Transportation (2007) 34:37–49
DOI 10.1007/s11116-006-0003-7
ORIGINAL PAPER

Promoting public transport using marketing
techniques in mobility management and verifying
their quantitative effects
Ayako Taniguchi Æ Satoshi Fujii

Published online: 5 July 2006
 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Abstract Mobility management (MM) is a transportation management policy thatuses ‘‘soft’’ measures to attempt to reduce car use and promote sustainable transportation modes such as public transport, bicycles, and walking. Using communicationand other means, MM induces voluntarily change towards more sustainable transportation modes. We implemented MM marketing to promote an experimental
community bus service. This project had two components: a questionnaire conductedin the service area and a monthly newsletter. The questionnaire was more than asurvey; it also communicated information about the bus and helped promote bus use.
One month after the survey, we implemented a follow-up survey targeting the initial
survey respondents. Results suggest that the MM program produced a general increasein bus use, as well as mouth-to-mouth advertising, that helped promote bus use.
Keywords Bus promotion Æ Marketing techniques Æ Mobility management Æ
Sustainable transportation
Abbreviations
MM Mobility management
TFP Travel feedback program

Introduction
Effective promotion of public transportation systems can improve the quality of theservice. An increase in system users leads to increased fare receipts, which can thenA. Taniguchi (&)
Department of Risk Engineering, University of Tukuba, 1-1-1 Ten-noudai,
Tukuba City 305-8573, Japane-mail: taniguchi@risk.tsukuba.ac.jp
S. Fujii
Graduate School of Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama,
Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8552, Japan

123

38

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

be invested in system improvements. Simultaneously, improving the quality of apublic transport system is also an important strategy for promoting the system.
Therefore, a marketing or communicative strategy (e.g. Brög 1998; Jones 2003; EU
2003b; Fujii 2004) to promote public transport is necessary and can be regarded as
one measure of a mobility management (MM) program. MM is a transportation
management policy that adopts soft measures to induce reductions in car use andincreases in sustainable transportation modes such as public transport, bicycling, andwalking (e.g. Jones 2003; Fujii 2004). Using communication, marketing techniques,
and other means, MM programs encourage voluntary change from car use to moresustainable transportation modes.
This study implemented MM measures to promote an experimental community
bus service called the ‘‘Ring-Ring Bus’’ in the city of Obihiro, Japan, and quantitatively examined the effects. The MM measures adopted in Obihiro included: (1) anewsletter that promoted the bus system and (2) a questionnaire that asked
respondents to plan to use free tickets for the bus service. The free tickets wereinserted in an envelope with the questionnaire.
Newsletters have been used in many cases of mobility management (e.g., Cairns
et al. 2004). However, the effects of these newsletters on personal psychology havenot been investigated. One objective of this study was to examine the psychologicaleffects of the newsletters.
The second MM measure involved a questionnaire that asked respondents tomake a behavioral plan to use the free bus tickets accompanying the questionnaire. This measure was called the ‘‘one-shot travel feedback program’’ (one-shot
TFP; c.f. Fujii and Taniguchi 2005, in press). Similar methods have been predicted to effectively change travel behavior according to the social psychologicaltheory of implementation intention (Gollwitzer 1993, 1996; Gärling et al. 1998;
Gärling and Fujii 1999, 2002; Gillholm et al. 2000; Fujii and Taniguchi 2005).
Although people often fail to implement a new behavior, such as using a new bus
system even when they intended to do so (e.g., when encouraged by free tickets),such intentions are more likely to be implemented when people develop abehavioral plan on how to implement the new behavior. Therefore, the second
objective of this study was to test how effective the questionnaire approach
was in actually causing individuals to make a behavioral plan to use the bus
system.
This study also aimed to investigate the sociological effects of MM measures.
Personal communication may play an important role in promoting a new bus system.
A recommendation to use a new public bus system, for example, may make people
decide to try the service. These new users may, in turn, recommend the bus to others,
thus promoting the bus system sociologically, as documented by a number of previous studies (Bass 1969; Mahajan and Muller 1979; Mahajan and Peterson 1985).
Word of mouth is an effective marketing tool for promoting some goods and services(Silverman 2001; EU 2003a). Thus, we hypothesized that recommendations to use
the bus through word-of-mouth communication would affect bus use and newsletter
reading experiences.
We also hypothesized that subjects would be influenced by participating in the
one-shot TFP. Using the bus and reading the specific bus-related newsletter would
be new behaviors for people. Such new behaviors may be spurred by a specificstimulus, such as participating in the TFP or having someone recommend the bus. In
addition, we hypothesized that these four factors (i.e. reading the newsletter, using123Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

