, Volume 42, Issue 5, pp 723–731 | Cite as

Social interactions in transportation: analyzing groups and spatial networks

  • Frank Goetzke
  • Regine Gerike
  • Antonio Páez
  • Elenna Dugundji


Travel demand is derived from activities that people have to or want to engage in. Work trips have been a primary concern for transportation researchers and an early focus of transportation modeling was on commuting behavior (Ben-Akiva and Lerman 1974; Train 1980). Subsequently, non-work activities, such as shopping or doctor visits, increasingly caught the attention of transportation analysts, and interest shifted from a trip-purpose approach (i.e. work trips) towards scheduled-based travel analysis (Bhat and Koppelman 1999). However, these activity trips all have in common that they still could be modeled without considering social context. The analysis approach of choice behavior was rooted in neoclassical economics assuming methodological individualism of isolated, utility-maximizing agents (Small and Winston 1999).

While using the traditional neoclassical tool box, much has been learned about journeys to work and trip scheduling for non-work activities. Early research...


Personal and activity networks Social influence Social network analysis Individual interactions Aggregate interactions 



We would like to thank all authors and participants in the Herrsching am Ammersee workshop for their contributions, ideas, and constructive criticism, as well as the other members of the convening committee beyond the guest editors of this special issue, Theo Arentze, Kay Axhausen, Juan Carrasco, Pat Mokhtarian and Darren Scott. We are grateful to Mark W. Horner, our liaison editor at Transportation, for valuable support and guidance throughout the development of this theme issue. We also want to express thanks to Martin Richards, the former editor-in-chief of Transportation, for backing our idea of a special issue and generously approving it. The International Workshop “Frontiers in Transportation—Social Interactions” held in 2013 at Herrsching am Ammersee near Munich, Germany was funded in part by the German Research Foundation (DFG) and hosted by the Institute for Transport Studies at the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU) Vienna.


