Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Weekday episodes are most likely to be undertaken solo or with nonhousehold other members (co- workers). We also observe that friends are more likely to be compan- ions than household members or family members for weekday active leisure activities. Younger individuals are more likely to undertake active leisure jointly. As in the case of passive leisure, men are also found to undertake active leisure activities independently or with nonhousehold, nonfamily mem- bers as companions. Caucasians are less likely to under- take active leisure solo and with colleagues compared with individuals of other ethnicities. Employed persons have a higher propensity to choose either independent active leisure or joint leisure with non - household other members as companions. Students are more likely to pursue leisure with friends and colleagues. Married individuals are found not to prefer pursuing joint leisure with only friends or nonhousehold family members. Solo episodes are favored over joint episodes with nonhousehold, nonfamily companions. However, 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 leisure with only nonhousehold friends and family. When children are present in the household, household members are the most favored companions for leisure. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Development of behaviorally oriented travelâdemand models requires an understanding of the joint time investment decisions of individuals with household and nonhousehold members. This is increasingly recognized as one of the most critical and understudied issues in the activity- based travelâdemand modeling field. This study contributes toward this goal by presenting an empirical analysis of companion types for different kinds of activ- ity and travel episode types. Data from the 2003 and 2004 ATUS were used in this analysis. Aggregate analysis indicates that a significant fraction of the daily activityâtravel patterns of individuals is pur- sued with other persons. Out- of- home and travel episodes are more likely to be undertaken with other persons than in- home episodes. Further, solo activities and travel are found to be less likely on weekend days compared with weekdays. On further examining the companion types for joint activity episodes, household members are the most dominant companions for in- home activities and travel whereas nonhousehold persons are preferred com- panions for out- of- home episodes. Finally, the authors also observe that joint weekend out- of- home episodes are more likely to include household members as compan- ions whereas joint weekday episodes are more likely to be undertaken with nonhousehold members. MNL models were also developed to determine the impacts of demographic characteristics, episode dura- tions, and day of the week on the choice of companion types for leisure activities. Nonhousehold companions were further classified into family, friends, and others for this analysis. Overall, the empirical results indicate simi- larities in the companion type choices for the three types of leisure activities (and in particular between active and passive leisure). Specifically, men prefer nonhousehold nonfamily members as companions. Employed persons and students are more likely to pursue social activities with nonhousehold other members (often co- workers) and friends, respectively. This indicates that increased opportunities to interact with nonhousehold members favor joint pursuit of social activities with nonfamily mem- bers as companions. Single individuals are more likely to spend leisure time with friends and other nonhousehold nonfamily members. In contrast, married individuals are found to have a higher propensity to pursue leisure jointly with their spouses and possibly children. Weekdays favor solo leisure episodes or joint episodes with nonhousehold members. Weekend episodes, on the other hand, are more likely to be undertaken with household members. Finally, the authors find the duration of the activity episode is related to the choice of companion type. 135COMPANIONSHIP FOR LEISURE ACTIVITIES TABLE 7 Model for Companion-Type Choice for Active 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 0.524 2.617 1.962 5.686 0.351 1.666 0.982 5.894 0.075 0.330 Activity episode duration 0.006 9.291 0.010 12.009 0.011 18.172 0.010 14.958 0.010 15.154 Weekday 0.998 12.074 0.870 5.587 0.246 2.995 1.048 10.061 Age 0.010 2.823 0.015 3.511 0.030 9.584 0.016 4.814 0.046 11.199 Male 0.538 6.669 0.589 3.872 0.534 5.421 White 0.298 2.230 0.510 1.990 0.259 2.174 0.532 3.171 Employed 0.396 4.414 0.550 3.508 0.353 3.923 0.293 2.702 Student 0.454 3.672 0.451 3.423 Married 1.388 11.003 0.426 4.492 0.363 3.574 0.848 7.050 No children in household 0.731 7.662 0.226 2.215 0.511 4.543 Log likelihood (convergence) 7,613.41 Log likelihood (constants only) 8,561.43