39

the bus, bus recommendation, and participating in the one-shot TFP) would affectwhether people then recommended the bus to others and intended to use the bus in
the future.
These hypotheses are summarized in Fig. 1, which shows the hypothesized effectof each MM measure, including word-of-mouth communication, intention, and bus
use experience. As mentioned above, the MM program in this study had two components: a one-shot travel feedback program (TFP; c.f. Fujii and Taniguchi 2005, inpress) and a distributed bus-related newsletter.
The following section explains the experimental community bus service. Section 3
describes the MM measures and the survey designed to investigate the effectivenessof those measures. Finally, section 4 provides the results of survey analysis andsummarizes findings.

Description Of The ‘‘Ring-Ring Bus’’Obihiro is located in central Hokkaido, the northern island of Japan. The city has apopulation of approximately 170,000, and the major economic activities are largescale farming and the service industry. The Ring-Ring Bus operated in an 8-km2 areathat extended 2 km east to west and 4 km south to north. The Ring-Ring Bus was a‘‘demand responsive bus,’’ in which users had to reserve a specific bus service bytelephone or facsimile. Although the approximate times of the initial bus stops were
fixed, the bus route was not. The bus operator could select the most suitable routebased on the reservations. Table 1 provides further details on the Ring-Ring Bus
service. Since the Ring-Ring Bus was run as an experiment, the number of bus stops
within the target area changed according to users’ requests during the experiment.
The difference in bus stops during each period represented the difference in the total
number of bus stops.

Methods
To investigate the effectiveness of the experimental ‘‘intervention,’’ it was necessary to compare a control group in which participants received no intervention andrecommendation

newsletter

recommending

one-shot
TFP

experienceof bus use

behavioral
intention
to bus use

Fig. 1 Process model illustrating influences of the one-shot TFP, newsletter distribution, and wordof-mouth communication on bus-use intention and experience

123

40

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

Table 1 The Ring-Ring Bus
Period of operation and operating funds:
Nov. 2003–Feb. 2004 Funds from Obihiro City
Mar. 2004–Apr. 2004 Funds from the Tokachi Bus Company
May 2004–Oct. 2004 Funds from Obihiro City
Vehicles: Two compact buses with 35-passenger capacities
Fare: 200 yen (about 1.7 US dollar) for adults, and 100 yen for children
Number of bus stops:
190 stops between Nov. 2003 and Feb. 2004
120 stops between Feb. 2004 and May 2004
163 stops between May 2004 and Oct. 2004
Reservations: telephone or facsimile (7:00–18:30)
Staff: 10 bus drivers and 4 telephone operators
Timetable:
7 times/day · 4 routes (=28 trips/day), Nov. 2003 to Feb. 2004
8 times/day · 4 routes (=32 trips/day), Feb. 2004 to May 2004
8 times/day · 2 routes + 10 times/day · 2 routes (=36 trips/day), May 2004 to Oct. 2004

a target group in which participants received the intervention. Differences in thedependent variables (such as the frequency of bus use or intention to use the bus)
between the control and target groups can be seen as an effect of the intervention.
Without a control group, any differences between pre- and post-intervention
conditions could be attributable to effects caused by other temporary factors (e.g.,seasonal factors) rather than the intervention. Therefore, it is important toestablish a control group when analyzing the effects of mobility management
interventions.
Overview of the experiment
Figure 2 shows the MM experiment schedule and the surveys used to investigate
effectiveness. As shown in the figure, questionnaires were distributed at the end ofJanuary 2004 to all households in the area through neighborhood associations (i.e.
the Wave 1 survey). We prepared two questionnaires: one for the control group and
one for the target group. We distributed both types of questionnaires to thehouseholds randomly. Each household received two questionnaires of the same type.
Randomization was achieved by distributing questionnaires to each household froma pile that was assembled such that one out of every five sets of questionnaires wasfor the control group and the next four sets of questionnaires were for the experimental group.
The three-page questionnaire for the control group included questions regarding
bus use.1 The final question also asked about intention to answer the follow-up
survey (the Wave 2 survey).
The questionnaire for the target group included the same questions used for thecontrol group and an additional page of questions asking recipients to make abehavioral plan to use the bus service. The latter questionnaire was inserted in an
envelope with an advertising leaflet for the Ring-Ring Bus and two bus tickets that1

The questions regarding bus use were used to evaluate bus users’ impressions about the bus andwere not used in this study.

123

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

41

Questionnaire survey (Wave 1)
Target group

Control group

Beginning of February
One-shot TFP(travel feedback program)* an advertising leaflet* travel behavioral plan sheet* two free bus tickets( available only for February)

Beginning of March and April

Distribution of monthly newsletters( in March and April)

Beginning of April

Questionnaire survey (Wave 2)

Fig. 2 Procedure flow for the MM intervention and measurements in this study

were valid for 4 weeks. The additional inserts were designed to motivate participants to use the bus. The questionnaire with the leaflet and bus tickets constituted
the one-shot TFP intervention. These materials, including the leaflet, tickets, andadditional inserts, were distributed to target group households as a ‘‘one-shot
TFP.’’At the beginning of March and April, we distributed newsletters to households inthe service area as an insert in the major newspaper. At the beginning of April, we
distributed the second questionnaire to people in both groups who had replied to theinitial survey (i.e. the Wave 2 survey). The questionnaire consisted of simple questions, which are given in Table 2. The effectiveness of the experimental one-shot
TFP intervention was assessed by comparing control and target group responses tothe Wave 2 survey.2
Items distributed to the target group
Advertising leaflet
The Ring-Ring Bus differed from a typical bus service in that it required a reservation to be made by telephone or facsimile, and there were no fixed bus routes.
While these characteristics can be positive features, they may also impede bus use if
potential riders are unfamiliar with a demand-responsive bus system. If people do
not use the bus because they are unsure about the bus system, we should expect anincrease in demand after distributing information on how to use the bus.
2

Note that it would be preferable to assess the effects of experimental manipulation using data froma two-wave (pre- and post-) panel survey. However, permission for such a survey was not obtained
before implementing the experiment, and thus we cannot provide such an analysis. Still, the effectiveness of the experimental manipulations could be assessed using only measures obtained from thepost-survey, as past experimental studies have demonstrated (e.g. Kirk 1995).

123

123

Do you think you are going to use the Ring-Ring Bus in the
future?
Did family or friends recommend that you use the Ring-RingBus?
Have you recommended that your family or friends use the
Ring-Ring Bus?
Have you used the Ring-Ring Bus?
– Frequency in March– Frequency in February
How many times did you use the free bus tickets?a
Did you read the newsletter called ‘‘Ring-Ring Tushin’’?

