Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 145
134 I N N O VAT I O N S I N T R AV E L D E M A N D M O D E L I N G , V O L U M E 2 cated by the negative coefficient on the age variable. Men likely to be companions than household or family mem- are found to prefer to socialize with nonfamily members bers for weekday passive leisure activities. to family members (either household or nonhousehold). Younger individuals are more likely to undertake pas- Caucasians are found to have a lower propensity to sive leisure activities with nonhousehold members. Men engage in social activities with nonhousehold family are found to undertake passive leisure activities indepen- members compared with individuals of other ethnicities. dently or with nonhousehold, nonfamily members as Employed persons have a higher propensity to choose companions. Caucasians have a lower propensity to nonhousehold other members as companions for social undertake solo activities compared with individuals of activities. This is intuitive given that these companions other ethnicities. are often co-workers. Students are more likely to social- Employed persons have a higher propensity to choose ize with friends and less likely to undertake joint social nonhousehold other members as companions for passive activities with household and nonhousehold family leisure activities. This is intuitive given that these com- members. panions are often co-workers. These persons also prefer Married individuals are more likely to undertake independent leisure to joint leisure with non-co-workers social activities with only household members (see the as companions. Students are more likely to pursue leisure negative coefficients for all other alternatives). Further, with friends and colleagues and less likely to do so with the negative coefficients are strongest for the three alter- nonhousehold family members. natives that do not include household members. This Married individuals are found not to prefer pursuing indicates that married individuals participate in social joint leisure with only friends or nonhousehold family activities with their spouses. Finally, the absence of chil- members. Solo episodes are favored over joint episodes dren in the household favors socializing with with nonhousehold, nonfamily companions. However, nonhousehold members. joint episodes including household members as compan- ions are preferred to solo episodes. Finally, the absence of children in the household favors pursuit of passive Companion-Type Model for Passive leisure with only nonhousehold friends and family. Leisure Activities When children are present in the household, household members are the most favored companions for leisure. The MNL model for the companion-type choice for pas- sive leisure activities is presented in Table 6. The "solo" alternative is chosen as the reference category. The Companion-Type Model for Active "household members only" alternative is not available Leisure Activities for individuals in single-person households. All other alternatives are available for all individuals. The MNL model for the companion-type choice for Results indicate that passive leisure episodes of longer active leisure activities is presented in Table 7. The durations are more likely to be pursued jointly than solo. "solo" alternative is chosen as the reference category. Further, among the joint episodes, shorter-duration The "household members only" alternative is not avail- activities are more likely to be pursued with non- able for individuals in single-person households. All household other members as companions, as are week- other alternatives are available for all individuals. day episodes. Otherwise, weekday episodes are more Results indicate that active leisure episodes of longer likely to be solo than joint. Finally, friends are more duration are more likely to be pursued jointly than solo. TABLE 6 Model for Companion-Type Choice for Passive Leisure Activities Household Nonhousehold Nonhousehold Nonhousehold Mixed Members Family Friends Other Composition Beta t-stat Beta t-stat Beta t-stat Beta t-stat Beta t-stat Constant 1.108 7.670 0.194 1.005 0.288 1.767 0.294 2.004 0.007 0.045 Activity episode duration 0.013 23.617 0.011 18.536 0.013 24.497 0.002 4.066 0.014 25.320 Weekday 1.097 14.038 0.890 10.322 0.297 4.220 0.292 4.840 1.165 15.323 Age 0.018 6.315 0.026 10.116 0.013 6.232 0.022 8.847 Male 0.533 7.800 0.415 5.413 0.629 9.778 White 0.360 3.299 0.192 1.792 0.362 4.049 0.141 2.012 0.369 3.696 Employed 0.926 10.598 0.977 10.348 0.499 6.211 0.478 5.952 0.828 9.965 Student 0.342 2.611 0.587 6.372 0.267 3.231 Married 1.730 18.831 0.262 2.881 1.026 12.067 1.228 16.110 No children in household 0.803 10.183 0.477 4.719 0.280 3.457 0.174 2.852 0.676 8.088 Log likelihood (convergence) 15,404.93 Log likelihood (constants only) 18,158.04