Residential self-selection in quasi-experimental and natural experimental studies: An extended conceptualization of the relationship between the built environment and travel behavior
Eva Heinen
University of Leeds, Institute for Transport Studies, Faculty of Environment, LS2 9JT Leeds, United Kingdom. and MRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge, Box 285, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8428-5709
Bert van Wee
Delft University of Technology
Jenna Panter
MRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge, Box 285, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
Roger Mackett
Centre for Transport studies, University College London. Gower Street, London WC1E6BT, United Kingdom.
David Ogilvie
MRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge, Box 285, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2018.1165
Keywords: residential self-selection, built environment, travel behaviour, residential relocation, quasi-experimental studies, natural experimental studies
Abstract
Despite a large body of research suggesting that the built environment influences individual travel behavior, uncertainty remains about the true nature, size, and strength of any causal relationships between the built environment and travel behavior. Residential self-selection, the phenomenon whereby individuals or households select a residential area based on their transport attitudes, is a frequently proposed alternative explanation for the reported associations. To resolve the issue of residential self-selection, longitudinal studies are often recommended. In this paper, we argue that intervention study designs are insufficient to fully resolve the problem and that intervention studies on the built environment and travel behavior may still be biased by residential self-selection. The aim of this paper is to extend existing conceptualizations of the relationships between the built environment, travel behavior, and attitudes and to provide suggestions for how a causal relationship between the built environment and travel behavior may be ascertained with more accurate estimates of effect sizes. We discuss the complexities of determining causal effects in intervention studies with participants who relocate, and the biases that may occur. We illustrate the complexities by presenting extended conceptualizations. Based on these conceptualizations, we provide considerations for future research. We suggest repeating analyses with and without individuals who relocated during the study, and with and without statistical controls for residential relocation. Additional quantitative and qualitative analyses will be necessary to obtain more accurate effect size estimates and a better understanding of the causal relationships.References
Baar J., Romppel, M., Igel, U., Brähler, E., & Grande, G. (2015). The independent relations of both residential self-selection and the environment to physical activity. International Journal of Environmental Health Research, 25(3), 288–298.
Bhat, C. R., & Eluru, N. (2009). A copula-based approach to accommodate residential self-selection effects in travel behavior modelling. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 43(7), 749–765.
Bhat, C. R., Paleti, R., Pendyala, R., Lorenzini, K., & Konduri, K. (2013). Accommodating immigration status and self-selection effects in a joint model of household auto ownership and residential location choice. Transportation Research Record, 2382, 142–150.
Biying, Y., Zhang, J., & Fujiwara, A. (2012), Analysis of the residential location choice and household energy consumption behavior by incorporating multiple self-selection effects. Energy Policy, 46, 319–334.
Bohte, W., Maat, K., & van Wee, B. (2009). Measuring attitudes in research on residential self‐selection and travel behavior: A review of theories and empirical research. Transport Reviews, 29(3), 325–357.
Boone-Heinonen, J., Guilkey, D. K., Evenson, K. R., & Gordon-Larsen, P. (2010). Residential self-selection bias in the estimation of built environment effects on physical activity between adolescence and young adulthood. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 7, 70.
Brown B. B., & Werner, C. M. (2011). The residents’ benefits and concerns before and after a new rail stop: Do residents get what they expect? Environment & Behavior, 43, 789–806.
Cao, X. J. (2015). Examining the impacts of neighborhood design and residential self-selection on active travel: A methodological assessment. Urban Geography, 36(2), 236–255.
Cao, X. J. (2014). Residential self-selection in the relationship between the built environment and travel behavior: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 1–3.
Cao, X. J. (2009). Disentangling the influence of neighborhood type and self-selection on driving behavior: An application of sample selection model. Transportation, 36(2), 207–222.
Cao, X. J., & Ettema, D. (2014). Satisfaction with travel and residential self-selection: How do preferences moderate the impact of the Hiawatha light rail line? Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 93–108.
Cao, X. J., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. L. (2009a). Examining the impacts of residential self‐selection on travel behavior: A focus on empirical findings, Transport Reviews, 29(3), 359–395.
Cao, X. J., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. L. (2009b). The relationship between the built environment and nonwork travel: A case study of Northern California. Transportation Research A, 43(5), 548–559.
Cao, X. J., Xu, Z., & Fan, Y. (2010). Exploring the connections among residential location, self-selection, and driving: Propensity score matching with multiple treatments. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 44(10), 797–805.
Craig, P., Cooper, C., Gunnell, D., Haw, S., Lawson, K., Macintyre, S., … Thompson, S. (2012) Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions: New Medical Research Council guidance. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 66,1182–1186.
Chatman, D. G. (2009). Residential choice, the built environment, and nonwork travel: Evidence using new data and methods. Environment and Planning A, 41(5), 1072–1089.
Chatman, D. G. (2014). Estimating the effect of land use and transportation planning on travel patterns: Three problems in controlling for residential self-selection. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 47–56.
Chen, C., & Lin, H. (2011). Decomposing residential self-selection via a life-course perspective. Environment and Planning A, 43(11), 2608–2625.
Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. (2010). Travel and the built environment. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(3), 265–294.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Greenland, S., Pearl, J., & Robins, J. M. (1999). Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology, 10(1), 37–48.
Handy, S. L., Boarnet, M., Ewing, R., & Killingsworth, R. (2002). How the built environment affects physical activity: Views from urban planning. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 23(2S), 64–73.
Handy, S. L., Cao, X., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005). Correlation or causality between the built environment and travel behavior? Evidence from Northern California. Transportation Research D, 10(6), 427–444.
He, X., & Zhang, L. (2014). Quantifying the self-selection effects in residential location choice with a structural equation model. Transportation Research Record, 2453, 153–161.