Behavioral intentionaThis question was not included in the questionnaire for the control group

Use of the free tickets
Reading the newsletters

Experience of using the
Ring-Ring Bus

Experience of recommending

Experience of recommendation

Question

Index

Yes/Notimes
times
one/two/three/not at all
Yes/No/Don’t know

Often/Sometimes/None

Often/Sometimes/None

No/YesEnds of the scale/alternatives

Table 2 Questions used to measure factors in the Wave 2 questionnaire and the endpoints of the measure scales

Discrete

Discrete
Continuous
Continuous

Discrete

Discrete

Continuous

Type of variable

42
Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

43

Travel behavior plan questions
We asked respondents to develop a travel behavior plan to activate an ‘‘implementation intention,’’ an intermediate factor between a behavioral intention, as assumed
in Ajzen’s (1985) theory of planned behavior, and an actual behavior such as using the
Ring-Ring Bus (e.g. Fujii and Taniguchi 2005). An implementation intention differsfrom a behavioral intention in that the latter is an intention to perform a behavior,and the former is an intention to implement a specific behavioral plan expected tolead to the goal behavior.
Even when people have a behavioral intention, such as ‘‘I am going to use the
Ring-Ring Bus,’’ they often fail to implement the actual behavior because they lackan implementation intention. An example of an implementation intention is, ‘‘I am
going to use the Ring-Ring Bus at a specific time to get from a specific place to a
specific place.’’ To activate an implementation intention, we asked the target
households in Wave 1 to carefully read the advertising leaflet outlining the RingRing Bus service and to confirm that they had received the leaflet and free bus
tickets. Then, we asked whether they might have an opportunity to use the free bus
tickets, and requested that they describe a specific occasion and when and from
where they were going to telephone to reserve the Ring-Ring Bus. Finally, we
provided a written suggestion that they actually implement the behavioral plan thatthey had written in the questionnaire.
Free bus tickets
To promote sustainable bus use, we gave each household in the target group two freebus tickets, which were intended to change bus-use attitudes from negative topositive by allowing recipients to experience the bus at least once. This method iscalled a ‘‘temporary structural change,’’ and is often used in bargain sales or at thestart of a new business (see Fujii and Gärling 2005). In providing the tickets weconsidered the following: the tickets were not cash vouchers, but small gifts. To
make the tickets seem like gifts, we enclosed them in an attractive envelope andwrote, ‘‘This is a small gift for you’’ on the outside.
Newsletter details
The newsletters were an attempt to modify attitudes towards cars and public
transportation, including the Ring-Ring Bus. The newsletters included informationon the Ring-Ring Bus service, information about the changing bus system, frequently asked questions about use of the Ring-Ring Bus, and general information on
problems with traffic and transportation. This newsletter was distributed to households in the service area as an insert in their newspaper.
Design of the Wave 2 questionnaire
The Wave 2 questionnaire was distributed as a double postcard. Table 2 shows thequestions on the Wave 2 questionnaire. By the questionnaire, we measured thefollowing psychological and behavioral factors: intention to use the Ring-Ring Bus,
whether respondents would recommend the Ring-Ring Bus to others, whether
others had recommended the Ring-Ring Bus to the respondents, use of the

123

44

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

Ring-Ring Bus, use of the free tickets, and experience reading the newsletters. The
response to behavioral intention was scored using five-point scales in which the mostpositive feeling toward the Ring-Ring Bus was rated as five and the most negative
was rated as one.
The responses to experience of recommendation, experience of recommending,experience of using the Ring-Ring bus, and reading the newsletters were discretevariables and were thus treated as dummy variables:
recommendation [to use the bus]: (Often or Sometimes, None) = (1,0)
recommending [that others use the bus]: (Often or Sometimes, None) = (1,0)
using the bus: (Yes, No) = (1,0)
reading the newsletters: (Yes, No, or Unknown) = (1,0)

