公交换乘优惠政策下居民换乘意向的异质性分析

doi:10.13229/j.cnki.jdxbgxb.20240661

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探究公交换乘优惠政策下城市居民换乘意向的影响因素及其相互作用机理，本文在计划行为理论和技术接受模型的基础上融入行为习惯，采用结构方程模型（SEM）构建了公交换乘优惠政策下的居民换乘意向模型；采用显示性偏好（RP）方法设计调查问卷，通过网络调查获得365份有效样本，探究各心理潜变量之间的路径关系，并通过Bootstrap法检验模型的中介效应；采用单因素方差分析（ANOVA）探讨潜变量在不同群组中的异质性。结果表明：态度、主观规范、感知有用性和行为习惯对换乘意向有直接的显著影响；态度、感知有用性和感知易用性是中介变量，但并非在所有路径中都能发挥中介效应；潜变量对换乘意向影响的总效应值从大到小排序为：行为习惯（0.457）、感知有用性（0.366）、态度（0.326）、主观规范（0.312）、感知易用性（0.096）；不同社会经济属性和出行特征的群组对潜变量的感知及影响存在显著差异。研究成果不仅有助于完善行为意向研究的理论体系，而且可为其他城市交通管理部门制定公交换乘优惠政策提供理论支撑。

关键词: 交通运输系统工程, 公交换乘优惠政策, 结构方程模型, 换乘意向, 计划行为理论, 技术接受模型, 行为习惯

Abstract:

In order to investigate the factors influencing urban residents’ transfer intention and their interaction mechanisms under the transit transfer preferential （TTP） policy， this paper integrates behavioral habits based on the theory of planned behavior （TPB） and technology acceptance model （TAM）， and develops a residents' transfer intention model under the TTP using the structural equation model（SEM）. The questionnaire was designed using the revealed preference（RP） method. A total of 365 valid samples were obtained through an online survey. The path relationships between psychological latent variables were explored， and the mediating effect of the model was examined using the Bootstrap method. Additionally， a one-way analysis of variance（ANOVA） was conducted to investigate the heterogeneity of latent variables across different groups. The results show that attitude， subjective norms， perceived usefulness， and behavioral habits have a direct significant impact on transfer intention. Attitude， perceived usefulness， and perceived ease of use are mediating variables， but they do not play a mediating effect in all paths. The total effect values of latent variables on transfer intention， in descending order， are behavioral habits （0.457）， perceived usefulness （0.366）， attitude （0.326）， subjective norms （0.312）， and perceived ease to use （0.096）. Significant differences were found between groups with different socio-economic attributes and travel characteristics on the latent variables. The findings of this study not only contribute to the theoretical framework of behavioral intention research， but also provide theoretical support for urban transportation management authorities in formulating the TTP policy.

Key words: engineering of communications and transportation system, transit transfer preferential policy, structural equation modeling, transfer intention, theory of planned behavior, technology acceptance model, behavioral habits

中图分类号:

U491

马壮林,毕宇明,周备,邓亚娟,兆雪. 公交换乘优惠政策下居民换乘意向的异质性分析[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2026, 56(1): 158-169.

Zhuang-lin MA,Yu-ming BI,Bei ZHOU,Ya-juan DENG,Xue ZHAO. Heterogeneity analysis of residents’ transfer intentions under transit transfer preferential policy[J]. Journal of Jilin University(Engineering and Technology Edition), 2026, 56(1): 158-169.

