# How do University Student Cyclists Ride? The Case of University of Bologna
## 1 Introduction
It highlighted students' cycling habits (41% of the students were regular cyclists) and the key factors impacting on cycling such as traffic safety and bicycle theft [18]. Another online survey submitted to young adults (18-25 years) studying at an urban United Kingdom university demonstrates that cycling motivators were enjoyment and improving fitness, especially amongst regular cyclists. However, weather and safety concerns were the main barriers. This study suggests that levels of cycling within a university setting may be higher than in the general population and the appreciation of the merits of cycling are well recognized [19]. A study conducted through focus groups methods at the University of South Australia, at the Metropolitan location of Mawson Lakes, offered an overview of university students' views on cycling, finding key factors for the motivation to cycle in health, affordability, environmental concerns, journey time, and pleasure. Safety is important for all cyclists contemplating the ride to university but staff and students differed over the importance of affordability, on-campus facilities, and the integration of cycling into broader transport networks [20]. Another piece of research on the use of bicycles among the students in the university city of Maribor, Slovenia, was aimed at finding the role of social or infrastructural determinants. The findings of the questionnaire, conducted among 382 students, showed that only 10.7% of students cycle daily, whereas 63.3% do not cycle at all. There were no statistical differences noticed between the impact of infrastructural and social factors; convenience was exposed as a statistically significant determinant, whereas the sustainability aspect proved to be an insignificant factor for students cycling [21]. Routing choices was the main focus of other researchers, who revealed the attractiveness of the different types of infrastructures, examining the effect of traffic volumes, topography, and traffic control devices on route choices [22]. The above-mentioned research relied on GPS data collection in Portland (US) with a participation primarily composed of regular cyclists and a sample of 44% females and 89% aged between 25 years old and 64 years old. The study, based upon a Path-size Logit Model (PSL), demonstrated that cyclists prefer shorter routes, and find relevance of some factors on routing, such as the preference for a separated lane and lane with less exposure to high traffic level. Some interesting deductions were drawn concerning average trip distance (from 3.5 km to 3.7 km) and average speed (from 16.1 km/h to 19 km/h). All the mentioned studies analyzed regular cyclists with a mixed composition of the sample and a distinction on the basis of the nature of the trip (commute home-work and non-commute, such as shopping, errands). Categorizing the types of cyclists is a relevant topic among this kind of behavioral analysis, in which the need to find a general and common approach and key factors acting on cycling by homogeneous groups are underlined. On this point, the authors of [23] defined their analysis by two main categories: bicycle commuting and non-work cycling, while an analysis conducted in Canada revealed four distinct types of cyclists: dedicated cyclists; path-using cyclists; fair-weather utilitarian;and 10 leisure cyclists. A survey conducted at the University of Cagliari analyzed the way in which the cycle is perceived by \"utilitarian cyclists\", \"leisure cyclists\" and \"non-cyclists\" categories [24]. More recently, ref. [25] define three users' categories using a dataset made up of GPS traces: risky and hasty, sly and informed and inexperienced and inefficient. In literature, findings in cyclist categories have been generally based on behavioral factors such as social, attitudinal, experiences, safety perception and similar.