Hill, A. B. (1965). The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proceed Royal Society of Medicine, London, 58, 295–300.
Hong, J., & Shen, Q. (2013). Residential density and transportation emissions: Examining the connection by addressing spatial autocorrelation and self-selection. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 22, 75–79.
Kamruzzaman, M., Baker, D. C., & Turrell, G. (2015). Do dissonants in transit oriented development adjust commuting travel behavior? European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 15(1), 66–77.
Kamruzzaman, M., Baker, D. C., Washington, S. P., & Turrell, G. (2013a). Residential dissonance and mode choice. Journal of Transport Geography, 33, 12–28.
Kamruzzaman, M., Baker, D. C., Washington, S. P., & Turrell, G. (2013b). Does residential dissonance impact residential mobility? Transportation Research Record, 2344, 59–67.
MacDonald, J., Stokes, R., Cohen, D., Kofner, A., & Ridgeway, G. (2010). The effect of light rail transit on body mass index and physical activity. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 39, 105–112.
Manaugh, K., & El-Geneidy, A. (2015) The importance of neighborhood type dissonance in understanding the effect of the built environment on travel behavior. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 8, 245–257.
McCormack, G. R., & Shiell, A. (2011). In search of causality: A systematic review of the relationship between the built environment and physical activity among adults. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 8(1), 125.
Mokhtarian, P. L., & Cao, X. (2008). Examining the impacts of residential self-selection on travel behavior: A focus on methodologies. Transportation Research B, 43(3), 204–228.
Naess, P. (2016). Built environment, causality and urban planning. Planning Theory and Practice 17(1), 52–71.
Naess, P. (2014a). Tempest in a teapot: The exaggerated problem of transport-related residential self-selection as a source of error in empirical studies. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 57–79.
Naess, P. (2014b). Response to van Wee and Boarnet. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 87–92.
Naess, P. (2009). Residential self-selection and appropriate control variables in land use: Travel studies. Transport Reviews, 29(3), 293–324.
Parascandola, M., & Weed, D. L. (2001). Causation in epidemiology. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 55, 905–912.
Pinjari, A. R., Bhat, C. R., & Hensher, D. A. (2009). Residential self-selection effects in an activity time-use behavior model. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 43(7), 729–748.
Pinjari, A. R., Eluru, N., Bhat, C. R., Pendyala, R. M., & Spissu, E. (2008). Joint model of choice of residential neighborhood and bicycle ownership accounting for self-selection and unobserved heterogeneity. Transportation Research Record, 2082, 17–26.
Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., & Frank, L. D. (2003). Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: Findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 25, 80–91.
Scheiner, J. (2014). Residential self-selection in travel behavior: Toward an integration into mobility biographies. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 15–28.
Scheiner, J. (2010). Social inequalities in travel behavior: Trip distances in the context of residential self-selection and lifestyles. Journal of Transport Geography, 18(6), 679–690.
Scheines, R. (1997). An introduction to causal inference. In V. R. McKim & S. P. Turner (Eds.), Causality in crisis? Statistical methods and the search for causal knowledge in the social sciences (pp 185–199). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
Schoner, J., & Cao, X. (2014). Walking for purpose and pleasure influences of light rail, built environment, and residential self-selection on pedestrian travel. Transportation Research Record, 2464, 67–76.
Schwanen, T., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005a). What affects commute mode choice: Neighborhood physical structure or preferences toward neighborhoods? Journal of Transport Geography, 13(1), 83–99.
Schwanen, T, & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005b). What if you live in the wrong neighborhood? The impact of residential neighborhood type dissonance on distance travelled. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 10(2), 127–151.
Schwanen, T., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2004). The extent and determinants of dissonance between actual and preferred residential neighborhood type. Environment and planning B: Planning and Design, 31(5), 759–784.
Shrier, I., & Platt, R. W. (2008). Reducing bias through directed acyclic graphs. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8, 70.
Suppes, P. (1970). A probabilistic theory of causality. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
Susilo, Y. O. (2015). The influence of parent’s perceptions and residential self-selection to the children’s travel modes at single parent households. Transport and Sustainability, 7, 43–64.
Tu, Y.-K., & Gilthorpe, M. S. (2012). Statistical thinking in epidemiology. Boca Rentoon, Fl: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis group.
van de Coevering, P., Maat, K. & van Wee, B. (2015). Multi period research designs for identifying causal effects of built environment characteristics on travel behavior. Transport Reviews, 35(4), 512–532.
van Dyck, D., Cardon, G., Deforche, B., Owen, N., & De Bourdeaudhuij, I. (2011). Relationships between neighborhood walkability and adults' physical activity: How important is residential self-selection? Health and Place, 17(4), 1011–1014.
van Ham, M., & Feijten, P. (2008). Who wants to leave the neighborhood? The effect of being different from the neighborhood population on wishes to move. Environment and Planning A, 40(5), 1151.
van Wee, B. (2009). Self‐selection: A key to a better understanding of location choices, travel behavior and transport externalities? Transport Reviews, 29(3), 279–292.
van Wee, B., & Boarnet, M. (2014). Reaction to the paper Tempest in a Teapot: The exaggerated problem of transport-related residential self-selection as a source of error in empirical studies. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 81–86.
Wang, D., & Lin, T. (2014). Residential self-selection, built environment, and travel behavior in the Chinese context. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 5–14.
Yu, C.-Y., & Zhu, X. (2015). Impacts of residential self-selection and built environments on children’s walking-to-school behaviors. Environment and Behavior, 47(3), 268–287.
Zhang, J. (2014). Revisiting residential self-selection issues: A life-oriented approach. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 29–25.