图/表 12

图1

图2

表1

表2

图3

图4

表4

表5

表6

表7

图5

参考文献 30

[1]	中国政府网. 中共中央国务院印发《交通强国建设纲要》[EB/OL]. [2024-03-23]. .
[2]	Nayum A, Nordfjærn T. Predictors of public transport use among university students during the winter: A MIMIC modelling approach[J]. Travel Behaviour and Society, 2021, 22: 236-243.
[3]	吴文静, 孙刃超, 宗芳, 等. 居民低碳通勤出行的主观态度识别及影响分析[J]. 重庆交通大学学报: 自然科学版, 2021, 40(5): 53-58.
	Wu Wen-jing, Sun Ren-chao, Zong Fang, et al. Subjective attitude identification and impact analysis of residents' low-carbon commuting travel[J]. Journal of Chongqing Jiaotong University(Natural Science), 2021, 40(5): 53-58.
[4]	Zhang X, Zhong S, Ling S, et al. How to promote the transition from solo driving to mobility services delivery? an empirical study focusing on ridesharing[J]. Transport Policy, 2022, 129: 176-187.
[5]	胡含, 李昕光, 孙崇效, 等. 城市居民低碳出行意向异质性分析[J]. 交通运输工程与信息学报, 2024, 22(1): 128-138.
	Hu Han, Li Xin-guang, Sun Chong-xiao, et al. Heterogeneity analysis of urban residents' low-carbon travel intention[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering and Information, 2024, 22(1): 128-138.
[6]	Kaye S, Lewis I, Buckley L, et al. To share or not to share: A theoretically guided investigation of factors predicting intentions to use fully automated shared passenger shuttles[J]. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2020, 75: 203-213.
[7]	Rejali S, Aghabayk K, Mohammadi A, et al. Assessing a priori acceptance of shared dockless e-scooters in Iran[J]. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2021, 100: No.103042.
[8]	马壮林, 崔姗姗, 胡大伟. 限行政策下城市居民低碳出行意向[J]. 吉林大学学报: 工学版, 2022, 52(11): 2607-2617.
	Ma Zhuang-lin, Cui Sha-shan, Hu Da-wei. Urban residents' low-carbon travel intention after implementation of driving restriction policy[J]. Journal of Jilin University(Engineering and Technology Edition), 2022, 52(11): 2607-2617.
[9]	Bollen K A. Structural Equation with Latent Variables[M]. New York: Wiley, 1989.
[10]	王玉茹. 居民低碳出行意向模型及其影响因素研究[J]. 云南民族大学学报: 自然科学版, 2016, 25(3): 280-285.
	Wang Yu-ru. A study of the factors influencing Tianjin residents' intention of low-carbon travel[J]. Journal of Yunnan Minzu University(Natural Science Edition), 2016, 25(3): 280-285.
[11]	乔婧, 孙立山, 刘小明, 等. 基于结构方程的公共交通换乘影响因素研究[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2017, 17(6): 296-300.
	Qiao Jing, Sun Li-shan, Liu Xiao-ming, et al. Analysis on public transportation transfer influencing factors based on structural equation model[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2017, 17(6): 296-300.
[12]	Li J, Shen J, Jia B. Exploring intention to use shared electric bicycles by the extended theory of planned behavior[J]. Sustainability, 2021, 13(8): 1-13.
[13]	Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior[J]. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 1991, 50(2): 179-211.
[14]	Davis F D, Bagozzi P R, Warshaw P. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models[J]. Management Science, 1989(35): 982-1003.
[15]	Neal D T, Wood W, Labrecque J S, et al. How do habits guide behavior? Perceived and actual triggers of habits in daily life[J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2012, 48(2): 492-498.
[16]	Fatmi M R, Habib M A. Modelling mode switch associated with the change of residential location[J]. Travel Behaviour Society, 2017, 9: 21-28.
[17]	Verplanken B, Orbell S. Reflections on past behavior: a self-report index of habit strength[J]. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2003, 33(6): 1313-1330.
[18]	张昱, 孙岩, 刘学敏. 基于TPB的北京市居民低碳通勤选择机制研究[J]. 北京师范大学学报: 自然科学版, 2020, 56(6): 831-837.
	Zhang Yu, Sun Yan, Liu Xue-min. Theory of planned behavior applied to choice of low carbon commuting of Beijing residents[J]. Journal of Beijing Normal University(Natural Science), 2020, 56(6): 831-837.
[19]	景鹏, 黄芳, 徐刚, 等. 自动驾驶支付意愿及影响因素分析[J]. 长安大学学报: 自然科学版, 2021, 41(1): 90-102.
	Jing Peng, Huang Fang, Xu Gang, et al. Analysis of autonomous driving payment willingness and influencing factors[J]. Journal of Chang'an University(Natural Science Edition), 2021, 41(1): 90-102.
[20]	Liu D, Du H, Southworth F, et al. The influence of social-psychological factors on the intention to choose low-carbon travel modes in Tianjin, China[J]. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2017, 105: 42-53.
[21]	Nieves-Pavón S, López-Mosquera N, Jiménez-Naranjo H. The role emotions play in loyalty and WOM intention in a Smart Tourism Destination Management[J]. Cities, 2024, 145: No.104681.
[22]	Samadzad M, Nosratzadeh H, Karami H, et al. What are the factors affecting the adoption and use of electric scooter sharing systems from the end user's perspective?[J]. Transport Policy, 2023, 136: 70-82.
[23]	齐航, 夏嘉祺, 王光超, 等. 考虑出行者习惯与利他性偏好的自动驾驶网约车使用意向模型[J]. 交通运输工程与信息学报, 2021, 19(2): 1-10.
	Qi Hang, Xia Jia-qi, Wang Guang-chao, et al. A behavioral intention to use model of autonomous vehicle ride-hailing incorporating traveler habit and altruistic preference[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering and Information, 2021, 19(2): 1-10.
[24]	盛光华, 岳蓓蓓, 龚思羽. 共享单车用户持续使用意愿研究——基于TAM理论的拓展模型[J]. 东北大学学报: 社会科学版, 2019, 21(6): 567-574.
	Sheng Guang-hua, Yue Bei-bei, Gong Si-yu. A research on consumers' willingness to use shared bicycles continuously——Based on the extended model of TAM theory[J]. Journal of Northeastern University (Social Science), 2019, 21(6): 567-574.
[25]	李振龙, 邢冠仰, 李佳, 等. 基于扩展TAM的车路协同系统驾驶人接受度研究[J]. 中国公路学报, 2021, 34(7): 188-200.
	Li Zhen-long, Xing Guan-yang, Li Jia, et al. Driver's acceptance of cooperative vehicle infrastructure system based on extended TAM[J]. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2021, 34(7): 188-200.
[26]	Chen C F, Chao W H. Habitual or reasoned? Using the theory of planned behavior, technology acceptance model, and habit to examine switching intentions toward public transit[J]. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2011, 14(2): 128-137.
[27]	Yen Y S, Wu F S. Predicting the adoption of mobile financial services: the impacts of perceived mobility and personal habit[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2016, 65: 31-42.
[28]	吴明隆. 结构方程模型——AMOS的操作与应用[M]. 重庆: 重庆大学出版社, 2009: 40-53.
[29]	Fu X, Juan Z. Exploring the psychosocial factors associated with public transportation usage and examining the "gendered" difference[J]. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2017, 103: 70-82.
[30]	Greenland S, Senn S J, Rothman K J, et al. Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations[J]. European Journal of Epidemiology, 2016, 31: 337-350.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