  1. Abou-Zeid, M., Ben-Akiva, M.: The effect of social comparisons on commute well-being. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 45(4), 345–361 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abou-Zeid, M., Schmöcker, J.D., Belgiawan, P.F., Fujii, S.: Mass effects and mobility decisions. Transp. Lett. 5, 115–130 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adjemian, M.K., Lin, C.Y., Williams, J.: Estimating spatial interdependence in automobile type choice with survey data. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 44(9), 661–675 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arentze, T., Timmermans, H.J.: Social networks, social interactions, and activity-travel behavior: a framework for microsimulation. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 35(6), 1012 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. Arentze, T.A., Timmermans, H.J.: A need-based model of multi-day, multi-person activity generation. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 43(2), 251–265 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. Axhausen, K.W.: Social networks, mobility biographies, and travel: survey challenges. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 35(6), 981 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. Ben-Akiva, M., Lerman, S.R.: Some estimation results of a simultaneous model of auto ownership and mode choice to work. Transportation 3(4), 357–376 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bhat, C.: A new spatial (Social) interaction discrete choice model accommodating for unobserved effects due to endogenous network formation. Transportation (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11116-015-9651-9
  9. Bhat, C.R., Koppelman, F.S.: Activity-based modeling of travel demand. In: Hall, R.W. (ed.) Handbook of Transportation Science, pp. 35–61. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bhat, C.R., Pendyala, R.M.: Modeling intra-household interactions and group decision-making. Transportation 32(5), 443–448 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bhat, C.R., Sener, I.N.: A copula-based closed-form binary logit choice model for accommodating spatial correlation across observational units. J. Geogr. Syst. 11(3), 243–272 (2009)Google Scholar
  12. Bhat, C.R., Sener, I.N., Eluru, N.: A flexible spatially dependent discrete choice model: Formulation and application to teenagers’ weekday recreational activity participation. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 44(8–9), 903–921 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bhat, C.R., Sidharthan, R.: A simulation evaluation of the maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) estimator for mixed multinomial probit models. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 45(7), 940–953 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. Bradley, M., Vovsha, P.: A model for joint choice of daily activity pattern types of household members. Transportation 32(5), 545–571 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carrasco, J.A., Cid-Aguayo, B.: Network capital, social networks, and travel: an empirical illustration from concepción, Chile. Environ. Plan. A 44(5), 1066–1084 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carrasco, J.A., Farber, S.: Selected papers on the study of the social context of travel behavior. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 68, 1–2 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Carrasco, J.A., Miller, E.J.: Exploring the propensity to perform social activities: a social network approach. Transportation 33(5), 463–480 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carrasco, J.A., Miller, E.J.: The social dimension in action: a multilevel, personal networks model of social activity frequency between individuals. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 43(1), 90–104 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Carrasco, J.A., Hogan, B., Wellman, B., Miller, E.J.: Collecting social network data to study social activity-travel behavior: an egocentric approach. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 35(6), 961 (2008)Google Scholar
  20. Dubernet D., Axhausen, K.W.: Implementing a household joint activity-travel multi-agent simulation tool: first results. Transportation (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11116-015-9645-7
  21. Dugundji, E. R, Gulyas, L. Empirical estimation and multi-agent based simulation of a discrete choice model with network interaction effects. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management, Sendai, Japan (2003a)Google Scholar
  22. Dugundji, E. R., Gulyas, L.: An exploration of the role of global versus local and social versus spatial networks in transportation mode choice behavior in the Netherlands. In: Proceedings of AGENT, Challenges in Social Simulation. University of Chicago, Argonne National Laboratory, Chicago, pp. 437–454 (2003b)Google Scholar
  23. Dugundji, E.R., Gulyás, L.: Sociodynamic discrete choice on networks in space: impacts of agent heterogeneity on emergent outcomes. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 35(6), 1028–1054 (2008)Google Scholar
  24. Dugundji, E.R, Gulyás, L.: Sociodynamic discrete choice applied to intercity travel demand: issues in estimation. In: Proceedings of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), Wroclaw. Available in IEEE Xplore (2012a)Google Scholar
  25. Dugundji, E.R., Gulyás, L.: Sociodynamic discrete choice on networks in space: role of utility parameters and connectivity in emergent outcomes. Proc. Comput. Sci. 10, 827–832 (2012b)Google Scholar
  26. Dugundji, E.R., Gulyás, L.: Structure and emergence in a nested logit model with social and spatial interactions. Comput. Math. Organ. Theory 19(2), 151–203 (2013)Google Scholar
  27. Dugundji, E.R., Walker, J.L.: Discrete choice with social and spatial network interdependencies: an empirical example using mixed generalized extreme value models with field and panel effects. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1921, 70–78 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dugundji, E.R., Páez, A., Arentze, T.A.: Social networks, choices, mobility, and travel. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 35(6), 956–960 (2008)Google Scholar
  29. Dugundji, E.R., Páez, A., Arentze, T.A., Walker, J.L.: Transportation and social interactions. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract 45, 239–247 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dugundji, E.R., Scott, D.M., Carrasco, J.A., Páez, A.: Urban mobility and social–spatial contact—introduction. Environ. Plan. A 45, 239–247 (2012)Google Scholar
  31. Fukuda, D., Morichi, S.: Incorporating aggregate behavior in an individual’s discrete choice: an application to analyzing illegal bicycle parking behavior. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 41(4), 313–325 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gliebe, J.P., Koppelman, F.S.: A model of joint activity participation between household members. Transportation 29(1), 49–72 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gliebe, J.P., Koppelman, F.S.: Modeling household activity–travel interactions as parallel constrained choices. Transportation 32(5), 449–471 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Goetzke, F.: Network effects in public transit use: evidence from a spatially autoregressive mode choice model for New York. Urban Stud. 45(2), 407–417 (2008)Google Scholar
  35. Goetzke, F., Rave, T.: Automobile access, peer effects and happiness. Transportation (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11116-015-9647-5