Results
Table 3 shows the response rates of the target and control groups. The ‘‘Number
printed’’ means the number of questionnaires given to the neighborhood association.
We asked the neighborhood association to distribute two questionnaires to eachhousehold in the target area. Since we do not know how many questionnaires theassociation distributed, the actual number of questionnaires distributed is uncertain.
Table 4 shows the frequency distribution and results of the v2 tests on the fourindexes measured as discrete variables. Table 5 compares the target and control
groups for the three indexes measured as continuous variables.
Table 4 shows that the target group did recommend the Ring-Ring Bus to others
and used the Ring-Ring Bus significantly more often than the control group; theproportion of the target group using the bus (38.4%) was more than double that of
the control group (17.6%).
The frequency of bus use in the target group in February was almost doublethat of the control group, and the difference between groups in February wassignificant (p<0.10; Table 5). Moreover, the frequency of bus use in the target
group did not decrease from February (1.07 times/month), when free bus tickets
were available, to March (1.04 times/month), when the free tickets were notavailable.
As can be seen in Table 4, there was no significant difference in the percentage of
people reading the newsletter between the target group and the control group. This

Table 3 Distribution, collection, and response rates

Target group
Control groupTotal

No. printed(Wave 1)

No. collected(Wave 1)

No. distributed(Wave 2)aNo. collected(Wave 2)
(response rate %)16,000b4,000b
20,000b

1,247
279
1,526

510 (40.9%)
118 (42.3%)
628 (41.2%)

410 (80.4%)
85 (72.0%)495 (78.8%)a

The Wave 2 questionnaire was distributed to the respondents to the Wave 1 survey who indicatedthat they would answer a follow-up surveybThese are approximate numbers

123133 (32.7%)
187 (46.3%)
no252 (61.6%)

no36 (8.8%)

17 (4.2%)
30 (7.4%)
yes
157 (38.4%)

yes
319 (77.8%)

don’t know
55 (13.4%)

257 (63.1%)
187 (46.3%)
–
–
total
410

407
404
total
409

Total

yes
68 (80.0%)

2 (2.4%)7 (8.3%)yes
15 (17.6%)
no8 (9.4%)28 (32.9%)
26 (31.0%)
no70 (82.4%)

Sometimes

Often

None

Often

Sometimes

Control group

Target group

DOF: degree of freedom, p: asymptotic significance probability

Reading the newsletters

Experience of
Ring-Ring bus use

Experience of recommendation
Experience of recommending

Frequency (percentage)

Table 4 The frequency distribution and results of the v2 test for the discrete variables

don’t know
9 (10.6%)

55 (64.7%)
51 (60.7%)
–
–

None

total
85

85
84
total
85

Total

2
2
DOF
1
DOF
2

v2
0.51

DOF
0.63
6.79
v2
13.34

v2

p
0.775

0.728
0.034
p
<0.001pv2 test (Pearson)

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49
45

123

46

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

Table 5 Comparison of the continuous variables between the target and control groups, and theresults of the one-tailed t-test
Target group

Control groupt-testNo. of Mean Standard No. of Mean Standard t value Degree of Significancedatadeviation data
deviation
freedom probability
Behavioral
407
intention
Frequency in 367
FebruaryFrequency in 354
March

3.48

1.28

85

3.29

1.29

1.22

490

(.11)

1.07

2.92

79

0.51

2.51

1.59

444

(.06)

1.02

3.08

81

0.72

2.92

0.82

433

(.21)

result disproves our hypothesis that the tendency to read the newsletter would be
affected by participation in the TFP. The reason for this is not clear, but one possibility is that those who received the TFP already had enough information and did
not feel the need to know more about the bus service.
The psychological and behavioral variables observed in the Wave 2 survey may berelated structurally, as hypothesized in Fig. 1. To investigate structural relationships,
we tested the hypotheses shown in Fig. 1 using observed data.
Table 6 shows the results of the multiple linear regression analyses and binary
logit analysis used to confirm the relationships between the factors after eliminating
non-significant paths. Figure 3 illustrates the statistically significant paths indicatedby the analyses.
The results support the hypothesis that the one-shot TFP and ‘‘recommended’’dummies induced bus use. The newsletter dummy was also significantly affected by
the recommended dummy. But it was not significantly affected by the one-shot TFP,
as was previously shown in Table 4. The ‘‘recommending’’ dummy was significantly
influenced by the newsletter, bus use, and recommended dummies. Finally, thebehavioral intention to use the bus in the future was significantly influenced by the
newsletter, bus use, and recommended dummies.

