Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mixité sociale et choix modal : importance des dimensions symboliques dans l’attrait des transports collectives

Social diversity and transport mode choice: the importance of symbolic dimensions in the attractiveness of mass transit

  • Article Original / Original Article
  • Published:
Recherche Transports Sécurité

An Erratum / Erratum to this article was published on 18 January 2013

Résumé

La compréhension des raisons du choix de mode de transports fait la part belle aux attributs fonctionnels, comme le temps de trajet, le coût des trajets ou l’accessibilité. Pourtant, les attributs symboliques et affectifs sont importants. Justement, l’une des différences essentielles entre voiture particulière et transports collectifs est fortement symbolique : les modes collectifs contraignent à une certaine mixité sociale. Dans un contexte de choix hypothétique entre ces modes, 200 résidents de la région parisienne évaluent à cinq reprises (au moyen d’échelles d’intention d’usage en six points, de −3 : jamais à 3 : toujours, sans point neutre) l’attrait de l’usage du bus et de la voiture, selon leurs temps de trajets relatifs et le type de population présent dans le bus. Les résultats montrent que la dimension symbolique (mixité sociale) contribue fortement à faire varier la désirabilité des modes tout comme la dimension fonctionnelle (temps de trajet).

Abstract

Our understanding of transport mode choice is largely based upon functional attributes, such as travel time, cost or accessibility. It is important, however, to also look at symbolic and affective attributes. Indeed, one of the main differences between mass transit and private car use is strongly symbolic: public transport compels users to confront social diversity. Given a hypothetical choice between those modes, 200 residents of the Parisian region were asked five times to evaluate (measuring usage intention on a six point scale: −3 meaning never and +3 meaning always, with no neutral point) the attractiveness of bus versus car-based transport, according to relative travel time and bus users’ population type. The results show that the symbolic dimension (the social mix) strongly contributes to the desirability of a transport mode, as does the functional dimension (travel time).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Références

  1. Amtuir (2010) Musée des transports urbains. Histoire générale des transports. Récupéré le 16 juin, 2010, à partir de http://www.amtuir.org

  2. Jansen P (1951) Les carrosses à cinq sols et Christian Huygens. Rev Hist Sci Appl 4:171–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Van-Exel NJA (2004) Inert or reasoned? An investigation of medium-distance travel decision making strategies using Q methodology. International Conference on Traffic & Transport Psychology (ICTTP), Notthingham, 5–9 September

  4. Barff R, MacKay D, Olshavsky RW (1982) A selective review of travel-mode choice models. J Consum Res 8:370–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Héran F (2001) La réduction de la dépendance automobile. Cahiers Lillois d’Économie et de Sociologie (37):61–86

  6. Steg L (2005) Car use: lust and must: instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 39:147–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Vande-Walle S, Steenberghen T (2006) Space and time related determinants of public transport use in trip chains. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 40:151–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Steg L, Vlek C, Slotegraaf G (2001) Instrumental-reasoned and symbolic-affective motives for using a motor car. Transp Res Part F 4:151–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fujii S, Gaerling T (2004) Temporary structural change as a strategy to break car-use habit. 3rd International Conference of Traffic and Transport Psychology, Nothingham, England, 5–9 September

  10. Thogersen J (2001) Structural and psychological determinants of the use of PT. TRIP Colloquium, Horsholm, Denmark

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fichelet M, Fichelet R, May N (1970) Contribution à une psychosociologie des comportements urbains. Pour une approche écologique de l’utilisation des moyens de transport. COPEDITH, Délégation générale à la recherche scientifique et technique, Paris

  12. Anable J (2005) “Complacent Car Addicts” or “Aspiring Environmentalists”? Identifying travel behaviour segments using attitude theory. Transp Policy 12:65–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ellaway A, Macintyre S, Hiscock R, Kearns A (2003) In the driving seat: psychosocial benefits from private motor vehicle transport compared to public transport. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol 6:217–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gandit M (2007) Déterminants psychosociaux du changement de comportement dans le choix du mode de transport — Le cas de l’intermodalité. Thèse de doctorat non publiée, UPMF, Grenoble

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kaufmann V (2001) Mobilité quotidienne et dynamiques urbaines — La question du report modal. Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes, Lausanne

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wall R, Devine-Wright P, Mill G (2005) Psychological predictors in context: An Empirical Study of Interactions between Determinants of Car Use Intentions Designing social innovation: Planning, building, evaluating. Hogrefe & Huber Publishers, Ashland, OH US, pp 117–126

    Google Scholar 

  17. Collins CM, Chambers SM (2005) Psychological and Situational Influences on Commuter-Transport-Mode Choice. Environ Behav 37:640–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gatersleben B, Uzzell D (2003) Local transport problems and possible solutions. Comparing perceptions of residents, councillors, officers and organisations. Local Environ 8:387–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mann E, Abraham C (2006) The role of affect in UK commuters’ travel mode choices: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Br J Psychol 97:155–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kouabenan DR, Gandit M, Jaussaud P, et al (2006) Étude des conditions d’une introduction efficace de l’intermodalité dans les déplacements urbains: analyse des représentations, des attentes et des résistances des usagers. Rapport final non publié d’une étude financée par le conseil régional Rhône-Alpes et le conseil général de l’Isère. Université Pierre-Mendès-France, Grenoble

