 1983. "The Use of the Life-Style Concept in Travel Demand Models," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 15(5), pages 623-638, May.
    8. Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Salomon, Ilan, 1995. "Modeling the Preference for Telecommuting: Measuring Attitudes and Other Variables," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2kn111m8, University of California Transportation Center.
    9. Novaco, Raymond W. & Stokols, Daniel & Milanesi, Louis, 1990. "Objective and Subjective Dimensions Of Travel Impedance as Determinants Of Commuting Stress," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt5jq8164z, University of California Transportation Center.
    10. Manski, Charles F & Lerman, Steven R, 1977. "The Estimation of Choice Probabilities from Choice Based Samples," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(8), pages 1977-1988, November.
    11. Novaco, Raymond W. & Stokols, Daniel & Milanesi, Louis, 1990. "Objective and Subjective Dimensions Of Travel Impedance as Determinants Of Commuting and Stress," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt10m3x16k, University of California Transportation Center.
    12. Mokhtarian, Patricia L, 1991. "Defining Telecommuting," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt35c4q71r, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    13. P L Mokhtarian & I Salomon, 1994. "Modeling the Choice of Telecommuting: Setting the Context," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 26(5), pages 749-766, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Bagley, Michael N., 2000. "Modeling employees' perceptions and proportional preferences of work locations: the regular workplace and telecommuting alternatives," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 223-242, May.
    2. Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Salomon, Ilan & Saxena, Somitra & Sampath, Srikanth & Cheung, Peter & Le, Kate & Bagley, Michael, 1996. "Adoption of Telecommuting in Two California State Agencies," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2v63b7b8, University of California Transportation Center.
    3. Patricia L. Mokhtarian, 1998. "A Synthetic Approach to Estimating the Impacts of Telecommuting on Travel," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 35(2), pages 215-241, February.
    4. Tang, Wei & Mokhtarian, Patricia & Handy, Susan, 2008. "The Role of Neighborhood Characteristics in the Adoption and Frequency of Working at Home: Empirical Evidence from Northern California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt9rg8w9c4, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    5. Haddad, Hebba & Lyons, Glenn & Chatterjee, Kiron, 2009. "An examination of determinants influencing the desire for and frequency of part-day and whole-day homeworking," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 124-133.
    6. José M. Ortiz-Lozano & Pedro C. Martínez-Morán & Víctor L. de Nicolás, 2022. "Teleworking in the Public Administration: An Analysis Based on Spanish Civil Servants’ Perspectives During the Pandemic," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    7. Georg Gottholmseder & Klaus Nowotny & Gerald J. Pruckner & Engelbert Theurl, 2009. "Stress perception and commuting," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(5), pages 559-576, May.
    8. Becky P. Y. Loo & Bo Wang, 2018. "Factors associated with home-based e-working and e-shopping in Nanjing, China," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 365-384, March.
    9. Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Raney, Elizabeth A. & Salomon, Ilan, 1997. "Behavioral response to congestion: identifying patterns and socio-economic differences in adoption," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 147-160, July.
    10. Nie, Peng & Sousa-Poza, Alfonso, 2018. "Commute time and subjective well-being in urban China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 188-204.
    11. Ingrid Gould Ellen & Katherine Hempstead, 2002. "Telecommuting and the Demand for Urban Living: A Preliminary Look at White-collar Workers," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 39(4), pages 749-766, April.
    12. Milakis, Dimitris & Cervero, Robert & van Wee, Bert & Maat, Kees, 2015. "Do people consider an acceptable travel time? Evidence from Berkeley, CA," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 76-86.
    13. Wilton, Robert D. & Páez, Antonio & Scott, Darren M., 2011. "Why do you care what other people think? A qualitative investigation of social influence and telecommuting," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 269-282, May.
    14. Christopher D. Higgins & Matthias N. Sweet & Pavlos S. Kanaroglou, 2018. "All minutes are not equal: travel time and the effects of congestion on commute satisfaction in Canadian cities," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1249-1268, September.
    15. Nicholas S. Caros & Jinhua Zhao, 2022. "Preparing urban mobility for the future of work," Papers 2201.01321, arXiv.org.
    16. Choo, Sangho & Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Salomon, Ilan, 2002. "Impacts of Home-Based Telecommuting on Vehicle-Miles Traveled: A Nationwide Time Series Analysis," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt2gj976x6, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    17. P L Mokhtarian & I Salomon, 1996. "Modeling the Choice of Telecommuting: 3. Identifying the Choice Set and Estimating Binary Choice Models for Technology-Based Alternatives," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 28(10), pages 1877-1894, October.
    18. Pazy, Asya & Salomon, Ilan & Pintzov, Tovi, 1996. "The impacts of women's careers on their commuting behavior: A case study of Israeli computer professionals," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 269-286, July.
    19. Shafizadeh, Kevan R. & Mokhtarian, Patricia L. & Niemeier, Debbie A. & Salomon, Ilan, 2000. "The Costs and Benefits of Home-Based Telecommuting," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt49c1n7hg, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    20. Novaco, Raymond W., 2000. "Traffic and Transport Psychology: Theory and Application, Talib Rothengatter, Enrique Carbonell Vaya (Eds.); Elsevier Science, Ltd., The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford 0X5 1GB, UK, 1997,," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 654-657, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social and Behavioral Sciences;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:uctcwp:qt29z267km. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucbus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.