Conclusion
This study designed and implemented a MM project to promote a local community
bus service and quantitatively analyzed the effect of the project. Further experimental studies are required to conclusively determine the effectiveness of one-shot
TFP for bus promotion, but this experiment shows that the self-reported frequencyof bus use increased in the target groups who received one-shot TFP as a MM
measure; no such increase was found in the control group. Moreover, the increase inbus use persisted after the period of free bus tickets. These results imply that a oneshot TFP, a marketing technique in mobility management, may be able to promotepersistent bus use. Moreover, the data suggested that reading the newsletter reinforced the behavioral intention to use the bus in the future. In fact, it was reported
that the average number of bus users after the MM intervention increased by 34%(from 589 people/month on average for December and January to 791 people/monthon average for April to July). Our results support the notion that this 34% increase123Non-standardized coefficient is described in column b

0.118

0.07
1.70
0.090
2.75 16.86 <0.001
R2=0.20; n=490

0.055
0.349
0.369

6.71

0.29

0.906
<0.001<0.001

0.12
5.86

0.00
0.25

rp: Pearson correlation coefficient;

t

8.87

1.10
7.91
<0.001

0.271<0.001p

rk: Kendall correlation coefficientt: t value;

0.103

0.518

0.106
0.463

rk

p: p value

0.31
1.11
0.266
–1.89 –5.10 <0.001
r2 = 0.31; n=494

2.40

0.33
2.01

b: Standardized coefficient; B: Non-standardized coefficient;aOne-shot MM dummy
Recommendation
dummy
Experience of bus
use dummy
Newsletter dummy
Constant terma
Goodness offit, Number ofsamples(n)

rp

B

p

b

t

Recommending dummy(binary logit analysis)

Behavioral intention(multiple linear regression
analysis)
t

–

3.65
6.51
–

<0.001<0.001p––––2.14 –6.80 <0.001
r2 = 0.09; n=494

–

1.15
1.33

B

Experience of bus use
dummy (binary logit
analysis)

0.047

1.000

0.164
0.298

rk

–

–0.48
2.97

t

p

–

0.63
0.00

–
–
–
1.16
4.15 <0.001
r2 = 0.02; n=495

–

–0.14
0.74

B

Newsletter dummy(binary logit analysis)

1.000

0.047

–0.0200.135

rk

Table 6 Results of the multiple linear regression analyses and binary logit analysis to confirm the causal relationships between the factors, after eliminating nonsignificant coefficients

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49
47

123

48

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

recommendation
Dummy

newsletter
Dummy

recommending
Dummy

one-shot
TFP
Dummy

experienceof bus use
Dummybehavioral
intention
to bus use
Significant causal relation
Marginally significant causal relation(all coefficients are positive)

Fig. 3 Causal relationship of bus use, word of mouth, and one-shot TFP resulting from theregression analysis

in the number of bus users would be, at least partially, caused by mobility management measures.
Second, the effectiveness of word-of-mouth advertising of the bus service in thetarget area was implied by the results of regression analyses. Bus use prompted users
to recommend the bus; recommendations, in turn, induced use of the bus by thosereceiving the recommendation.
These results imply that word-of-mouth advertising plays an important role inboth promoting bus service and that the development of such individual advertisingmight be a result of the marketing techniques adopted in MM, including thenewsletter and the one-shot TFP, which may have begun a chain of bus use andrecommendations.
Although further study is necessary to understand the longer-term effectivenessof MM and additional psychological and behavioral effects of MM using richer
measurements, the results in this study suggest that MM techniques may be effective
in promoting bus use.