    Google Scholar 

  21. Marsh P, Collett P (1986) Driving passion: the psychology of the car. Boston: Faber and Faber

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rubens L, Gosling P, Moch, A (2011) Favoriser le report modal: connaître les raisons liées au choix d’un mode de déplacement pour le changer. Pratiques psychologiques 17:19–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jensen M (1999) Passion and heart in transport — a sociological analysis on transport behaviour. Transp Policy 6:19–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Petit J (2003) Cinq logiques de mobilité et leurs conséquences sur la planification des déplacements urbains. Cah Sci Transp 42:35–58

    Google Scholar 

  25. Farrington J, Gray D, Martin S (1998) Rural sustainability and the fuel price escalator. Town and Country Planning, 67, 370–371

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hamilton K, Jenkins L, Gregory A (1991) Women and transport: bus deregulation in West Yorkshire. University of Bradford, Bradford

    Google Scholar 

  27. Root A, Boardman B, Fielding W (1996) The costs of rural travel. University of Oxford, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  28. Dupuy G (2006) La dépendance à l’égard de l’automobile. La Documentation française, Paris, 96 pages

    Google Scholar 

  29. Jaillet-Roman MC (2005) La mixité, une notion floue et bien commode. Libération, 8 avril, page Société

  30. Breakwell GM (1986) Coping With Threatened Identities. Methuen, London

    Google Scholar 

  31. Breakwell GM (1988) Strategies adopted when identity is threatened. Rev Int Psychol Soc 1:189–203

    Google Scholar 

  32. Tajfel H, Turner JC (1979) An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: Worchel S, Austin W (eds) The social psychology of intergroup relations. Pacific Grove: CA/Brooks/Cole, pp 33–48

  33. Tajfel H, Turner JC (1986) The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In: Worchel S, Austin W (eds) Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed). Nelson-Hall, Chicago, pp 7–24

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lorenzi-Cioldi F, Dois W (1994) Identité sociale et identité personnelle. In: Bourhis RY, Leyens JP (eds) Stéréotypes, discrimination et relations intergroupes. Mardaga, Liège, pp 69–96

    Google Scholar 

  35. Brisbois X (2010) Le processus de décision dans le choix modal: importance des déterminants individuels, symboliques et cognitifs. Thèse de doctorat non publiée, UPMF, Grenoble

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ben-Akiva M, Morikawa T (2002) Comparing ridership attraction of rail and bus. Transp Policy 9:107–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power and analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  38. Beirão G, Sarsfield-Cabral JA (2007) Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: A qualitative study. Transp Policy 14:478–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Garling T, Axhausen K, Brydsten M (1996) Travel choice and the goal/process utility distinction. Appl Cogn Psychol 10:65–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Steg L, Geurs K, Ras M (2001) The effects of motivational factors on car use: a multidisciplinary modelling approach. Transp Res Part A: Policy Pract 35:789–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Allport GW (1954) The nature of prejudice. The Beacon Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hewstone M, Brown R (1986) Contact is not enough: an intergroup perspective on the “contact hypothesis”. In: Hewstone M, Brown R (eds) Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters. Basil Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  43. Pettigrew TF, Tropp L (2000) Does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? In: Oskamp S (ed) Reducing prejudice and discrimination. Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  44. Taylor DM, Dubé L, Bellerose J (1986) Intergroup contact in Quebec: Myth or reality? In Hewstone RBM (ed) Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters. Basil Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  45. Taylor DM, Moghaddam FM (1994) Theories of intergroup relations: International social psychological perspectives (2 ed). Praeger, London

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ben-Akiva M, Bradley M, Morikawa T, et al (1994) Combining revealed and stated preferences data. Market Lett 5:335–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Webb TL, Sheeran P (2006) Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychol Bull 132:249–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire interuniversitaire de psychologie (EA 4145), université Pierre-Mendès-France, BP 47, F-38040, Grenoble cedex 09, France

    X. Brisbois & D. R. Kouabenan

  2. LAPPS — Laboratoire parisien de psychologie sociale (EA 4386), université Paris-Ouest-Nanterre-La-Défense, 200, avenue de la République, F-92001, Nanterre cedex, France

    L. Rubens

Authors
  1. X. Brisbois
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. R. Kouabenan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. Rubens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to X. Brisbois.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brisbois, X., Kouabenan, D.R. & Rubens, L. Mixité sociale et choix modal : importance des dimensions symboliques dans l’attrait des transports collectives. Rech. Transp. Secur. 28, 181–189 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13547-012-0044-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13547-012-0044-6

Mots clés

Keywords

Search

Navigation