潜变量	题项
态度（ATT）	ATT1：公交换乘优惠政策是一个好主意
	ATT2：公交换乘优惠政策很有吸引力
	ATT3：支持公交换乘优惠政策
主观规范（SN）	SN1：家人和朋友的鼓励会让我更愿意接受
	SN2：如果周围的人接受换乘优惠政策，我也会接受
	SN3：政府的引导会让我愿意接受换乘优惠政策
感知行为控制（PBC）	PBC1：如果我几乎不换乘，我不会支持公交换乘优惠政策
	PBC2：换乘距离过长，我不会支持换乘优惠政策
	PBC3：优惠幅度越大，我会接受换乘优惠政策
感知有用性（PU）	PU1：公交换乘优惠政策可以降低出行费用
	PU2：公交换乘优惠政策可以减少出行时间
	PU3：公交换乘优惠政策可以提高出行便捷性
感知易用性（PEU）	PEU1：我认为公交换乘很便捷
	PEU2：我认为公交换乘信息很容易获取
	PEU3：我可以熟练地进行公交换乘
行为习惯（BH）	BH1：我能熟练使用各种公共交通工具
行为习惯（BH）	BH2：公共交通是我日常出行的常用方式之一
换乘意向（TI）	TI1：我在日常生活中经常进行公交换乘
换乘意向（TI）	TI2：我会在日常生活中推荐他人选择公交换乘

