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