References
Ajzen, I.: From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In: Kuhl, J., Beckmann, J. (eds.)
Action control: From Cognition to Behavior, pp. 11–39. Springer, Heidelberg (1985)
Bass, F.: A new product growth model for consumer durables. J. Manage. Sci. 15, 31–38 (1969)
Brög, W.: Individualized marketing: implications for TDM. CD-ROM of the Proceedings of the 77th
Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board (1998)
Cairns, S., Sloman, L., Newson, C., Anable, J., Kikbride, A., Goodwin, P.: Smarter Choices:
Changing the Way We Travel. Department for Transport, UK (2004)
EU (2003a) Interactive Marketing of Rural Buses, United Kingdom: The final report [available
online at http://www.eu-tapestry.org/]
EU (2003b) Viernheim Household Transport, Germany: The final report. [available online athttp://
www.eu-tapestry.org/]
Fujii, S.: Mobility management. Transport. Econ. 65(3), 21–30 (in Japanese with English abstract)(2004)
Fujii, S., Gärling, T.: Temporary structural change: a strategy to break car-use habit and promote
public transport, in Selected Proceedings of Traffic and Transportation Psychology 2004 (2005)

123

Transportation (2007) 34:37–49

49

Fujii, S., Taniguchi, A.: Reducing family car use by providing travel advice or requesting behavioral
plans: an experimental analysis of travel behavior feedback programs. Transport Res D 10(5),385–393 (2005)
Fujii, S., Taniguchi, A.: Determinants of the effectiveness of travel feedback programs: a review ofcommunicative mobility management measures for changing travel behavior in Japan, Transport
Policy (in press)
Gärling, T., Fujii, S.: Structural Eequation Modeling of Determinants of Implementation Intentions.
Goteborg Psychological Reports, Goteborg University, Sweden, No. 4, Vol. 29 (1999)
Gärling, T., Fujii, S.: Structural equation modeling of determinants of planning. Scand. J. Psychol.
43(1), 1–8 (2002)
Gärling, T., Gillholm, R., Gärling, A.: Reintroducing attitude theory in travel behavior research: thevalidity of an interactive interview procedure to predict car use. Transportation 25, 129–146(1998)
Gillholm, R., Erdeus, J., Garling, T.: The effect of choice on intention-behavior consistency. Scand.
J. Psychol. 41, 241–250 (2000)
Gollwitzer, P.M.: Goal achievement: the role of intentions. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 4, 141–185 (1993)
Gollwitzer, P.M.: The volitional benefits of planning. In: Gollwitzer, P.M., Bargh, J.A. (eds.) The
Psychology of Action: Linking Cognition and Motivation to Behavior, pp. 287–312. Guilford
Press, New York (1996)
Jones, P.: Encouraging behavioural change through marketing and management: what can beachieved? Presented at the 10th International Conference on Travel Behavior Research, Lucerne, Switzerland (2003)
Kirk, R.E.: Experimental Design, Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd edn. Briiks/Cole
Publishing Company, Pacific Grove, CA (1995)
Mahajan, V., Muller, E.: Innovation diffusion and new product growth models in marketing.
J. Market. 43, 55–68 (1979)
Mahajan, V., Peterson, R.: Models for Innovation Diffusion, Sage University Paper, (1985)
Silverman, G.: The Secrets of Word-of-Mouth Marketing. American Management Association, NewYork (2001)

Biography
Ayako Taniguchi is Assistant Professor of Risk Engineering at University of Tsukuba, Japan. Her
current research objective is to apply psychological strategies to manage social dilemmas concerning
urban and transportation policy, and research interests include promotion of public transport,
educational program to develop moral sense of school children, and risk communication.
Satoshi Fujii is Professor of Civil Engineering at Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan. His current
research objective is to apply social psychology to transport policy making, and research interests
include travel behavior analyses, behavioral decision making, personal judgment and decision
making in social dilemmas, attitude toward public policies.

123