Investigating the endogenous social interaction effects on the choice of owning a bicycle by the university students in Toronto

References

• Akar, G., and K. Clifton. 2009. “Influence of Individual Perceptions and Bicycle Infrastructure on Decision to Bike.” Transportation Research Record 2140: 165–172.
   Google Scholar
• Akar, G., N. Fischer, and M. Namgung. 2013. “Bicycling Choice and Gender Case Study: The Ohio State University.” International Journal of Sustainable Transportation 7: 347–365.
   Google Scholar
• Aptech Systems. 2017. Gauss. http://www.aptech.com/.
   Google Scholar
• Branion-Calls, M., T. Nelson, D. Fuller, L. Gauvin, and M. Winter. 2019. “Association between Individual Characteristics, Availability of Bicycle Infrastructure, and City-Wide Safety Perception of Bicycling: A Crossectional Survey of Bicyclists in 6 Canadian and U.S. Cities.” Transportation Research Part A, forthcoming.
   Google Scholar
• Carrasco, J., B. Hogan, B. Wellman, and E. J. Miller. 2008. “Collecting Social Network Data to Study Social Activity-Travel Behaviour: An Ego-Centric Approach.” Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 35: 961–980.
   Google Scholar
• Castillo-Manzano, J. I., and A. Sánchez-Braza. 2013. “Managing a Smart Bicycle System When Demand Outstrips Supply: The Case of the University Community in Seville.” Transportation 40: 459–477.
   Google Scholar
• Dugundji, E. R., and J. Walker. 2005. “Discrete Choice with Social and Spatial Network Interdependencies: An Empirical Examples Using Mixed Generalized Extreme Value Models with Field and Panel Effects.” Transportation Research Records 1921: 70–78.
   Google Scholar
• Emond, C. R., W. Tang, and S. L. Handy. 2009. “Explaining Gender Difference in Bicycling Behavior.” Transportation Research Record 2125: 16–25.
   Google Scholar
• Fernández-Heredia, A., S. Jara-Díaz, and A. Monzón. 2016. “Modelling Bicycle Use Intention: The Role of Perceptions.” Transportation 43: 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Grange, L.d., F. González, I. Vargas, and J. C. Muñoz. 2013. “A Polarized Logit Model.” Transportation Research Part A 53: 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Grange, L. D., F. González, I. Vargas, and R. Troncoso. 2015. “A Logit Model with Endogenous Explanatory Variables and Network Externalities.” Networks and Spatial Economics 15: 89–116.
   Google Scholar
• Guevara, C. A., and M. Ben-Akiva. 2010. “Addressing Endogeneity in Discrete Choice Models: Assessing Control-Function and Latent-Variable Methods.” In Choice Modelling: The State-of-the-Art and The State-of-Practice, edited by Stephane Hess, and Andrew Daly, 353–370. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Habib, K. M. N., J. Mann, M. Mahmoud, and A. Weiss. 2014. “Synopsis of Bicycle Demand in the City of Toronto: Investigating the Effects of Perception, Consciousness, and Comfortability on the Purpose of Biking and Bicycle Ownership.” Transportation Research Part A 70: 67–80.
   Google Scholar
• Habib, K. M. N., A. Weiss, and S. Hasnine. 2017. “On the Heterogeneity and Substitution Patterns in Mobility Tool Ownership Choices of Post-Secondary Students in Toronto.” Paper presented at the 96th Annual Meeting of Trans. Res. Board, January 8–12.
   Google Scholar
• Handy, S., Y. Xing, and T. J. Buehler. 2010. “Factors Associated with Bicycle Ownership and Use: A Study of Six Small U.S. Cities.” Transportation 37: 967–985.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, S., F. Manca, T. Alexander, S. Nielsen, and C. Prato. 2015. “Intentions to Use Bike-Sharing for Holiday Cycling: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior.” Tourism Management 47: 34–46.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, S., F. Manca, T. Alexander, S. Nielsen, and C. Prato. 2016. “Walking, Cycling and the Urban Form: A Heckman Selection Model of Active Travel Mode and Distance by Young Adolescents.” Transportation Research Part D 44: 55–65.
   Google Scholar
• Krizek, K. J., P. J. Johnson, and N. Tilahun. 2005. “Gender Differences in Bicycling Behavior and Facility Preferences.” In Conference Proceedings 35, Research on Women’s Issues in Transportation Volume 2: Technical Papers, 31–40. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Ma, L., J. Dill, and C. Mohr. 2014. “The Objective Versus Perceived Environment: What Matters for Bicycling?” Transportation 41: 1135–1152.
   Google Scholar
• Maness, M., and C. Cirillo. 2016. “An Indirect Latent Informational Conformity Social Influence Choice Model: Formulation and Case Study.” Transportation Research Part B 93: 75–101.
   Google Scholar
• Schoner, J., G. Lindsey, and D. Levinson. 2015. “Factors Associated with the Gender Gap in Bicycling over Time.” Paper presented at 94th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Sener, I., N. Eluru, and C. R. Bhat. 2009a. “An Analysis of Bicycle Route Choice Preferences in Texas, US.” Transportation 36: 511–539.
   Google Scholar
• Sener, I., N. Eluru, and C. R. Bhat. 2009b. “Who Are Bicyclists? Why and How Much are They Bicycling?” Transportation Research Record 2134: 63–72.
   Google Scholar
• Sigurdardottir, S., S. Kaplan, M. Møller, and T. Teasdale. 2013. “Understanding Adolescents’ Intentions to Commute by Car or Bicycle as Adults.” Transportation Research Part D 24: 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Singleton, P. A., and T. Goddard. 2016. “Cycling by Choice or Necessity? Exploring the Gender Gap in Bicycling in Oregon.” Transportation Research Record 2598: 110–118.
   Google Scholar
• StudentMoveTO. 2015. Accessed July 2017. http://www.studentmoveto.ca/.
   Google Scholar