潜变量名称	Cronbach's α	AVE	CR
态度	0.879	0.710	0.880
主观规范	0.878	0.716	0.883
感知行为控制	0.896	0.743	0.897
感知有用性	0.896	0.741	0.896
感知易用性	0.874	0.697	0.873
行为习惯	0.870	0.772	0.871
换乘意向	0.881	0.788	0.881

类别	检验指标	接受范围	拟合值	效果
绝对适配统计量	χ²/df	1<χ²/df <3	1.292	较好
	SRMR	SRMR<0.05	0.041	较好
	RMSEA	RMSEA<0.05	0.028	较好
	GFI	GFI>0.9	0.953	较好
增值适配度统计量	NFI	NFI>0.9	0.963	较好
	TLI	TLI>0.9	0.989	较好
	IFI	IFI>0.9	0.991	较好
	CFI	CFI>0.9	0.991	较好
简约适配统计量	CN	CN>200	341	较好
简约适配统计量	PGFI	PGFI>0.5	0.677	较好

假设路径	p值	假设检验
H₁₁：态度→换乘意向	***	接受
H₁₂：感知行为控制→换乘意向	0.298	拒绝
H₁₃：主观规范→换乘意向	**	接受
H₁₄：感知有用性→换乘意向	***	接受
H₁₅：行为习惯→换乘意向	**	接受
H₂₁：感知行为控制→态度→换乘意向	0.693	拒绝
H₂₂：主观规范→态度→换乘意向	***	接受
H₂₃：主观规范→感知行为控制→换乘意向	0.254	拒绝
H₂₄：主观规范→感知有用性→换乘意向	***	接受
H₂₅：感知有用性→态度→换乘意向	***	接受
H₂₆：感知易用性→态度→换乘意向	0.192	拒绝
H₂₇：感知易用性→感知有用性→换乘意向	***	接受
H₂₈：行为习惯→态度→换乘意向	***	接受
H₂₉：行为习惯→感知行为控制→换乘意向	0.485	拒绝
H₂₁₀：行为习惯→感知易用性→换乘意向	***	接受
H₂₁₁：行为习惯→感知有用性→换乘意向	***	接受

路径	效应值	标准误	临界比	p值	Lower 2.5%	Upper 2.5%
感知行为控制→态度→换乘意向	-0.006	0.016	-0.353	0.724	-0.044	0.021
主观规范→态度→换乘意向	0.098	0.040	2.455	0.014	0.036	0.197
主观规范→感知有用性→态度→换乘意向	0.017	0.010	1.639	0.101	0.004	0.050
主观规范→感知有用性→换乘意向	0.057	0.027	2.132	0.033	0.018	0.127
感知有用性→态度→换乘意向	0.084	0.040	2.116	0.034	0.027	0.184
感知易用性→态度→换乘意向	0.027	0.030	0.908	0.364	-0.018	0.102
感知易用性→感知有用性→换乘意向	0.074	0.037	2.028	0.043	0.022	0.171
感知易用性→感知有用性→态度→换乘意向	0.022	0.014	1.591	0.112	0.005	0.064
行为习惯→态度→换乘意向	0.106	0.045	2.345	0.019	0.036	0.213
行为习惯→感知有用性→换乘意向	0.083	0.035	2.327	0.020	0.029	0.173
行为习惯→感知有用性→态度→换乘意向	0.024	0.014	1.772	0.076	0.007	0.066
行为习惯→感知易用性→态度→换乘意向	0.017	0.020	0.895	0.371	-0.011	0.069
行为习惯→感知易用性→感知有用性→换乘意向	0.048	0.024	1.976	0.048	0.015	0.117
行为习惯→感知易用性→感知有用性→态度→换乘意向	0.014	0.009	1.551	0.121	0.004	0.042