  36. Goetzke, F., Andrade, P.: Walkability as a summary measure in a spatially autoregressive mode choice model: an instrumental variable approach. In: Páez, A., Gallo, J.L., Buliung, R.N., Dall’erba, S. (eds.) Progress in Spatial Analysis: Methods and Applications, pp. 217–232. Springer Publishing, New York, (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Goetzke, F., Rave, T.: Bicycle use in Germany: explaining differences between municipalities with social network effects. Urban Stud. 48(2), 427–437 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Goetzke, F., Weinberger, R.: Separating contextual from endogenous effects in automobile ownership models. Environ. Plan. A 44, 1032–1046 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ho, C., Mulley, C.: Intra-household interactions in transport research: a review. Transport Rev. 35(1), 33–55 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Joubert, J.W., Meintjes, S.: Computational considerations in building inter-firm networks. Transportation (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11116-015-9650-x
  41. Kamargianni, M., Ben-Akiva, M., Polydoropoulo, A.: Incorporating social interaction into hybrid choice models. Transportation 41(6), 1263–1285 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kowald, M., Axhausen, K.W.: Focusing on connected personal leisure networks: selected results from a snowball sample. Environ. Plan. A 44(5), 1085 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kowald, M., Axhausen, K.W. (eds.): Social Networks and Travel Behaviour. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Aldershot (2015)Google Scholar
  44. Kowald, M., van den Berg, P., Frei, A., Carrasco, J.A., Arentze, T., Axhausen, K., Mok, D., Timmermans, H., Wellman, B.: Distance patterns of personal networks in four countries: a comparative study. J. Transp. Geogr. 31, 236–248 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kroesen, M.: Do partners influence each other’s travel patterns? A new approach to study the role of social norms. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 78, 489–505 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kuwano, M., Tsukai, M., Matsubara, T.: Analysis on promoting factors of electric vehicles with social conformity. In: Proceedings of the13th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research (IATBR), Toronto (2012)Google Scholar
  47. Kuwano, M., Zhang, J., Fujiwara, A.: Dynamic discrete choice model for multiple social interactions. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2231, 68–75 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Matous, P., Todo, Y., Pratiwi, A.: The role of motorized transport and mobile phones in the diffusion of agricultural information in Tanggamus Regency, Indonesia. Transportation (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11116-015-9646-6
  49. Okushima, M.: Simulating social influences on sustainable mobility shifts for heterogeneous agents. Transportation (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11116-015-9649-3
  50. Páez, A., Scott, D.M.: Social influence on travel behavior: a simulation example of the decision to telecommute. Environ. Plan. A 39(3), 647 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Páez, A., Scott, D.M., Volz, E.: A discrete-choice approach to modeling social influence on individual decision making. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 35(6), 1055 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Paleti, R., Bhat, C.R., Pendyala, R.M., Goulias, K.G.: The modeling of household vehicle type choice accommodating spatial dependence effects. In: Proceedings of the 92nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2013)Google Scholar
  53. Ronald, N., Arentze, T., Timmermans, H.: Modeling social interactions between individuals for joint activity scheduling. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 46(2), 276–290 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schwanen, T.: Managing uncertain arrival times through sociomaterial associations. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 35(6), 997–1011 (2008)Google Scholar
  55. Scott, D.M., Kanaroglou, P.S.: An activity-episode generation model that captures interactions between household heads: development and empirical analysis. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 36(10), 875–896 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Scott, D.M., Dam, I., Páez, A., Wilton, R.D.: Investigating the effects of social influence on the choice to telework. Environ. Plan. A Policy Pract. 44(5), 1016–1031 (2012)Google Scholar
  57. Scott, D.M., Dugundji, E.R., Páez, A.: The social dimension of activity, travel and location choice behavior. J. Transp. Geogr. 31, 212–215 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sener, I.N., Bhat, C.R.: Flexible spatial dependence structures for unordered multinomial choice models: formulation and application to teenagers’ activity participation. Transportation 39(3), 657–683 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sener, I.N., Eluru, N., Bhat, C.R.: On jointly analyzing the physical activity participation levels of individuals in a family unit using a multivariate copula framework. J. Choice Model. 3(3), 1–38 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sharmeen, F., Arentze, T., Timmermans, H.: Predicting the evolution of social networks with life cycle events. Transportation (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11116-015-9644-8
  61. Sidharthan, R., Bhat, C.R.: Incorporating spatial dynamics and temporal dependency in land use change models. Geogr. Anal. 44(4), 321–349 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sidharthan, R., Bhat, C.R., Pendyala, R.M., Goulias, K.G.: Model for children’s school travel mode choice: accounting for effects of spatial and social interaction. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2213, 78–86 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Small, K.A., Winston, C.: The demand for transportation: models and applications. In: Gomez-Ibanez, J.A., Tye, W.B., Winston, C. (eds.) Essays in Transportation Economics and Policy: A Handbook in Honor of John R. Meyer. Brookings Institution Press, Washington (1999)Google Scholar
  64. Srinivasan, S., Bhat, C.R.: Modeling household interactions in daily in-home and out-of-home maintenance activity participation. Transportation 32(5), 523–544 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Timmermans, H.J., Zhang, J.: Modeling household activity travel behavior: examples of state of the art modeling approaches and research agenda. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 43(2), 187–190 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Train, K.: A structured logit model of auto ownership and mode choice. Rev. Econ. Stud. 47, 357–370 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Van den Berg, P., Arentze, T., Timmermans, H.: A multilevel analysis of factors influencing local social interaction. Transportation (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11116-015-9648-4
  68. Walker, J.L., Ehlers, E., Banerjee, I., Dugundji, E.R.: Correcting for endogeneity in behavioral choice models with social influence variables. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 45, 362–374 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Whalen, K.E., Páez, A., Bhat, C.R., Moniruzzaman, M., Paleti, R.: T-communities and sense of community in a university town: evidence from a student sample using a spatial ordered-response model. Urban Stud. 49(6), 1357–1376 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Goetzke
    • 1
  • Regine Gerike
    • 2
  • Antonio Páez
    • 3
  • Elenna Dugundji
    • 4
  1. 1.University of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA
  2. 2.Dresden University of TechnologyDresdenGermany
  3. 3.McMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  4. 4.CWI - National Research Institute for Mathematics and Computer ScienceAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations