7"! ‘VI w-vy—w'wm ‘vr-vlrlv‘ -Tv"—-.-v1“'— .\ 7“. _ I> _ C — . ul I“ - . . .. . u .. . . . . a. . 0’ . . . ..o . .. . ‘4 . . . . o .H _ .. .: J . . . . b _ . L . . . , .1 . _ a . .. . . 1.. _. O . . . . . I . . . c . . a. .. . u . u... r .4. - OJL . . ‘2... . .. . o. .. .. #— -.< H.... ...u- ..._' ' . _ . . . . a ,- .. . . 3|.— . . . . _ . . .. . o . a .J .o .. O. ‘ ... a _ . . . .J (.12 o ‘ .u _ . . I. . I. . .. _ . . . . . ._..... .. .r.o.au g.” . . . . .r . . . . .v. ._._ .. \ . . 7.7:. ) -.. fit “a. o. k ... r. ... ¢ .. s. .I . . . o. u . . . . . . v». . I: 4' 01:..In- . . x . I. I ., _ r «o. . p .. 5... ...o Q. o . o. . .. . t; . f r... n . o , . 5. A. ... 4 wL 4 .o .r. ‘ n 4 u 107 O .l‘ . . . .1... pd . . t vo-‘ .. . . . o... .‘_ . . a . . 4 ... ..u_ . A. o . 4 .. .. . . ¢ v. D J. . I. L >. _ . . r I .. :2}; ..u, u .0. r .- .‘t’l'. . ‘ . .... I _ , ¢ .‘oo . J~.".oo. ,... «v’ _ .. I . . .. ‘ 1 3o 1 .. I“ . . . .. . .u" U .. 00.. v); rflunfli_wvtcfn_l_ e,‘ . 1.7. ‘2'. o:-,\ . .0 . . at... 1‘ no. I.J..a.ofiuf .0 . . . . . . . .L , . 4 v.1 1.; . . _ . ._ . . . . 3. 71.79»... _ . . . r... o. 3 v1 . _ . V . . c 1.»: . .. . DP.‘ .1. ...t o.. k L - . .., .O.Ju/.-l..¢\0. . . _ .. ..I I”; auc: I o _' u I: . _ - ' ‘W “c ‘1‘ 'F‘uU‘VTI.‘F" I O '0‘-- —.-,o b “q o‘O-D .u”.-.nl.-v. --. O o.-§O-.'l‘ 0...... cocoo-r IIOQ,0.-aooo.o‘a. ANTICIPATED TRAVEL PROP _+ SIT'Y F GASOLINE A STUDY ON THE IMPACT 0 AVAILABILITY AND PRICE Thesis far the Degree ‘of M. S. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY. THOMAS WALTER MOUSER. 1975 .. ., .—f.- 1.1. AV. I ~ ' . .. u .T,.. . ..-’—O...ut . 4 n ., Jr 1 ,...‘—j.~o . .v.§....¢ .L.... I. (O '.¢o' .up-:. .a III III JIIIIIIIIIIIII III ”gnaw 31 ET SSSSS ANTICIPATED TRAVEL PROPENSITY: A STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF GASOLINE AVAILABILITY AND PRICE By Thomas Walter Mouser A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Park and Recreation Resources 1975 ACCEPTED Committee Chairman Committee Member Committee Member ABSTRACT ANTICIPATED TRAVEL PROPENSITY: A STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF GASOLINE.AVAILABILITY AND PRICE By Thomas Halter Mouser During the winter of 197A and the so called "Energy Crisis" Americans suddenly became more aware of the importance of energy in transportation. One sector of the economy which was particularly affected by rising gasoline prices and sporadic gasoline shortages was the travel industry. This is a result of the automobile's vital position as the link between the recreationist and the tourist region. Gasoline conditions have become significant elements in travel decisions. This study desires to determine if gasoline conditions can be expected to influence future travel, and if so, to what extent and for which individuals. The study was designed, pretested and then administered by personal interview to a randomly sampled papulation of #78 individuals in northern Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. Analysis found the sample to be commensurate to the general population in terms of racial composition, educational achievement and income. Examination of the basic percentage frequency counts indicated that current gasoline conditions would not greatly influence future travel. The majority of respondents interviewed indicated gasoline Thomas Halter Mouser availability and price affected their travel very little if at all. In the same way, a majority anticipated that future travel in terms of trip number, trip distance and trip duration would be comparable to past travel. It was felt, however, that the minority expectation for future travel to decrease was substantial and necessitated further investigation. Income was found to relate positively with both anticipated travel and planned travel. Individuals in the lower income level were significantly more likely to decrease future travel than persons in upper income levels. It was also found that persons in higher income levels indicate a greater expectancy for travel costs to increase than do persons in lower income levels. I Those persons who perceive the impact of gasoline price to be a lot had a greater tendency to anticipate to travel less in the future than did those who perceived the impact to be negligible. The same relationship proved to be true between the perceived impact of gasoline availability and anticipated travel. Respondents did not appear to make any substantial distinctions between the influence of gasoline availability and gasoline price. There was evidence to indicate that the perceived impact of gasoline availability affects income levels equally while the perceived impact of price affects some income levels differently. I It was observed that those who had made a past travel decision related to gasoline conditions had a greater tendency to perceive the influence of current gasoline conditions to be worse and to anticipate to travel less in the future. The number of gasoline related travel decisions also related significantly with the expectation to decrease travel. Thomas Halter Mouser Comparison between the findings of anticipated travel and planned travel produced a number of interesting inconsistencies. For instance, it was found that those who cancelled a trip in the previous year have a tendency to be anticipating future travel to decrease and at the same time have a greater tendency to be planning a trip in the future. It is felt these reported inconsistencies are beneficial to the study and provide areas worthy of future research. The study is a preliminary investigation into the relationships between gasoline conditions and travel propensity. It provides a useful basis for future research,and at the same time, contributes substantially to a general understanding of these relationships. A series of policy and research recommendations are provided in the hope that the implications of this study will be logically extended. ANTICIPATED TRAVEL PROPENSITY: A STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF GASOLINE AVAILABILITY AND PRICE By Thomas Halter Mouser A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Park and Recreation Resources 1975 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to present my appreciation to Professor Lewis Moncrief, my major adviser, who gave support and encouragement as well as conscientious guidance throughout my Master's program. And to Professors Stephen.1~ Smith and Lawrence Lesotte who were kind enough to serve on my graduate committee and provide assistance in both this study and my graduate program. Special thanks also go to Paul.Myers and Daniel Stynes for their considerable aid in both the development and implementation of this study. I find myself deeply grateful to my parents who have continually supported my efforts whether they be in weakness or in strength and to my wife, Sandy, and our daughter, Joy Lynn, whom I both appreciate and love. TABLE OF CONTENTS AMOUWTS 0.00.0.0...OOOOOOOOOOCOOOO0.00.00.00.00.COO... LIST OFW OO...O0.0.0....0.0.00.0...-OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO LIST OF FIGURE 0......OOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0....0.00.00.00.00. LIST OF Apmlcm 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000C Chapter I. SIGNHICANCE AND ONETIVES O0.0.0....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SIGNH‘ICANCE OF 1“ STUDY 0....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 03]me or m STUDY 0.0.000....COCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .............................. INTRODUCTION ........................................ COSTS AND BENEFITS OF RECREATIONAL TRAVEL ........... POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS .......................... SUM! O0.0.00.0.0....0...O...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCCOCOO III. RESEARCH DESIGN, HYPOTHESES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF Tu W EMTION 0.0.0....000...OOOOCOCOOOOOOOOC ma DEIGN .0.00....OO...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO The matment 'eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee The PreteSt eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Sampling eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Implementation Of the hatment eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Analyds O...OOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO CONCEH‘S OOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOO0.0.0....OOOOOOQOOOOOOOCOO Travel Propensity ................................. Influence of Gasoline Price and Availability ...... Assesment 0f Place eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Regional Degirability eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Past Gasoline Related Travel Decisions ............ BaCkground F‘Ctors eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee mmm OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0000000000000000000...... Incme 0.0I.00......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00...... Influence of Gasoline Price and Availability ...... iii Page ii vi vii viii \O\l\l\nHI-' 13 15 17 17 17 17 18 19 21 2h 25 26 28 28 Chapter P881: GaSOline Related Travel DeCisions o o o o o o o o o o o o Gasoline Conditions Over Time ..................... CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE POPULATION ............ Education OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Income .OOOOOCOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOCOOOO0.00....0 Race .00.....00...0.00.00.00.0000000COOOOOOOOOOOOCO IV. FINDINGS -- ANTICIPATED TRAVEL PROPENSITY ............. GENERAL FINDINGS .................................... Implications ...................................... INCOME .............................................. Hywthesis 1 .0...0.0.00.0...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Res‘llts 0.0.0.0000...OOOOOOOOOOO0.00000000000COOOCC Implications OO0..OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0.... INFLUENCE OF GASOLINE AVAILABILITY AND PRICE ........ General Findings 0.000...acooooooooooooooocoo-co... Implications cocoa...oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo HywthCSiS 3 oooooooooo.ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Results ........................................... Hymthefls 5 ocoo.coo...ocooooooooooooooooooooooooo Results ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Implications ...................................... Availability V80 mice coooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Implications oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo PAST GASOLINE RELATED TRAVEL DECISIONS .............. General Findings .00000000.000.00.00.00.000.00.000. Implications coo.-o.ooooooooooooooooooooooo0.00.00. HypOtheBiB 7 00000.00o.oon...oooooooooooooooooooooo Results 000.00.000.00...00.0000000000000000000.000. Implications onooocoo...oooooo0.0000000000000000... GASOLINE CONDITIONS OVER TIME ooooooooooooooooooooooo General Findings 0.0000000000000000oooooooooooooooo HyPOthGSj-S 9 oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Results soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Implications ...................................... CONTRASTING DIMENSIONS OF ANTICIPATED TRAVEL ........ V. FINDINGS -- PLANNED TRAVEL ............................ GENERAL FINDINGS .................................... Implications ...................................... INCOME .............................................. Hymthesis 2 0.0.0.0...ooooooooooooooooooooooococo. Results coo.oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Ilplications 00.000.000.00.oooooooooooooooooooooooo iv 7" 1 l | v I .. ~ 0 . ‘ 3 ‘ 01". p Chapter VI. INFLUENCE OF GASOLINE AVAILABILITY AND PRICE ........ HypOtheSj-s 1+ o.ooooooooooooooooooooooo000.00.00.00. Results coo.o.ooooooooooooooooooooooo0.000.000.0000 HypOthesj-s 6 ooococo-0000.000oooooooooooooooooooooo Results coo-ococo-00.000000000000000.00000000000000 Implications 0....cocooooo0.000.000.00000.0.00.0... AntiCipated VB. Planned Travel oooooooooooooooooooo PAST GASOLINE RELATED TRAVEL DECISIONS .............. BypOtheSis 8 coo-000.000.000.00oooooooooooooooooooo Rewlts coo.oso...oooooono...oooooooooooooooooooooo Implications no.ooooooooo-oooooooooooooo0000000.... Ant101pated VS. Planned have]. oooooooooooooooooooo GASOLII'E CONDITIONS OVER Tm OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO HypomCSiB 10 oo.ooooocoooooooooooooooooooooooocoo. Rewlts OOOOOOOOOO0..0.0...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO DISRARITIES BETUEEN ANTICIPATED AND PLANNED TRAVEL .. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............. SUMY 00......O..OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOQOOOOCOOOO CONCLUSIONS .0O...0....O0.0.0.0....0.000000000000000. The Importance Of PaBt Travel ooooooooooooooooooooo Reliability of the Dependent Variable ............. Regional Impact of Changing Travel Propensity ..... BROWTIONS 0.0......0...0.0000000000000000COOOOO Policy Recommendations coocoo...ooooooooooooooooooo Stability 0f the Travel Market oooooooooooooooooooo Changing Travel HopenSj-ty oooooooooooooooooooooooo The Influence of Gasoline Conditions .............. ResearCh Recommendations ooooooooooooooooooooooa... WMCE LIMATURE OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00000000000000000000000 APMDICE 00.0.0...0......0.00.00.00.00...OOOCOOOOOOOOOCOOOOO LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Concern for Travel Time or Travel Cost in the Decision to Make a Recreational Day Trip ..................... 12 20 Reswnse by County 000000000000000000000000000000000000 20 3. Comparison of the Median Years of Education Completed by Respondents and the Pbpulation ................... 33 A. Comparison of Annual Household Income of Respondents md RWhtion by County 0000000000000000000000000000 3"" 5. Comparison of the Racial and Sexual Composition of the Salple ”d the Powhtion by County 0000000000000000 35 6. Anticipated Travel Propensity: A Comparison With coopr's Findings 0......COCOCOCCOCCCC.‘O...’........ 38 70 home I‘ve]. by AntiCipated Travel 00000000000000000000 1&0 8. The Impact of Gasoline Price by Anticipated Travel homnflt’ .....................C.................... #5 9. The Impact of Gasoline Availability by Anticipated b‘vel O...0....0..OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 1.8 10. Anticipated Travel by the Decision to Drastically Change or Cancel a Trip ............................. 5h 11. Anticipated Travel by the Choice of an Alternate hmswrt‘tion Had. 0000......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.. 55 12. Anticipated Travel by the Preclusion of a Previous “atmtion OO0.0.0....OOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOCOO00.0.0... 55 l}. Perceived Impact of Gasoline Conditions on Travel ..... 58 1“}0 Inca-e I‘ve]. by Planned Travel 000000000000000000000000 63 15. The Impact of Gasoline Availability and Price by mad h‘vel OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOQOOOO... 66 16. The Cancellation of a Trip and the Use of Alternate Transportation by the Planning of a Trip ............ 69 17. The Preclusion of a Previous Destination by the Decision "at to Tr".1 0.00.00.00.00.IOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0...... 70 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Proportion of Respondents at Each Income Level who Anti-Cipate meme Travel-OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO #1 2. Proportion of Respondents at Each Level of Perceived Impact of Gasoline Price Uho Anticipate Declining havel OOOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOCOO0......0.00.00.00.00... M 3. Proportion of Respondents at Each Level of Perceived Impact of Gasoline Availability who Anticipate mowing havel OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCO0.0.0.0000... ”6 h. Proportion of Respondents Having Made Different Numbers of Travel Decisions (Gasoline Related) vii LIST OF APPENDICES .Appgndix A. B. Interview Schedules 1. Final Interview Schedule 2. Pre-Test Interview Schedule Area of the Study and Selected Counties viii CHAPTER I SIGNIFICANCE AND OBJECTIVES Sigificance of the Stud; "1 will build a motor car for the great multi- tude. . . solowinpricethatnoman. . .willbe unable to own one and enjoy with his family the bless- ings of hours of pleasure in God's great open spaces." Henry Fordl This vision of one man, Henry Ford, completely transformed the American way of life. In a few years the "great multitude" was not only blessed with an opportunity to enjoy "God's great open spaces" but also dependent upon the vehicle through which mlch an opportunity came. he automobile quickly evolved from a playtoy of the affluent to a near-necessity of the canon laborer. Ivan in this age of space travel. the automobile maintains its position as wise mover of men for both work and play activities. John Lansing of the Survey Research Center has shown that 92% of those who travel under 200 miles for vacation and pleasure feel the automobile is the best travel mode.2 Even for trips of 500 miles or more, 68% felt the automobile was still the best means of transportation? Houghtom-Ivans and Miles found that as high as 90% of U. S. recreationists 1 3. mm, Man and Environment, (Imudom: Penguin, 1967) p. 74. 2 John 3. mm, The Travel Market: lfltlfifi, (Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, 1 5 p. . 3 Ibid., p. 1+0. travel by private automobile.“ In asking respondents to consider an ideal method of transportation for long distance family trips, McMillian had respondents rate each transportation mode on a scale from one to nine with nine representing the ideal means of travel. He found that for one-half of the respondents the automobile was close to the ideal (between eight and nine) no matter what the trip purpose or distance? McNillian's findings led him to state that: "The significant conclusion is that it (the automobile) is not only important in terms of use, but it also engenders favorable attitudes and perceptions."6 'mis favorable position of the automobile arose and has been maintained :as a result of its versatility and econoq. No other vehicle yet developed can provide the individual freedom and relative inexpense of the privately driven automobile. Recently, however, this position has been questioned through the energence of the so called "energy crises". Through the years cheap mobility has depended upon cheap fuel. At a time when fuel prices have risen drastically and fuel availability is uncertain, this basic form of mobility for the American people is questioned. This lack of certainty is especially evident in the area of pleasure travel where both the recreationist and the travel industry are highly depudent upon the mobility available through the autaobile. 1‘ U. Houghtom-lvans and J. C. Miles, "Weekend Recreational Motoring in the Countryside", Journal of the Town PM Institute, LVI (1970) p 392. "'""'""" 5 R. K. Nelillian, National Surve of Tran rtation Attitudes and Behavior : Phase I S , National Cooperative Highway fisearch Eogr- Report No. 49, p. 15. 6 Ibid., p. 15. a . A . , a _ o . . a (k I. . . . nJ . . u . . . , . Ta . v m . - . l . .. . r s . .., v . o .. _ o a . . . . I w 0 w . u A . . u _ I J. O V . . . . a h‘m d . I o . . v o m .a r. . .— v.v I O a 4 a .. . . o A v . J _ o , J C . . _ . s T . . . J m . _ v . . a . o . . . n 4 .. . x pl . r . 4. a re . A . A I r\ . 7,. , . . , . a . s v! , . . . . _ . .. r . 1 y A V . LA . .Ar . . a. . . . , ... _ .( ¢ . U I‘ a It . . . r e . . ., .- _ . .. ,t‘ , . . . (pun . . ,_ . .7. . .l n r l , . a . . a . u _ . a . II me~o During the early months of 1974 papular literature drew attention to the critical condition of the domestic travel industry as a result of gasoline conditions. 193 magazine reported in February that, "The traveling public, beset by uncertainty over flight cancellations, filling station closings and gasoline rationing schemes is staying home in the droves. As a result, the travel industry which accounts for 860 million a year in the U. S. alone, is having one of its most chilling winters. "7 Later reports showed that travel was not being hindered as much as feared, yet concern still focused on the influences gasoline conditions were having on travel. 0. 8. News and World Heart suggested in March of 197‘} that the travel behavior of tourists was possibly changing towards trips closer to home and towards more heavy use of mass transportation as a result of a concern for gasoline conditions.8 The recreation industry has been endangered not only by an inhibition to travel on the part of potential tourists but also by a threatened legislated restriction of recreational travel by a number of Congres-en who considered pleasure travel a "non-essential" use of scarse energy. Senate Bill 82589, "hergency Energy legislation”, selected recreation as one of a nuber of ”non-essential" uses of energy.9 In doing so it drew attention to the controversial issue of the place of recreation in the economy and social well being of the nation. 7 mm, February 25, 197k, p. 37. 8 H. S. lewa and World Report, March ll, 197‘}, pp. 34 R 37. 9 United States Department of the Interior, "hergency Energy legislation”, In 0. S. Senate Co-ittee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Hm, Washington, D. 0., 197‘}. In his article, "The Economics of Leisure", George Souls comments upon the importance of the automobile to leisure activities. He writes, "When the #8 hour work week became general during World War I, the automobile became virtually a necessity in getting to and from places where recreation facilities were available."10 With the recognition of the automobile as the link between the recreationist and the tourist region, it is obvious changing pleasure travel will influence both the individual as well as the recreation industry. The degree of influence will vary with individual as well as regional characteristics. It is this potential difference within individuals and regions that this research effort wishes to address itself. Prior to the winter of 197A and the Arab oil embargo the world seemed unaware or at least unconcerned with the possible affects of scarce fuel. Since 1955 U. S. transportation energy consumption has grown an average of 4.1% per year.11 Two periods in history set them- selves apart as being times when pleasure travel was restricted. During the first years of the Great Depression businesses dependent upon pleasure travel suffered serious losses. Seasonal hotels, for example, showed a decline of 75% in receipts between 1929 and 1933.12 By 193%, however, the American Automobile Association estimated travel had been restored 10 George Souls, "ibonosics of Leisure", The Annals of the American Acadggl of Political Science, CCCXIII, (September, 1957) p. 21. ll James J. Hutch, Trans rtation Ener Use in the United States: A Statistical Histo 12 J. F. Steiner, Recreation in the De ession, (New York: Social Science Research Council, 19375P. 95. to the 1930 level.13 Pleasure travel was also restricted during brief periods in World War II when gasoline was rationed. Both of these periods are generally viewed as crises situations in which scarce fuel is not the limiting factor. No studies were undertaken which portrayed relation- ships between gasoline conditions and travel for pleasure. Many have argued as Seneca did that the increase in income and leisure time in the past has reduced the importance of travel costs and distance as traditional restraints to travel.1“ As a result, little research has been carried out concerning the relationship between energy and mobility. As a consequence, little is known about the relation- ships between energy and travel behavior or the travel industry. It is obvious that recent escalations in gasoline price and sporadic gasoline shortages will undoubtedly have an affect of some kind on future travel behavior. Since the winter of 1974 a number of spontaneous research efforts have been made to monitor possible trends in vacation travel and their eminent impact upon the travel industry. his research desires to continue that investigation in terms of changing travel propensity. Objectives of the Study The objectives of this study are basically two-fold. The first and primary objective is to investigate the influence of perceived gasoline conditions have on expected travel propensity. The second objective is to draw implications from the findings which will aid in an 13 Ibid., p. 95. 1“ J. J. Seneca, J. P. Davidson, and F. G. Adams, "An Analysis of Recreational Use of the T.V.A. lakes", Land Economics XLIV. understanding of how changing travel prepensity will influence both the individual recreationist as well as the recreation region. This study is intended for use as a forerunner to future research, but it is anticipated it will also prove useful to area governments for both planning and promotion purposes. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction This literature review provides the foundation upon which this research effort is built. The majority of studies reviewed are descriptive in nature having been undertaken by governmental bodies either as a means to aid highway development or tourist promotion. In these studies a specific distinction is often lacking as to purpose of travel. It has been suggested by some that the concepts developed in general transportation studies are applicable to outdoor recreation travel.1 Others feel that there are fundamental differences between recreational and non-recreational travel.2 Lansing lists three principal classes or reasons for a distinct classification for non-business travel: First is the desire for social prestige, second is the desire for personal gratification, and third is the desire to visit friends and relatives.3 An example of how distinctions between recreational and non-recreational 1 c. E. Tiedmann and D. Milstein, "Travel Models: Methods and Models,“ Michigan Outdoor Recreation Demand Study 1, (1966) pp- “-33. R. I. Wolfe, Parameters of Recreational Travel in Ontario: A Pro ess Report, Ontario Department of Highways, Report R. B. III, 1 6y p0 10 2 3 John B. Lansing, "The Effects of Migration and Personal Effective- ness on Long-Distance Travel," Transportation Research, II, (1968) p. 329. travel influence behavior differently can be seen in the so-called gravity model. The gravity model is a standard highway model which incorporates the basic frictional character of distance.“ In recreational travel it was found that distance does not always act as a disutility. Wolfe, for instance, reported that "for a certain quite considerable distance . . . the friction of distance not only disappears but becomes, as it were reversed; . . . the further peOple go the further they want to go."5 As a result of these probable distinctions between recreational and non-recreational travel it seems necessary to limit the discussion when possible to non-work travel and to recognize the possible variation in characteristics between work and non-work travel. Clawson considers the recreation experience to consist of five phases: anticipation, travel to the site, on site experiences, travel back, and recollection. This study although emphasising the two travel phases recognizes the importance of the remaining three phases to both the recreational experience and the travel experience. The anticipation stage is especially important to travel decisions. It is here an individual reflects upon his motivations, prior experiences, degree of spatial integration, social status and values.6 These factors along with financial and time constraints usually form the basis from which travel decisions are made. A David Mercer, "The Role of Perception in the Recreation Experience: A Review and Discussion," Journal of Leisure Research, III, (1971) p. 26A. 5 R. I. Wblfe, "Vacation Homes and the Gravity Model,".Ekistics, 17h, (1970) p. 353. 6 Mercer, op. cit., p. 26%. 9 Costs and Benefits of Recreational Travel Hohl defines the "price of travel" as, "the level of service 7 II which the traveler experiences or most endure. Price is, therefore, the combined difficulty of travel, required time for travel, hazard and discomfort of travel, as well as the expense of travel. Each of these are evaluated by the individual motorist in terms of his own perception. Therefore, Wohl suggests that on deciding whether or not to make a trip or on what route to take, or on what mode of travel to use, travelers are guessing or estimating in advance two things: (1) what is the trip worth; and (2) how easy, cheap and quick will it be to travel?8 An individual's behavior in part is, therefore, dependent upon his perception of the existing conditions. Intuitively the traveler is estimating how easy, comfortable, convenient, quick and cheap the trip will be. If he perceives a trip to be too expensive, or too time consuming or too uncomfortable then he will not make the trip. Obviously, perception may not correlate with reality. It is important to distinguish influences upon both perception and behavior. Hartgen and Tanner in their studies on the effect of traveler attitudes in travel made decisions discuss the importance of attitudes in travel behavior: Each individual has associated with him a set of needs defined by the roles he assumes in his interaction with other persons and groups. Through experience, individuals and 7 Martin Wohl, "Demand, Cost, Price and Capacity Relationships Applied to Travel Forecasting," Highway Research Record, XXXVIII, (1963) p. 1:0. 8 Ibid., p. #5. 10 groups develop both awareness of and attitudes toward alternative courses of action that might satisfy needs. Through awareness, a person or group recognises the existence of those particular actions offering some potential for satisfying needs. Attitudes, on the other hand, are the pro-established tendencies for responses toward any of the courses of action identified by awareness. Attitudes and awareness, therefore, aid individuals by identifying activities and actions that satisfy needs.9 In a study on the influence of gasoline price and availability it is important, therefore, to identify the role of perceptions, basic attitudes in the form of pro-established tendencies, and any new elements of awareness. As Hartgen and Tanner suggest, "Experience from each trip may result in conscious or subconscious changes in the traveler's attitude, thus affecting his subsequent travel decisions."10 As has been mentioned numerous times previously gasoline price has not before been considered a.major deterent to travel. At a time when there is an awareness of increased price and questionable availability of gasoline, it is important to understand how changing attitudes and perceptions relate to basic travel decisions. Of particular interest would be the influence of past experiences, the impact of gasoline price on travel expense and the impact of gasoline availability on travel hazard or discomfort. Past research efforts on the cost of travel indicate basic relationships with both monetary and non-monetary expenses. Numerous 9 D. T. Hartgen and G. H. Tnnner, "Investigations of the Effect of Traveler Attitudes in a Model of Mode-Choice Behavior," Highway Research Record, CCCLXIX, (1971) p. 2. 1° Ibid., p. 2. 11 highway studies have been undertaken to provide information on the efficient use of both time and fuel resources.11 It has been found that distance can generally be viewed as having a negative effect on the desirability of a good gravity mode.12 A distance of #00 miles was the point at which travel costs were generally larger than accomodation expenses.13 As was mentioned, however, distance in some cases has been shown to be a positive benefit of travel. Travel time has also been shown to be an important component of travel. It was observed that time saved and income significantly affected the value of travel time savings by motorists, and that the benefits of travel time saved differ significantly according to trip purpose.1u When respondents were asked the reason for choosing a particular vacation route, 22% indicated a factor of convenience, 61% a shorter travel time while no one indicated lower gas or oil costs.15 Koegh reported similar findings to these with the exception that 6% of his sample chose a particular route because it was cheapest.16 11 Paul J. Claffey, "Time and Fuel Consumption for Highway- User Benefit Studies," Public Roads, XXII, (April, 1960) pp. 16-21. 12 c. E. Tiedmann and D. Milstein, PP. u-53. 13 G. D. Boggs and R. McDaniel, Characteristics of Commercial Resorts and Recreational Travel Patterns in Southern Ontario, Ontario Department of Highways, Report RR133, (1968) p. 59. 1“ c. Thomas and Gordon Thompson, "Value of Time Saved by Trip Purpose," Highway Research Record, CCCLXIX, (1971) p. 10k. 15 Ibideg p. 1090 16 B. M. Keogh, "The Role of Travel in the Recreational Day Trip," (unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1969) p0 2&0 12 TABLE 1 CONCERN FOR TRAVEL TIME OR TRAVEL COST IN THE DECISION TO MAKE A RECREATIONAL nu TRIP17 Frequency Percentage Travel cost of more concern 12 h Travel time of more concern 85 25 Equal concern for travel cost and travel time 71 21 Neither travel cost nor travel time considered 167 50 TOTAL 335 100 Uhen respondents were asked to indicate their concern for travel time or travel cost in the decision to make a recreational trip (see Table l), 50% indicated they considered neither travel cost nor travel time in their travel decision. Of those who did consider travel time or travel cost important very few considered travel cost of more concern; while approximately one-quarter considered travel time alone oflgggg' concern and one-fifth applied equal concern to travel time and travel cost. It appears that travel time is distinctly more of an influence on recreational trip distance than is travel cost. During March of 1974 Cooper undertook a telephone survey to determine if individuals were going to alter their vacation patterns as 17 B. M. Keogh, "The Role of Travel in the Recreational Day Trip," (unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1969) p. 2#. Cited by Barry O'Rourke, "Travel in the Recreational Experience-eA Literature Review," Journal of Leisure Research, VI, (197%) p. lh2. 13 a result of gasoline conditions.18 He reported that for the most part travel patterns were not going to be altered as much as some had feared (see Table 6). The impact of gasoline conditions was observed in the area of trip cancellations and vacation travel plans. Ten percent of the individuals responding indicated they had cancelled a trip in the preceding three months and three-fifths of these reported the reason to be anticipated gasoline shortages.19 Over one-third of the respondents reported they had decided not to travel "this year". Of these 17% noted gasoline shortageras the main reason.20 Pepulation Characteristics The influence of socio-economic variables on travel behavior is the focus of a number of studies. Income, age and lifestyle have all been shown to influence travel for pleasure. A brief review of findings will provide a background for the hypotheses used in this research effort. A number of studies have reported a significant impact of family characteristics on travel. The household as the basic generator of trip productions is an important area of travel research. It has been shown that family recreational patterns are associated with family stage.21 Lansing noted a correlation between a low frequency of travel and families with a head of about thirty because of the presence of young children.22 18 Rollin Cooper, "An Attitude Survey of Vacation Travel Plans for 197h," (unpublished report, University of Wisconsin, 197#). 19 Ibid., p. 3.~ 2° Ibid., p. 3. 21 H. D. Sessoms, "An.Analysis of Selected Variables Affecting Out- door Recreation Patterns," Social Forces, XXXXII, (1963) p. 113. 22 Lansing, op. cit., p. 331. 1“ Others have suggested that the presence Of young children tends to reduce the number of trips taken and makes the recreation pattern more home bound.23 Family cohesion appears to affect travel significantly. It was found that the greater the proportion of people's half-dozen closest relatives who live at a distance, the more often people travel. The location of friends appears to have a similar but slightly smaller 2% affect on travel. The significance of age level in travel appears to fluctuate with the purpose of the trip. ORRRC study report #20 indicated that those who engaged in automotive riding often for sightseeing and relaxation increased with age while Lansing reported that there is a 25,26 general decline in frequency of travel with advancing age. This decline is not regular, however. There is also an observed tendency for people over 65 to tend not to like to drive at high speeds, and hence, prefer travel by common carrier.27 The affect of income on recreational travel is generally considered 28 positive. Upper income individuals travel more than lower. Low income 23 Roger Vickerman, "The Demand for Non-Werk Travel," Journal of Transport Economics and Pblicy, VI, (1972) p. 187. 2a Lansing, op. cit., p. 331. 25 U. S. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, Participation in Outdoor Recreation: Factors Affecting Demand Among American Adults,” Report #20, p. 22. 26 Lansing, op. cit., p. 331. 27 John Lansing and Dwight Blood, The Chan Travel Market, (Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, 196%; p. #3. 28 mains, OE. Cite, p. 3310 15 car owners actually use their vehicles less often and over lower mileages recreationally than high income car owners.29 It has also been shown that the practice of dividing one's vacation time between two or more shorter vacation trips rises in frequency with income.30 This finding is suggested to account for the small difference in duration of vacation trips between lower and higher income families as well as the absence of large differences in distance and cost per trip as income increases. The influence of population characteristics on travel would be summarized by saying that on an individual basis recreational trip making is thus biased towards working males in the younger age groups, with some significant differentiation between occupational socio-economic groups,31 and that among socio-economic variables income is by far the most important determinant of vacation travel.32 Summary The following is a summary of the reviewed findings along with their perceived relevance to this study: 1. Both awareness and attitudes are important components of an individual's attempt to satisfy needs. It is, therefore, useful to investigate an individual's perception of the existing influence of gasoline conditions on travel behavior 29 B. Rodgers, "Leisure and Recreation," Urban Studies, VI, (1969) P. 371. 30 U. 8. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, op. cit., p. #h. 31 Vickerman, op. cit., p. 18?. 32 U. s. ORRRC, op. cit., p. to. 2. 3. 5. 16 Travel time has been shown to be more of an influence on trip distance than is travel cost. It would be beneficial to investigate if travel cost in the form of higher gasoline prices is actually causing a decline in pleasure travel. Recent studies have suggested gasoline conditions are not greatly affecting vacation travel. It is necessary to test this hypothesis as well as determine if some individuals or regions are affected more than others. Income has been shown to have a positive effect on travel. It would be advantageous to determine in what ways income level affects both the perception of gasoline conditions as well as future travel behavior. Age and family stage have been shown to affect recreational travel in a.number of ways. It is possible these two factors would also contribute to the impact of current conditions. As a result of the literature reviewed it is possible to provide a hypothesis which logically pursue the possible relationships between gasoline conditions and travel propensity. Unfortunately it appears there is still a need to answer elementary questions concerning the relationships mentioned prior to investigating the exact nature of the relationships. The hypotheses in the following chapter are, therefore, general in nature. They provide necessary links in the understanding of the influence of gasoline conditions on travel, but do not provide definite answers to specific questions. CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN, RIPOTRESES AND CHARACTERISTICS 01' m SAMPLE POPULATION Research Basin he Instrument Data used in this research effort was a portion of the information gathered by the Department of Park and Recreation Resources in an extensive twin study. he instrument itself (see Appendix A1) is a rather large and complex assortment of travel related measures. As a result of the instrument's length, its necessary complexity, its requirement for visual aids, as well as many recognised benefits, the personal interview technique was considered the best data collection proudure. The instruent was cross-sectional in nature (collecting all data at one point in time) and thus the survey was limited in its ability to measure past conditions, future conditions, or prevalent trends. This inability to measure conditions in and between time periods in many respects complicates the achievement of the objectives presented in Chapter I. Pretest A single pretest (Appendix A2) was conducted in the East lensing, Hichigan area. Twenty-one adult respondents were chosen by means of a chunk sample. As can be seen through comparison of the pretest with 17 - \J ,7. a I s .i 18 the final instrument, a number of changes were made as a result of the pretest findings. the finding which demands the greatest emphasis is that the question of gasoline shortages was found to be a controversial issue dependent upon whether large oil companies had manipulated reserves to contrive a shortage. As a result, an individual who felt there was a ”manipulated“ shortage had a tendency to respond that there (1) was no shortage at all, and that (2) his travel was not at all hindered. In many instances where this condition was true, further questioning revealed that recreation travel in fact had recently been restricted. The respondent, however, was at first unwilling to shit to a decline in travel since it was a result of a "contrived" shortage. Although this bias is not completely eliminated in the final instrument, its impact is hopefully minimised. 122$! Theregicndesignatedasthesampleareawasbasedonboth traveler origin studies and the region's travel promotion agency's . expenditure patterns. This area as shown in Appendix B covers north- eastern Illinois, northern Indiana, and northern and central Ohio. A total of 1‘06 counties were designated. This division represents approximately 60! of Ohio's population. 755 of Illinois' population and 80! of Indiana's population. Each of the counties in the dominated areas were arranged in order of the 1970 penulation from the largest to the .allest. From this ordering the list was divided into ten strata with approximately the one number of individuals per strata. from each strata one county was then randomly chosen to represent that strata. As can be observed from Table 2, three separate strata are contained in Cook County, v A .1 1 \r r . , p 1 ,g.‘ -. - .4.‘ l , ¢ . .— ‘e ‘ e I ' . w . ' D a "V ' .x .. x. 1‘! ‘e'rl'f . - r' _ \ . . Ie"- ) “ ‘ .. b s _., - ~ q \ v' t.“ IA.: . . . . -._, . \ . I. 7' 19 Illinois (Chicago), which is a result of its comparatively large population. In the same way Cuyahoga County, Ohio (Cleveland), was the only representative of the fourth strata. It should be mentioned, that those first four strata because of their predominant size are not randomly chosen. Intra-county sampling was done by means of a random selection of households using the most recent telephone directories of each county. Bach interviewer was given a list of mass and addresses selected from the directeries and was instructed to contact by phone the first 60% of the list and arrange a personal interview. he shortcomings of a telefione generated pcpulation include the exclusion of many of the very poor and very rich who do not have phone service or do not have listed numbers as well as inadequate coverage of the transient and many students. It was felt, however, that the pcpulation generated through the phone directories would not present a bias too great to satisfy the objectives of the project. Implementation of the Inetruent Interviewing was done through the aid of appronimately forty women interviewers. Each of those women was required to attend a four hour training session in which principles and guidelines discussed in the Survey Research Center's Interviewer's Hanual were presented.1 ness training sessions as well as mbsequeat interviewer evaluations one week later were finished in late Hay, 1971+. Data collection itself was complete early in July, 1971.. 1 University of Michigan Institute for Social Research, Inter- viewer's llanual (Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, 1W .‘l ! '.‘ .v ..‘-- . I z. . “ ‘ ‘ O > ' n~ ‘ ' “' ‘ v _ 1 ' . . _ .. . - - . | "~_‘ -‘ e . ' I ~ I I ‘ I ~ , e ' I ’ ‘ . . . k , e v .... - ' w u u v e ’l _ . . . - . -\. p - . i J ~ ‘ I ‘ .r‘ ._ a. i _ . ’ n ' '1 " ‘l I 4 . V J _ _ _ s t - - . . ' - ’ v A . I x . u. . , , , c a. .. ‘ r' ' ‘ \‘ : ‘ . ‘ § -.s‘ ' ‘ 7:” ~ ‘. V . A. . . ‘31 . . v c _ ’ . a . e ‘- 1", 1 l‘ l 7 ‘ ~ .‘ ‘ . c ' - \- ‘ _ ' f' . at, o . > ' h" ‘ . .J , . -V ' .. -.. . . . e -: x " {'9 ." e‘ i ' . ' ‘ p v ' H. ’ a '1‘ I. \' J A ‘ ‘ . . ‘ - . s a I .- I 4 . a Q - " U ' . i I ' | _. , t A. 4-e-!o ‘ . . ’ n . - "v ~- v ' " ' (' . A . -- ‘ 0‘ ‘ a O -a-o Q I: ~.- ~ .7. n. O O—- - - " ‘. -' a ‘ f - " ‘ . a I L‘ \ ' 3‘ 3‘ _ . _ 3 -, p. .« ., — I C ' .J .. , 4 u. _‘ . . I . s .o. . ..- (J.-. ‘ O f , . . I . ., usa- ». -’- ' ' 0 -— .’ “‘ v D . e _ ‘ V r - r - a ~,' ' e t A . ‘ ) s . -. A '1 , - Us- A. e- m .e , _ 1 . V .- I! 1 -.J. ‘1' ~ ,t I“ a ' . ‘.. , “e . v. .. l . -b I I no a -- - ' 4 " - e/o . g :51 _e ' "I. . . u 4 e u , I ‘h( '.\ 5's -- J 1.1- - 1 ' . n‘, . .A ‘I , - v I - {I ‘H, -) e . . -‘ .‘ ' ..- ) ~‘ " - > - - . ‘ . A‘ V m- -1 O - ‘ - .J . h u - o - . --. c C b A w- e. . e. - -( ‘, .«oo-u -’ ‘9 an .mn on em corona: osno Johnna .. x uodm R or 88383 unused Jase: in and: on son Hedonism oaofisfl .8535 BE amém on so assassinate.» oEo .533 H? and: m: 8 ooeaos ans 683 as 5.0m ms was enonsaeaofi ensscaH .823. > as on an m3 Essences oEo .emonsro 3 Earn one 8: canons ascend .nooo HHH .2 .H comm concomom caveman—co sauna H309 5.3 Humans—Hum 5550 Hosanna 2.52093 goo Hm Hmzommmm Nag 0 /\v1‘ . l...’ R ’1“ 21 Table 2 gives the total number of names and addresses drawn for each county along with the number of interviews completed and the response rate in each county. The original expectation was that each interviewer would complete the first 60% of his interview contacts. The survey would thus maintain a 60! response rate. However, considerable difficulty was encountered by the interviewers in reaching their quota of interviews. For this reason, additional households were randomly selected in seven counties. Several reasons explain the lack of response encountered. First there was a hesitancy on the part of many households in urban areas to allow strangers in their homes even after the purpose of the survey was explained in detail. In addition to this, many of the households selected were never successfully contacted. Cook County alone had 156 selected households which were not reached. Another reason for the lack of response can be found in the number of limitations placed upon the interviewers. They were asked to interview an equal number of men and women. Respondents also had to be living in a household where the head was twentybfive years old or older and had to have been.married during their lifetime. .All of these conditions contributed to the inability to obtain the planned level of response. 22:2: The data.Obtained from the survey was coded on the same forms used in the interviews. The information was then punched onto computer cards and verified. Data was then transferred to a magnetic tape where it was put on storage in the Michigan State university Computer Center. Analysis was done by means of stored programs described in .- v 0‘ u ‘ ‘ e " O I . ,_ . V I , ‘ u , D u. \ . ‘ . . 7 e .» I, I. ‘ .\ . s l . I . I P A .v ' r 4.. r‘ ' ‘. A ‘ ‘1. a- " ‘ a.‘ ‘i ‘ ‘ i ~ . . . . ., e . --- l - s . A ~‘ I‘. ~O ‘v H“ . . .~s\. - ‘ ’ . . . . . 1 5 . . A — - l l I x f ~~ \. I . do u ".r" ..J ~- ‘ I I '| ,- .. .’~ V r , 1 ._-. h l’ ‘ 'u I .L". -- V _ .1‘ H'- .. - , . 22 Statistical Packagg for Social Sciences.2 Since the meamres obtained through the survey instrument were ordinal in nature, statistical 3 measures used were limited to chi square, and Kendall's tau. These measures are tests for the presence of significant relationships and should not be interpreted as showing causality. Concepts The following is a listing of all major concepts dealt with in this study. Discussion includes both the significance of the concept as well as the tool or tools used in its meawrement. Travel Proansity Travel for pleasure is that travel undertaken for which there is no formal obligation. This study will concentrate on automotive pleanre travel. his decision is based on two basic observations. First, the automobile is by far the Nor mode of recreation travel. As many as 90% of northern Michigan recreationists arrive by means of the automobile.“ Secondly, the very intro-regional nature or the study eliminates transportation modes normally used for long distance travel. A trip is defined as a Journey in which the respondent is at least once 100 miles from his permanent residence. Distance for all 2 Norman lie, Dale Bent, and Hadlai Hull, Statistical Resign for the Social Sciences, (New York: hedraw- 11, 97 . 3 Hubert n. Blalock, Jr., Social Statistics, 2nd edition, (New York : lchraw-Hill, 1972 . 1' Uel Blank, and Clare Conn, Guidelines for Tourin-Recreation in Hichi an's U r Peninmi'l'i, Upper mu Co-ittee on Area Progress, (1&6) p. 15. 23 trips was measured as a straight line distance except for the need to circumvent large bodies of water. Travel propensity, as used in this study, is the inclination to travel and is inferred from past travel behavior. Three major factors are usually involved in describing travel prOpensity: (1) frequency of travel: (2) distance traveled: and (3) the duration of a particular trip. In a cross-sectional instrument such.as that used in this study, distance as well as duration of past trips can be obtained with a reasonable degree of reliability. Trip frequency or the number of trips per year is difficult to measure satisfactorily since it relies on the respondent's summation of all trips over a year usiag*reca11 alone. For this reason, the frequency of travel was expressed in terms of major divisions of trip frequency. The respondent was asked if he took at least one trip evepp pear for the last five years and if he traveled at all last year. .A major consideration of this study is the influence gasoline prices and availability have had on travel propensity. In order to determine a.change in travel propensity it was:necessary to measure anticipated future travel patterns or future travel propensity. This type of measurement is adequately gained in a longitudinal study which was beyond the scope of this research project. It was, therefore, necessary to rely on the respondents' expectations and plans for future travel. Each respondent was asked at the end of the interview to indicate if his travel patterns in terms of distance, duration, and number of trips would be‘gppg,.lgpp, or about the same during the next six:months in comparison to travel last year. Thiswmeasure is limited not only by an individual's inability to anticipate future I v . A v e~. .. w a. ‘ ,- § o n ‘ n O . ‘\ _ n. a. J ,._ _ . ..' n b‘ 1 (Jan -8 3 J -. J "I l . , V .A ‘0‘ I ,- ' 'n v l ‘ a! - . 4 \fi. . h 'J . . ‘ . ‘ ., . n . . I ‘ _ .‘u f - ' |-. . ,. A e . I _ ‘ I! ... I , i . o'" ' l A-« .- . - t- ' I “ ' i F4 ' . A .. _ A -a ». e - H I e \. ‘. ,‘. a 3' ' “< ~ . . ,g‘ h a ’ s . 4‘ ‘\ _ _ . ‘k ._ . . ’I I ’ A4 - —v~- C e a . - l I I v - .. . ', _ .1 J. e . u ' , I v “ ‘ ‘ s w p ‘ ‘l . — ‘7 ._ f " a _._ ~ . .~r i . g m ', u. a . ~ . ; In ‘ . ., , - ‘ a. s . D.. ‘ . e - . , -‘ ,. . ,. _ - e g V- a I‘ I I I . 1 x' ‘ ml. ' I . . , . - » 1‘ . . at conditions, but also by his inability to carry out expectations. Bull, for example, has shown that leisure activities have the greatest error of all daily activities in the amount of time individuals estimate they will spend on them.5 Possibly a more accurate means of measuring future travel propensity is by recording those trips which were currently planned. Unfortunately trip planning at the time of the survey was probably not complete and there are always those individuals and trips which are not planned in advance. As a result, uncontrollable biases are inherent in the use of planned travel as a measure for future propensity. It is obvious that seaming future travel propensity by means of trips currently planned is not necessarily any more reliable than expected travel propensity. It is hoped that the use of each will provide a measure which when the prevailing limitations are understood will indicate a trend, not an exact meanre of change. Therefore, each form of future travel propensity will be correlated separately so any possible variation between expected and planned travel can be observed. Influence of Gasoline Price and Availabilit; The possible influence gasoline conditions have on travel is of primary concern to this research effort. The two dimensions of current gasoline influence, availability and price are, therefore, distinguished. Each respondent was told that, "gasoline availability has to do with whether you can get as much gas as you need when you want it and gasoline 5 Neil Bull, "Prediction of Future Daily Behaviors: An hpiricel fissure of leisure", Journal of Leisure Research, IV, (1972) pp. 12:. e V . . a . 1 l a. . ,7 p . I \ . 's O .J e. r ' O . . e . . I a e- .- , . .4 e e l o 0-. l' e ‘U u as I e. 4 V I ~‘l .. l a f' . t. a r.. ‘.s A - v ‘- s - e A e - _ . I >AI 25 price is the amount you have to pay per gallon of gas". Numerous places throughout the interview the respondent was asked to distinguish between the influence of gasoline prices and gasoline availability in response to a particular situation. A second perspective fro. which to view the relationship between travel and the ispact of gasoline is over tine. If an individual perceives the situation to be getting worse, his action sight be different from an individual who sees the situation as getting better even if both assess the current situation at the sale level. Tb seasure this possible trend, the respondent was asked to assess the affect gasoline prices and availability had on his travel during three separate periods of tine; six sonths pg, 92!, and six sonths froa now, with the leasure being calculated fros the direction of change over the described periods of tile. Again, it needs to be esphasised that the cross—sectional survey is not the best sedius to gain such a.neasure. Assess-ant of Place The use of the seaatic differential developed by Hyersé sakes available a.neasure which represents the gross attractiveness that a particular region has in the mind of the respondent. This evaluation, although a subjective place-out, assesses the respondent's value of an area. Its use is lisited to detersining the isplications of what any sodifications in travel propensity will have on the Great Lakes region. 6 Paul B. Myers, "Decision Making and Travel Behavior: A Hid- western Study", (unpublished Doctor's Dissertation, Michigan State University, l97h). 26 gagional Desirability In addition to the use of Hyers' semantic differential, the respondent is asked at the conclusion of all gasoline related questions how he would evaluate each state's desirability as a travel destination colpered to a hypothetical evaluation last year. In asking this decision at the conclusion of all gasoline related questions, as well as all questions related to travel plans and expected travel propensity, it is assumed the respondent will take into consideration such factors as change in travel propensity, ispact of gasoline conditions, and other econosic conditions. This seasure lay, therefore, show the influence of such conditions. It is consequently both broad and weak, butitishopeditwouldagainahowatreadandthusopenthewayfor a sore thorough investigation. Past Gasoline Related Travel Decisions The iaportance of past actions in future behavior has been.well doculented.7 The concept of propensity 1. based on this behavioral principal. Pest gasoline related decisions say have great bearing on future decisions. For this reason the respondent was asked a series of questions concerning past gasoline associated travel experiences. Included in the list of situations was the cancellation or drastic chase in a trip, the decision to use sons fore of trangrtation other than the autoeobile, and whether or not he views a past destination as being Ee_cluded as a result of gasoline related conditions. his concluding question, although not necessarily a past experience, is assused to be 7 D. T. Hartgen and G. B. Tanner, "Investigations of the Effect of Traveler Attitudes in a Model of lode-Choice Behavior", Highwg Research Record, 0601111, (1971) pp. l-l‘t. 27 a decision related to past experiences and as such nay possibly be an influence in future propensity. Mound Factors A nunber of co-only used background factors were collected and used in the analysis. These included: age, sex, incone, age of the oldest child, and county of residence. Incone was chosen as a representa- tive of social and econonic status because of the basic econonic nature of gasoline influences and also because of its co-on usage in travel studies. Bmtheses The postulates outlined below represent the fundnental relation- ships hypothesised through the application of the literature. Bach hypothesis is given in both its conceptual and operational forn. It will be noted that the hypotheses are presented in pairs with one representing a possible relationship with anticipated travel while the other represents a possible relationship with planned travel. This is done to facilitate a conparison between the two seasures of future propensity. In the sue way, the ispact of gasoline availability and gasoline price are presented individually to allow for future conparison. The hypotheses are structured in a way to draw attention to relationships existing with declining travel propensity rather than rising propensity. no intention is to concentrate on factors influencing a decline in “n.1e 28 one Past travel studies have shown that incone is positively related to pleasure travel. That is, as incone increases travel for pleasure also increases.8 It is anticipated that future travel propensity will also display a positive relationship with incone. This would be true for both anticipated travel and planned travel. 1. Conceptual: There is a positive relationship between incone and anticipated travel propensity. Research: Higher proportions of persons in the lower incose level will anticipate trip frequency, trip distance and trip duration to dininish than persons in the upper levels. 2. Conceptual: There is a positive relationship between incose and plsnned travel. Research: higher proportions of persons in the upper incone level will have a trip planned than persons in the lower levels and higher proportions of persons in the lower incone level will have decided not to travel than persons in the upper incone levels. Influence of Gasoline Price and Gasoline Availability The recent drastic increases in gasoline price as well as sporatic gasoline shortages are anticipated to adversely affect respondents' future travel plans. Therefore, the greater an individual perceived gasoline availability and price to affect his travel, the sore likely he would be to anticipate travel to decrease in the future and the less likely he would be to have a trip planned in the future. 8 lensing, John B., "The Iffects of Migration and Personal Effectiveness on Long-Distance Travel", Transpgrtation Research, Vol 2, ’0 n... 29 3. Conceptual: There is a negative relationship between the influence of gasoline price and anticipated travel propensity. Research: Higher proportions of persons indicating the hnpact of gasoline price on travel to be great will anticipate trip frequency, trip distance, and trip duration to dininish than persons indicating the ispact of price to be snall. h. Conceppual: There is a negative relationship between the influence of gasoline price and planned travel. Research: Higher proportions of persons indicating the inpact of gasoline price on travel to be great will not have a trip planned and will have decided not to travel than persons indicating the inpact of price to be ssall. 5. Conceptual: There is a negative relationship between the influence of gasoline availability and anticipated travel proponsity. Research: Higher proportions of persons indicating the ispact of gasoline availability on travel to be great will anticipate trip frequency, trip distance, and trip duration to dininish than persons indicating the ispact of price to be alall. 6. Conceptual: There is a.negative relationship between the influence of gasoline availability and planned travel. Research: Higher proportions of persons indicating the inpact of gasoline availability on travel to be great will not have a trip planned and will have decided not to travel than persons indicating the ispact of price to be snall. Punt Gasoline Related Travel Decisions Experiences fros past trips any result in conscious or subconscious changes in attitudes which will in turn affect subsequent travel decisions. ..- 30 It is anticipated that the individual who because of adverse gasoline conditions has sade decisions changing past travel behavior is likely also to change in some manner his future behavior as well. Thus individuals who have cancelled trips, chosen alternate transportation nodes, or recognized certain travel destinations as being precluded are hypothesized to be expecting as well as planning to travel less in the future. 7. Conceptual: There is a.negative relationship between past gasoline related travel decisions against travel and anticipated travel propensity. Research: Higher proportions of persons having cancelled a trip, chosen an alternative node of travel, or precluded a previous destinap tion will anticipate trip frequency, trip distance, and trip duration to dininish than persons not having sade past gasoline related travel decisions. 8. Conceptual: There is a negative relationship between past gasoline related travel decisions against travel and planned travel. Research: Higher preportions of persons having cancelled a trip, chosen an alternative node of travel, or precluded a previous destinap tion will.not have a trip planned and will have decided not to travel than persons not having sade past gasoline related travel decisions. Gasoline Conditions Over Tine It was anticipated that an individual's perception of future conditions in cosparison to present conditions would influence his travel plans. A person who felt gasoline conditions would affect his sore g; sonths fros now than they affect his Euntlp would hypothetically anticipate as well as plan to travel less than a person who felt conditions would affect his to a lesser extent in the future. 31 9. Concgptual: Persons who perceive the ispact of gasoline conditions to be getting worse are sore likely to anticipate a decrease in travel propensity than persons who perceive conditions to be isproving. Research: Higher prOportions of persons indicating the ispact of gasoline conditions to be getting worse will anticipate trip frequency, trip distance, and trip duration to dininish than persons indicating conditions are isproving. 10. Conceptual: Persons who perceive the ispact of gasoline conditions to be getting worse are less likely to have trips planned than persons who perceive conditions to be isproving. Research: Higher proportions of persons indicating the ispact of gasoline conditions to be getting worse will.not be planning a trip and will have decided not to travel than persons indicating conditions are isproving. Characteristics of the Scale Poglation In his dissertation Myers conducted a.thorough.investigation of the representativeness of the population saspled in relation to the total area population.9 The following is a but: M of his findings on educational achievesent, incose level, and racial cosposition. Education Table 3 contains a.cosparison between sale and fesale respondents in the various counties in terns of education. It appears a disparity exists in at least two counties where the level of the respondents' last year of school cospleted was considerably higher than the populations' 9 Myers, op. cit., pp. 55-60. 32 This is a result sost probably of a bias introduced in the sampling procedure as well as one introduced by the interviewers in locating their respondents. In general, however, it appears the sasple population does reasonably represent the general population. .1292; Annual household incose is the second factor Myers used to seasure the representativeness of the sasple. Teble h contains three separate figures on the annual incose for each county. The first is the seas annual incose level while the second is an adjusted 197# projection cosputad through the use of a.national average increase between 1970 and 197k. The third figure is the seas level reported by respondents in each county. The Table shows a consistent trond for the sssples' incose level to be higher than the 1970 seen but lower than 197# pro- Jections. Myers concluded fros the above inforsstion that the represents, tiveness of the sasple is not easily detersined through incose as a result of the fact that adjusted levels for each county are not available and the realization that 1970 figures are already outdated.10 It, however, can be noted that the levels reported in the study do not deviate greatly fros either the county or regional levels. Race The sasple population's racial cosposition as sussarised in Table 5 deviates rather highly fros the 1970 census figures for each county. This is a result of saspling procedure, the ssall nusber of households 10 H’."., 02. cite. ’0 56s 33 .03 .33 .noflniooo-nflo 3.388 on. naaoon £350 on» «o 32.8 .u .0 o.- ~.3 0.3 ~.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 0.3 $333.58 3.3 ~.3 0.3 n.3 0.3 5.3 n.3 n.3 cannon «seas-oh 3.3 0.3 «.3 0.3 0.3 ~.3 3.3 3.3 escaped-mom 5.3 3.3 «.3 0.3 n .3 93 i3 i3 one!» «node: dough cabs: sol-moan unison soon.” sodas: amino loco hon—poo has ZOHHSER a a: Saga Hm Eco league— ho a Sun: a .3 3330 "l‘gs‘lte‘oh"ll .0..‘it'et'lli‘lll‘lII.‘IAI-I.I' 'IOGI‘II!I|I . . ~ ‘ . \ . .u- l .l.. .I .0 I II... ." will-Illa! told v!|e’d"l10“.'ll" ! el .- . .D'd‘ -t"l.lll'hu 'l' - . . G - -8.‘ 'I O D 9338 no .3886. 5 . 00.. 0332.8 38. 0.. 0.. on S me an 00 m3 wanna—om non-n: 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 93 33 Tn 0.3 nan-a0 .93: 333 u 0&3 3.3 3.3 0:: :3 0.3 0.5. 0.3 0.3 .13 .ooooononn 0.03 3.3 0.: 0.3 ~.3 ~.3 0.3 3.3 2.3 .53: nova—rm echo: sol-moan finance soc—J sound: smooch—o #000 L538 Hm tonnage g magma—m ho go!" aoabom Ade-l4 ho gnaw—50 nag I ‘ Y I I I I I I 'I'l In." [0-53.1.1 h ’ D . ql d A'IIIO ‘ 'I.-- t5 V A ulrl '40 ‘0 lp..‘l I a 0|:- 0 O 1 t O . I -4 1 I ‘ § ‘ . . . fl I I O O O a t . ‘.' a .ll VIICIIOIOIIIVO..IJO~I IIOE'II‘O .‘1'4’.ll.."~ .D,n.0 III. ." u u‘-‘l.u.1|l‘l".II.-.IlIu'. .I ni'll...lul0ll..0|' '-"u"-lu.lll II.‘I'I.-!"|.I.'III'I. . A l 1 Ah I 0 p x J I -s v u o l O Q . O I I. o O ' ‘ O c It U 1 ’I! n l ‘.| v . .."IQ§ ‘a, 0 . . O C I,‘ a. .. v ‘Q.’ U “ O ' On. -‘A- o t O I: O . u I x Q. O 35 .03 candy .mowpmwumuoandno Huumaow .mnmnou on» «0 amousm .m .93 .03 03000 . 3003 .003000 00300300 0000000000 .0 .0 u. .0 .00000300030 03001N0,m.00003003 03 0 003003333 3 m u A30 00 an 00 30030 .mowumwnouumnmno goauaanmmw Hanonow .ommd "nowpnasmom mo nsmuoo .nsmqoo on» we nachum .m.pa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0: 030000 .0300 u 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0: 0.00 0.00 0.00 00003 .n0>o and ma .odaa & 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.03 0.~3 0.03 030000 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.33 0.03 0.03 0.00 0000000 0003 napash 0:003 aoawmnum dawned 00003 00036: «megahso xvoo gonna can ouwoz R HBZDOU wm onB< gong ho Bo 0N.0m 00.0m 00.00 330 00 0oz =aoz 0000 00000: U330.. 0030000000: 0000 00000: x30: .53de 20 mZOHEHono HZHAomdw ho Enema GEM—“momma m." a; P\IIIIL.JI. .'.---.'- V-“-.l-‘.-"".-.-’-.‘ utility 59 of gasoline conditions to be getting worse will anticipate trip frequency, trip distance and trip duration to diminish than persons indicating conditions are improving. Results Statistical inquiry did not produce any supporting evidence for this hypothesis. No significant relationships were discovered. It is felt the seasure was a poor attelpt to deter-ins a change in gasoline influence over time. The measure was constructed through a colputation of the difference between two separate questions. The classifications that resulted through the cosputation were disproportionate as a result of the large nuaber of individuals who did not change their reported level of significance fros one tile period to the other. Inglications This lack of findings is an indication that either the perceived ispact of gasoline conditions did not change to a significant degree over tile or that individuals were not able to specify the change. It is also very such possible that the respondents did not coaprehend the significance of the series of questions used for this seasure, and therefore, had a tendency to indicate the sale level of ispact for each tine period. It lust be sentioned that the absence of support for this hypothesis can also be considered as an indication of the absence of a.relationship. It is possible that perceived ispact of gasoline conditions.over tile does not influence travel prepensity. This, however. does not seen likely given the fact that the influence of gasoline availability and price does influence expected travel prOpensity. “4 I. r "1 1" Q J‘fuj.‘ § . 1‘ I M f‘Uu“ co\."‘ 60 Contrasting_Dimensions of Anticipated Travel One aspect of the findings which has not been discussed previously is the contrast between the three specified dimensions of anticipated travel propensity: trip frequency, trip distance and trip duration. From the reported findings it appears anticipated change in travel will be similar in all three areas. This obviously does not necessarily have to be the case. An individual may reduce trip distance at the same time he is increasing trip duration. The measure, anticipated travel propensity, as used in this study was not intended to make fine distinctions between travel dimensions. Its purpose was to determine a direction of change and not an exact degree of change. The results show that in most hypotheses all three dimensions are influenced in the same directions but not necessarily to the sale extent. There are reported percentage differences between the three dimensions of future travel which possibly illustrate contrasts. It is not statistically possible, however, to document these differences. Future detailed research is necessary to determine the degree to which each area of travel propensity is anticipated to change. CHAPTER V FINDINGS -- PLANNED TRAVEL General Findings When asked if they were planning to take a recreational trip of 100 miles or more in the next six months, 60% of the sampled population indicated they were intending to take such a trip. Of these, the majority (62%) were currently planning a single trip while 25% were planning two and a little more than 10% were planning three trips. Approximately one-fifth of the respondents indicated that they had definitely decided not to take a trip this dy_e_a_1_'.. When adted why travel had been eliminated, 27% indicated the influence of gasoline price, 7% indicated the influence of gasoline availability and 66% referred to some other reason. Implications Trip planning at the time of the survey (June) was undoubtably incomplete. It is difficult to know how many trips were not yet planned. This, combined with the fact that no comparible data is available from past years, limits the ability to draw implications from these general findings. Income Hypothesis 2: SUPPORTED Concpptual: There is a positive relationship between income 61 62 and planned travel. Research: Higher proportions of persons in the upper income level will have a trip planned than persons in the lower levels and higher preportions of persons in the lower income level will have decided not to travel than persons in the upper income levels. Results Significant relationships were found between income and each of the three variables available to portray planned travel. Almost three-quarters of the upper income group are currently planning a recreational trip in the next six:months while less than “0% of the lower income group are currently planning a trip (see Table 1“). When those planning to travel were asked how many trips they currently had planned it was found that the number of trips planned was also significantly related to income. The observed trend was that as income increased the number of trips planned also increased. This is supported by a tau of .1589 indicating a slight positive relationship between the two. As was mentioned planned travel is definitely a.weak measure of travel propensity. It is entirely possible that low income individuals do not plan trips as far in advance as higher income individuals and are, therefore, not adequately represented in the above relationships. Possibly a better means of measuring the intent to travel is by recording those who definitely do not intend to travel in the next year. This decision might hopefully be more stable and, therefore, harbor greater reliability. The significant relationship between the decision not to travel in the next six months and income indicates that as income increases that decision not to travel decreases. 'I :3 "'1- n a ’x Currently Planning a Trip 63 TABLE 11} INCOME LEVEL BY PLANNED TRAVEL Decided Not to Travel Income Yes No Total Yes F;- Total 0 - 7.999 37% 63% 100% 25% 75% 100% (106) (101») 8,000 - 12.999 61% 39% 100% 20% 80% 100% (12k) (122) 13,000 and Above 74% 26% 100% 11% 89% 100% (198) (197) N ‘+28 #23 Chi Square 100.71 11.040 DF 2 2 Significance .0000 .ooko a.-. Implications Because of the known inadequacies of planned travel as a.neasure it is difficult to draw reliable implications from its relationship with other variables. The primary reason for the use of planned travel is to provide a check for the relationships with anticipated travel propensity. .For these reasons implications drawn from the use of planned travel as a.neasure will be limited to its reflective impact upon relationships already reported between expected travel propensity and the independent variable under consideration. For instance, in the case of both anticipated travel and planned travel, income level appeared to influence each in the same direction. It can, therefore, be stated with a.moderate degree of confidence that future travel propensity does in fact increase with income. A number of later postulates do not prove to find support in both measures of future propensity. This, of course, draws attention to obvious disparities. Influence of Gasoline Availabilitland Price Hypothesis #: NOT SUPPORTED Conceptual: There is a.negative relationship between the influence of gasoline price and planned travel. Research: Higher proportions of persons indicating the impact of gasoline price on travel to be great will not have a trip planned and will have decided not to travel than persons indicating the impact of price to be small. y§ Amomv mace umm use Amomv macs men mm: as: as sea haaasnaaau>< no poqaaH woeo. 38. 880333 e s an am.m mm.~H census ago we: m? z 23 woos awe awn 3.: “82 man no: nos < Amwv mood mas mam Anne mood man umm «wave oaasa $8 aces new ea: 38 hood Km a? £3: 4 Anne mooa man and Anne mooa awn new capped sco> 303 moon mew use some goes a? umm a e. no: sauce oz a.» Haves oz a.» coded co uuuaaH 25$ 3 sex 3308 Hosafieon mafia s ummmmudm “Hung 5” fig $53. 21.5 mm Hog 924 MBHAH3H<>< 303 he HERE” Ha I l . ‘ c . . N U .0 I t a. e a e d . ' I 0 ‘ . O «I I .r - l | C 1 I I I O I. ‘ I | Q - I ‘ II I ' I U 0 - I ' ‘ - I Q I v _ . , .k I . .a I n I I. l.. II. lll‘lll VJ Ill vu't 9.1. .,..ul||llllr.i'. ll!" ..'I“‘I.| 1 (n.00I'01I'I‘A. ‘II' III. 'I III '1..- Tlulllll trill. 11' I’ll'I ‘0'- l'! I. I 3 ‘ . .4 I O I n U . . - U ‘l . I I \ .I . ' A - . ' - I I . V "‘I. - I‘ll. I U ' - n I '.‘ ‘ - ' I I ’I' I. 1 . 1| ‘ I 0 ol. 1 O . V I i C a I I 0 Int I 0 - I O t u r e. "le r l ‘I - v I 4. I- '0 I v A U c e L! C a e. v I I I a]- I I In 1.10 e v I I v ( r I. ( 0 III. )lll1‘llllul". I ellllll‘Ya-I'l nilrel‘i.\ .‘ll‘e‘vlllubt‘v. ...Illllv.¢..lll‘l ul..uI..| e1. 1 .v-‘ll“ll.ll . 1“» eYt.t’Lt|.4tll.vlvl.VI n."|0 l _ ~ .J v e O I e v D a I o 1 t l V 4 .n e I (u e - e v I l a a v \ - ¢ 0 e I s e 67 of gasoline availability on travel to be great will not have a trip planned and will have decided not to travel than persons indicating the impact of price to be small. Results It was found that the impact of availability relates to a significant degree with the decision not to travel as well as the indication that a trip is currently being planned, but not in the manner hypothesized. The patterns might be interpreted in the same manner as the relationships discussed in the preceeding section on the impact of gasoline price. The relationships seem to indicate that those perceiving the impact of gasoline availability to be an extreme of not at all or ‘a_lgt.had a greater tendency to not be planning a trip as well as a tendency to have made an actual decision not to travel (see Table 15). Implications Continued investigations of the significant relationships between the impact of gasoline availability and price and planned travel did not produce adequate explanations for the patterns displayed. As a result the only implications which this author can comfortably suggest even after the use of various controls is that it appeared individuals who perceive the impact of gasoline price to be great did, in fact, have limited travel plans. This statement, however, has limited implications since as few as ten percent of the sample population saw the impact of price and availability to be great (a lot). Anticipated vs. Planned Travel Comparison of the reported findings concerning the influence of gasoline conditions on anticipated travel and planned travel reveal , , r: . l a. _ . . . . , .— , A r , A, . ‘ A D V - r a , ' I '. ' 1 o _ . . ._ e l v. c ‘4 I . ' ' , _ . . t . c v .Q. ' . . 68 a number of inconsistencies. The decision not to travel was found to be related with a high impact of gasoline conditions, but it was not generally found that planned travel decreased with an increase in the perceived impact of gasoline conditions. In fact, it appears that trip planning is highest for those individuals who see the impact of gasoline conditions to be moderate rather than low. These inconsistencies do not seem to discredit each other but rather raise a number of significant questions. The admitted weakness of planned travel as a.neasure as well as the inherent shortcomings of the subjective measure, expected travel propensity, may account for these obvious discrepencies yet it is still necessary to determine the importance of gasoline conditions both in travel perceptions and in travel plans. It is reasonable to assume that the reported findings concerning anticipated travel prepensity would reflect themselves in planned travel as well, yet this research effort has not satisfactorily showed that as being true. Past Gasoline Related Travel Decisions Hypothesis 8: NOT SUPPORTED Conceptual: There is a negative relationship between past gasoline related travel decisions against travel and planned travel. Research: Higher proportions of persons having cancelled a trip, chosen an alternative mode of travel or precluded a previous destination will not have a trip planned and will have decided not to travel than persons not having made past gasoline related travel decisions. Jr . v . —.. P a - 69 TABLE 16 THE CANCELLATION OF A TRIP AND THE USE OF ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION BY THE PLANNING OF A TRIP Past Travel Decisions Currently Plaggigg a Trip Yes o Total Cancelled a Trip: Yes 75% 25% 100% (97) _ljo _ _ 56% {was 100% (381) N l+78 Chi Square 10.96 D? 1 Significance .0009 Chose Alternate Mode: Yes 75% 25% 100% (60) _ _ No __ _ 57% #375 100% (up) N l+73 Chi Square 6.04 DP 1 Significance .OlhO .....- —. 3 I ~-, . --. . 70 TABLE 17 THE PRECLUSION OF A PREVIOUS DESTINATION BY THE DECISION NOT TO TRAVEL Destination Precluded Definitely Decided Not to Travel Yes No Total Yes 24% 76% 100% (130) __ No:_ _ __ ___ 15% 85% _100% (539) N #69 Chi Square h.82 DP 1 Significance .0281 Results A single significant relationship was found in each correlation between past travel decisions and trips planned (see Tables 16 and 17). Each, however, varies in nature and in interpretation. A positive relationship was found between those who were currently planning a trip and those who had cancelled a trip, as well as those who had chosen an alternative transportation mode. Those who had cancelled a trip or chosen to use an alternative transportation mode in the previous twelve months had a greater tendency to be planning a trip. The decision not to travel was found to be significantly related only to the preclusion of a previous destination. Here, however, it appears those who had precluded a destination had a greater tendency to have made the decision not to travel (see Table 17). Almost a quarter of those who had a destination eliminated had decided not to travel in the next six:months, while 15% of those who had not eliminated a destination had made the decision not to travel. O M a. . a on- O -- ' : v 71 Implications It is interesting that those who cancelled a trip or chose to use a transportation mode other than the automobile have a greater tendency to be planning a trip. A possible explanation for this behavior is that those who experienced difficulties in travel last year are more likely to have the planning stage of this year's trips completed at an earlier time, and thus have a greater percentage of trips planned. Another possibility is that the restriction on travel caused by last year's decisions has made a greater priority to be put on travel this year. A second area of interest lies in the fact that the preclusion of a destination,unlike the cancellation of a trip or use of an alternate mode, appears to influence individuals to decide not to travel. This could imply that peOple who have precluded a previous destination do not have another suitable destination to visit and thus decide not to travel. Even if this is not the case, the fact that past travelers have decided not to travel indicates an unusual hesitancy. Possibly promotional efforts could influence these individuals. Anticipated vs. Planned Travel An interesting disparity has arisen between the findings of Hypothesis 7 and Hypothesis 8. It is observed that those who have made past gasoline related travel decisions have a tendency to expect travel propensity to decline while at the same time they have a greater tendency to be planning a trip. This could either be interpreted as an indication that one of the measures for travel propensity is inaccurate or that some additional phenomenon is occurring. Two suggestions were given in the preceding section on implications. The lack of thorough data on trip planning limits the ability to adequately discuss this incongruity. 72 It is an area requiring further research. Gasoline Conditions Over Time Hypothesis 10: NOT SUPPORTED Conceptual: Persons who perceive the impact of gasoline conditions to be getting worse are less likely to have trips planned than persons who perceive conditions to be improving. Research: Higher prOportions of persons indicating the impact of gasoline conditions to be getting worse will not be planning a trip and will have decided not to travel than persons indicating conditions are improving. Results No significant relationships were reported which would indicate planned travel was at all related to whether or not an individual perceived gasoline conditions as getting better. As in Hypothesis 9, (page 57) this lack of significant findings is a possible result of a poor measurement technique or an actual absence of a relationship. (See page 59 for a.more thorough discussion of this explanation.) Dispggities Between Anticipated and Planned Travel The lack of congruity between anticipated and planned travel might be interpreted as a.weakness in the study. It is felt, however, that these reported disparities do not weaken the measures but instead focus upon the need to further delineate the differences between expected and planned propensity. As has been mentioned, certain characteristics of the research design limited the ability to obtain a single all- inclusive measure for future travel propensity. As a result two measures 73 were developed with separate yet distinct limitations which could be checked against each other. The results show this couparison functioned well to uncover the disparities and yet at the same time opened the way for further research Opportunities. For it is, in fact, possible that the inconsistencies reported are valid differences. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary This study has been undertaken as part of a broad based research effort into the travel behavior of mid-western residents. The primary focus of the study has been to investigate the influence perceived gasoline conditions have upon anticipated travel. It was desired to determine if gasoline conditions could be expected to influence future travel, and if so, to what extent and for which individuals. Concepts tested were structured using the influences of gasoline conditions as independent variables and anticipated travel as well as planned travel as dependent variables. It was generally found that gasoline conditions would—mot‘““’ greatly influence future travel. The majority of persons interviewed felt gasoline availability and gasoline price influenced their future travel decisions either not at all or 7951 little. In the same manner, the majority of respondents anticipated that their future travel would be comparable to past travel. This was found to be true for anticipated trip number, trip distance and trip duration, the three major dimensions of anticipated travel. The anticipation for trips to be fewer in number (38%), shorter in duration (25%) and shorter in distance (31%), although a minority expectation, never-the-less represents a substantial shift in travel behavior. It is difficult to put an exact impact on such a transition, 71+ J -—- u.--.—.. a f .,., 75 yet it is felt this minority expectation might significantly affect both individualsrand regions. The remainder of the study, therefore, concentrated on the expectation for travel to decrease. Income was found to relate positively both to anticipated travel and planned travel. Individuals in the lower income level were significantly more likely to decrease future travel than persons in the upper income levels. It was also found that persons in the higher income levels indicated a greater expectation to pay more for future travel than did persons in the low income level. Those persons who perceived the impact of gasoline price to be .g_12£ had a greater tendency to anticipate to travel less in the future than did those perceiving the impact to be negligible. The same relationship proved to be true between the perceived impact of gasoline availability and anticipated travel. Respondents did not appear to make any substantial distinctions between the influence of gasoline availability and the influence of gasoline price. There was evidence to indicate that the perceived impact of gasoline availability affects income levels equally while the perceived impact of gasoline price affects income levels differently. Past gasoline related travel decisions were shown to be a significant influence on anticipated travel. It was observed that those who had made past gasoline related travel decisions were more likely to perceive the future impact of gasoline conditions to be worse and to expect to travel less in the future. There appeared to be a major distinction between those who cancelled or changed past travel and those who considered past destinas tions as now being precluded. Although both types of past gasoline related decisions related negatively with anticipated travel it was 76 observed that each related differently with planned travel. Those who cancelled or altered past travel were more likely to have a trip planned while those who had a destination in mind as being precluded had a tendency to not be planning a trip. Comparison between the findings of anticipated travel and planned travel produced a number of interesting inconsistencies. For instance, it was found that those who cancelled a trip in the last year have a greater tendency to be anticipating future travel to decrease,and at the same time,have a greater tendency to be planning a trip in the future. It is felt these possible inconsistencies are beneficial to the study and provide areas worthy of future research. Conclusions The Importance of Past Travel This study uses as a point of reference the change which is assumed to result from recent past experiences. The influx of new information in the way of experiences is expected to increase the possibility of modification or change. It was assumed gasoline conditions from a historical standpoint are not a major factor in travel propensity and that the recent emergence of an "energy crisis" would bring the importance of gasoline conditions in travel to the forefront. There is, therefore, a need to document not only the influence of past travel in general on future propensity, but more specifically to identify the influence of recent past travel in comparison to more distant past travel experiences. when any of the relationships already described between an independent variable and expected travel propensity are controlled for travel last year, a significant relationship is found for those who traveled last year while no significant relationship is 77 found for those who did not travel last year. Two possible implications arise from this importance of traveling last year. The first implication would indicate that those who traveled most recently had experiences which caused significant changes in their travel behavior. The second implication would be that those who traveled last year represent those who have always traveled more, and thus have a greater likelyhood to change travel propensity than do non-travelers. The most probable explanation is that both of these situations exist. A further investigation of the findings might depict this combination. The elimination of a previous destination was found to be signifi- cantly related to taking a trip last year. Of those who didn't travel, only 17% knew of a destination which they now considered precluded, while 32% of those who did travel were aware of such a destination. This could be a function of either a traveler - non-traveler relation- ship or the influences of recent past experiences. The non-traveler would have few destinations to eliminate and those who had most recently experienced restrictions in gasoline conditions would have a greater tendency to see destinations as precluded. It is felt the study represents the influence of recent past conditions and as such is useful in understanding the impact of the so called "energy crisis". Future travel as reported here reflects the significant impact of past experiences related to gasoline conditions. It has been shown that those persons who experienced the greatest impact of instability in gasoline conditions are the most likely to anticipate future travel to decrease. 78 Reliability of the Dependent Variable The majority of this study has dealt with relationships between the considered dependent variable, anticipated travel propensity and various independent variables such as the impact of gasoline availability and price. The study depends to a large extent upon the reliability of the dependent measure, anticipated travel propensity. As has been mentioned previously the most reliable means of measuring future travel propensity is through the use of a longitudinal design which allows for measurement both before and after travel takes place. This is especially true when the desire is to measure the impact of current perceptions on future actions as is the case in this study. However, as was also stated earlier, a longitudinal design was not feasible for this research effort. The decision was made instead to use subjective measures which could represent both current perceptions as well as future anticipations. The limitations of these measures has already been discussed and the reported findings have hopefully been presented to draw attention to these inherent limitations. It is, however, possible to present certain characteristics of the dependent variable which document its reliability. The three characteristics discussed below portray strengths of the measure, expected travel propensity. First, expected propensity throughout the study is shown to be significantly related to past trips. This, of course, is a result of the comparitive nature of the question asked but is at the same time an indication that individuals were actually considering past travel in their prediction of future change. This indicates that individuals who did not travel last year did not distinguish any significant influence 79 from independent variables possibly as a result of the absence of a past travel reference point. Anticipated travel propensity, therefore, measures the impact of recent past experiences on future travel. A second area of comparison which validates the reliability of expected travel propensity as a comparitive measure is that it shows a significant relationship with planned travel patterns. For instance, a significant relationship between those who are planning a trip and expected travel propensity in terms of travel time, travel distance and travel duration, indicates that those who expect propensity to decrease have a greater tendency to not yet be planning a recreational trip. A third means by which to document the reliability of the dependent variable, expected travel propensity, is through a comparison of the results of this study with Cooper's findings on the exact same question (see Table 6). The findings of the two studies are very similar. Any differences could easily be explained by the sampling procedures and the time period which separates the two studies (three months). Anticipated travel propensity evidences that it measures future travel in comparison to past travel. It gives no indication of degree of change but functions well to provide a direction of change. Its weakness,like any subjective measure, lies in the ability of the respondent to properly judge his own intentions. Regional Impact of Changing Travel Propensity_ Changing travel prOpensity will undoubtedly affect regions differently. It has been suggested that the expectations to reduce trip frequency, distance and duration will each have separate implications for regional travel. To adequately encourage tourist development and ~--. I‘J'I’ { 80 provide for travel demand, it is necessary that area governments recognize the implications of changing travel propensity. The measure designated to determine changes in regional desira- bility, as a result of changing travel propensity, proved inadequate for such a complex taSk. No specific distinctions were found between regions of the Great Lakes.Area (Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Ontario). This is partially explained by the fact that regional attractivity is a relative measure. In a time of gasoline shortages the attractivity of a region is better measured in relation to distant places rather than a number of equal distant places. This was not done. It was observed, however, that individuals anticipating future travel to decrease had a significant tendency to be more critical of a region's desirability. It appeared respondents who saw the impact of gasoline conditions to be great also had a tendency to evaluate regions more critically. These observations are suggested to imply that individuals who recognize their travel as being modified, are investigating the possibilities of regional travel more thoroughly, but have not necessarily made final decision about regional desirability. Recommendations Policy Recommendations It is difficult to present specific policy recommendations which are developed directly from the hypotheses presented in this study. Policy recommendations, instead originate from the implications of the reported findings. These implications, of course, must be tempered by the understanding that certain limitations exist in the subjective measures used. It is possible, however, to present a number of .‘IIJI ‘1 81 recommendations which are based upon the overall findings of the study. Stability of the Travel Market An early finding of the study was that future travel was not going to deviate dramatically from past travel for the majority of the respondents. It was found instead that individuals generally did not anticipate future travel as different from past travel. Even for those who anticipated a decline in travel, the majority were low income individuals who did not contribute substantially to the economy of the travel industry. It appears that the tourist industry can expect travel trade to be commensurate with past levels. Certain areas or industries, however, may conceivably be discriminated against as a result of changing travel propensity. It appears business in close proximity to travel markets, as well as those providing a wide base of recreational activities, are in a better position to take advantage of changing travel patterns. There is also some evidence to suggest that larger facilities at which travelers can make reservations are more likely to attract vacation travelers. flagging Travel Propensig The minority expectation was for travel to decrease in comparison to past years. This tendency seemed to be particularly evident for the lower income level as well as for those who perceived the impact of gasoline conditions to be great. A special form of discrimination is evidenced here when it is recognized that the low income individual who already travels the least, is the most likely to anticipate a decline in future travel propensity as well. If this expectation proves true, it is even more necessary that adequate recreation and transportation is available for those who find themselves deprived. 82 Although the numbers anticipating decline in travel dimensions are not great, they do represent a substantial expectation for travel patterns to change, but not end. Changing travel propensity means a potentially changing travel market. Area governments as well as the Federal Government must recognize both the need to adapt and the opportunity to benefit from such a transition. There is evidence to suggest that individuals anticipating changes in future travel have not yet settled into new travel patterns. If this is true, there is an Opportunity to enhance regional travel through promotion efforts designed to attract persons still in transition. The opportunity is there to mold travelers into recreational patterns more suitable to current situations. The Influence of Gasoline Conditions The influence of gasoline conditions is thought by some to be sporadic in nature and, therefore, difficult to either predict or measure. It has, however, been shown that past gasoline related travel experiences have a definite influence on future expectations,and as such, gasoline conditions are very much a real influence on future travel. The drastic rise in gasoline price alone has caused a significant impact on travel in the minds of this study's respondents. With this in mind, it is possible to present a number of logical suggestions. Gasoline conditions can be assumed to be at least part of the reason why individuals anticipate a decline in travel propensity. Those who are most concerned about gasoline's impact on travel may be influenced positively by promotional efforts directed at reducing travel costs such as taking shorter trips or using alternative transportation modes. It would also be possible for regions to capture markets which are i K Iona ‘7' .\.d l 83 precluded from the "usual" vacation destination because of increased costs. A positive utilization of gasoline's restrictive nature on travel would be for the Federal government to encourage trips which conserve energy rather than discourage travel in general. Individuals already show an inclination to anticipate travel prepensity to decline. Positive policies using this inclination could support regional travel which would conserve energy and at the same time meet the population's recreational needs. Research Recommendations With the conclusion of an exploritory research effort such as this, there is usually an explosion of new unresolved questions. Such is the case here. Rather than inventory all of these questions, it is perhaps appropriate to emphasize a couple of areas worthy of a substantial research commitment. A full research effort addressing the regional impact of changing travel propensity would be beneficial both to the recreation industry] and to regional planning organizations. This study has given evidence which would suggest that changing travel patterns will affect regions differently. It is necessary to discover if this is the case and to what extent it is occurring. It would also be useful to understand the basic reasons why individuals are attracted to particular regions. Is it simply because more desirable regions are now precluded? A second area of study which could be incorporated into the first area is the measurement of the degree of change individuals anticipate in each travel dimension. This would prove to be of more use to behavioral evaluations than the direction of anticipated change. It is 84 also possible to better measure planned travel. This is especially true in the area of trip planning. What gasoline considerations are actually incorporated into trip planning? How do travelers view the cost of recreational vehicles? Are trips being more thoroughly planned as a result of travel costs? A final area of interest might be to trace the impact of the 197# "energy crisis" on travel behavior. Does the critical influence of gasoline conditions decrease with time? Are there continuing affects of the moderation in travel made during this "crises" period? Hill travelers eventually return to patterns normal to the years of cheap fuel? All of these questions find meaningful policy implications for future decisions. WE LITERATURE 85 REFERENCE LITERATURE Books Arvin, R. Han and Environment. London: Penguil, 1967. Babbie, Earl R. Survey Research Methods. Belmont: Vadsworth Publish- ing 00., 1973. Blalock, Hubert N., Jr. Social Statistics. 2nd ed. New York: NcGraw- Bill, 1972. Clawson, Marion. Economics of Outdoor Recreation. Baltimore: John Bolkins Press, 1 . Die, Norman, Dale Bent, and Hadlai Bull. Statistical m for the Social Sciences. New Iork: NcGraw- 11, 1970. Lansing, John B., and Dwight 1!. Blood. 31% Travel Market. Ann Arbor: Institute of Social Research, 1 . Iansing, John B. The Travel Narket_l961k-126§. Ann Arbor: Institute of Social Research, 1¥5. Lundberg, Donald. The Tourist Business. 2nd ed. Boston: Cahners Books, 1971:. Steiner, J. 1'. Recreation in the Depression. New Iork: Social Science Research Council, 1937- Survey Research Center. Interviewer's Nanual. Ann Arbor: Institute of Social Research, 1 9. Articles Anderson, Nels. "Measurement of Values and Future Leisure." Acta Sociologica XII, I}, pp. 179-185. Bull, Neil C. "Prediction of Future M1! Behaviors: An hpirical Measure of Leisure." Journal of Leisure Reasearch IV, 1, (1972) pp. 119-128. Burdge, Rebel J. "Levels of Occupational Prestige and Leisure Activity." Journal of leisure Research I, 3, (1969) pp. 262-2710. Claffey, Paul J. "Time and Fuel Consumption for Highway-User Benefit Studies." Public Roads m1, 1, (1960) pp. 16-21. 86 I ' f. l A 9 . l O . a e p. 0v . .. - . ., O . s . A 0 . — . c . , . . . . p n O \ a - l llllllll. a v s C . x v». «c r I J F A f r s . .. a F . . . O. '1 ,v _ o r O I r v . . . _ e .k a. . s . . a . m ‘4 . .. vu. C I s. . .. . I D - O Q v . a I ma~O my..- s~ 0| 4 [’0 Au K. J .b— l» . ., . . . . . a . _ . a. f. I... .5 . p.. . . _ ‘ ! F . O O . u . m n . . . . . I by. e o , , l c — .n . . A. .. a . . a , . . e a . v s \ . a a . _ a . m p D. ’ 4 . O f y. 9‘ < r a . I I Coleman, 1‘. E. "Evaluation of Some Elements of Auto-Driver Trip Production." Highway Research Record No. #1, pp. 1:5-50. Crevo, Charles. "Characteristics of Su-er Veekend Recreational Travel." 11m Research Record No. 1:1, pp. 51-60. Gordon, I. R., and S. L. Edwards. "Holiday Trip Generation." Journal of Transport Economics and Polig No. 7, (1973) pp. 153-533. Hartgen, D. J. and G. H. Tanner. "Investigations of the Effect of Traveler Attitudes in a Model of Mode-Choice Behavior." Him Research Record No. 369. Pp. l-l‘t. Houghton-Rvans. V. , and J. C. Miles. Weekend Recreational Motoring in the Countryside." Journal of the Town P1anninLInstitute LVI, (1970) pp. 392-397. lensing, John B. "The Effects of Migration and Personal Effectiveness on Long-Distance Travel." Transmrtation Research II, pp. 329-338. Mercer, D. "Discretionary bevel Behavior and the Urban Mental Map. " Australian Geogaphical Studies II, No. 2, (Oct., 1971) pp. 133-1‘+3. , "The Role of Perception in the Recreation Experience: A Review and Discussion." Journal of Leisure Research III, pp. 261-276. Murdie, R. A. "Cultural Differences in Consumer Travel." Economic Geogam XLI, 3, pp. 211-233. O'Rourke, Barry. "Travel in the Recreational Rxperience--A Literature Review." Journal of leisure Research VI, 2, pp. 1‘00-156. Shuldiner, Paul V. "Trip Generation and the Home." Hi Research Record No. 3‘07: pp. 190-59. Soule, George. "The Economics of leisure." The Annals of the American Acad% of Political and Social Science CCCXIII, (Sept., 1957) pp. 1 2 . Thomas, C. Thomas and Gordon I. Thompson. "Value of Time Saved by Trip Purpose." Weaamh Record No. 369, pp. 1010-117. Vickerman, Roger. "The Demand for Non-work Travel." Journal of Transport Economics and P0119; VI, 2, pp. 176-210. walker, John R. "Social Status of Head of Household and Trip Generation From Home." Menard Record No. 111+, p. 191. Vatson, Peter L. "Problems Associated With Time and Cost Data Used in Travel Choice Modeling and Valuation of Time." thg Research Record No. 369. PP. 11:8-158. Wohl, Martin. "Demand, Cost, Price and Capacity Relationships Applied to Travel Forecasting." m Research Record No. 38, pp. #O-SR. 87 .‘A‘ "O O- ~‘“q I'll! i lei-II ? a o. a . e . . a f . . . I O s .a e n. v . a v e C . v 0. I 0 . f . .- m l .. x . c u L . x . A . a . e 4 - O . ' .).. I u D e: . v m e I 0 e . o \l . v . . _ o . . . U . . O . . . A . C e o p c A s » . I s] s I. p I O . A . . . s\ Q U Unpublished Material Cooper, Rollin. "Attitude Survey of Vacation Travel Plans for 197k." (Madison, Uisc.: Recreation Resources Center, University of Wisconsin, 1971+.) (Mimeographed.) Myers, Paul B. "Decision Making and Travel Behavior: A Midwestern Study." Unpublished Doctor's Dissertation, Michigan State University, 197‘:- Public and Quasi-Public Agency Repgrts Bland, Uel and Clare Gunn. Guidelines for Tourism-Recreation in Michi 's Upper Peninsula. Upper P5ninsu1a Committee on Area E;ogrees, 1966. McMillian, R. K. "National Survey of Transportation.Attitudes and Behavior: Phase 1, Summary Report." National Coo rative ‘giggggngesearch Program Report #9, 1968. Mutch, James J. Trans rtation Ener use in the United States: A Statistical HistoryI 1222:1221. Prepared for the Nat onal Science Foundations by Rand Inc., 1973). Strassman, V. Paul. Economic Growth in Northern Michiggg. East Lansing: Institute for Community Development and Services, Michigan State University United States Department of the Interior. Wisergency Energy Legislation." In U. S. Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, He s, Vashington, D. C., 197“. U. S. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission. "Purticipation in Outdoor Recreation: Factors Affecting Demand Among American Adults." Study Report No. 20, (Washington D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962). 88 ‘.-'_ APPENDICES 89 APPENDIX A INTERVIEW SCHEDULES FINAL AND FRI-TEST APPENDIX A1 FINAL INTERVIEW SCHEDULE INTERVIEW NUMBER l 2 3 COUNTY NUMBER “ 6 INTERVIEWER NUMBER UPPER GREAT LAKES TOURISM STUDY INTERVIEW SCHEDULE Introduction: Try to put the respondent at ease. Assure him/her that his cooperation is appreciated and that his/her candor is necessary if the results are to be meaningful. "Just relax" is the theme. Present the order of the interview: "These are the areas we will be covering during the next few minutes. The interview is broken into six areas and I'll read them to you in order to show you where we'll be going. 1. Travel experiences. 2. Travel ideas and attitudes in relation to family attitudes. 3. Sources of information (newspaper, TV, magazines). 4. Impressions of Great Lakes Region. 5. Influence of gas shortages on trip planning. 6. Personal background information. Page 2 The first area we need to cover is your travel experiences. Remember,_before we get started, that vacations are taken for a number of different reasons —- to visit relatives, to see newgplaces, to ggt away from it all, to camp out and so 23;_ This means that we cannot strictly define vacations. You do. If you think of a trip as travel for pleasure, then it is. So, ...first question. 7. Have you ever taken a pleasure trip by car or bus that 7 involved traveling over 100 miles from your home? 1. Yes if no, go to 21 2. No If yes... 8. Thinking back, can you remember the last trip by car 8 that you took that was over 100 miles long? (Hand respondent U.S. Map.) 1. Yes if no, go to 15 2. No If yes... (State) 9. Where did you go on that trip or, more specifically, where 9 10 were you when you were furthest from your present home on that trip? (Get_particu1ar location and state;) (Region) 11 12 13‘ 14 15 (Distance) 10. How many people were traveling on this trip together? 16 17 11. What was the single most important reason for taking it? 18 19 (Be specific) (If response is visitation of relatives -- find out which side or both) 12. How many nights were you gone on that trip? If you can't 20 21 remember exactly, estimate the number of nights. Page 3 13. Now, you were gone about nights on that trip. Can you remember where you spent those nights? By this I mean with friends, relatives, motel, hotel, campgrounds... wherever. TYPE # 0F NIGHTS Type of accommodation Number of nights in each 22-24 22 23 24 25-27 25 26 27 28-30 2 8 29 30 (Try to account for each night) 14. Can you remember the month and year in which the trip was 31 32 taken? Number of months passed since trip was taken: (Excluding the month of the trip and the present month included.) Now, let's look at some other trips by car that you've taken. 15. How many auto pleasure trips of over 100 miles do you think 33 34 you took during the last year? (State) 16. Where did you go on the longest one during the last year? 35 36 (Specifically) 17. 41 42 18. 43 (State) 19- (Distance) What was the single most important reason for taking it? (be specific) New to go back a71ittle.furthér’ywouldvyou say that you've taken at least one trip of 100 miles every year during the last five years? 1. Yes 2. No Where did you go on the longest automobile trip you've taken during the last five years? (Specifically) (Distance) 50 52 53 54 51 55 57 56 58 59 70 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Page 4 What was the single most important reason for taking it? (specifically) Now I'm going to ask you to describe yourself in several general ways regarding how you travel. First, how often do you take trips of over 100 miles. Compared to your friends, relatives, co—workers, and so on—-do you travel... 1. Very often 2. Often 3. Occasionally 4. Seldom 5. Never Now, describe how far you typically would go on such trips. Again, use relatives, friends, neighbors, as comparisons. Do you usually take trips that are: . Very close by (no 100 mile limit . Within a short distance here) . Medium distance . Long distance . Very long distance U1§UNH Now, describe yourself or your family in terms of planning a trip. Do you plan out the trip (where to go, where to, stay, what to do, L..) . Not at all . A little . Quite a bit . Carefully . Very carefully Uikle-d If you had questions on where to go, how to get there or where to stay on a trip, where would you go for information? Now, let's look at four particular places. We need to know if you have been to any of these areas and for how long. First, have you ever been in the Canadian province of Ontario? 1. Yes 2. No Can you estimate the total number of nights you have spent in Ontario? 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 7O 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 (Card #) 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. .1-6 same as #1 7 14 36. Page 5 Have you ever been to Minnesota? 1. Yes 2. No Can you estimate the total number of nights you have spent in Minnesota? Ever been in Wisconsin? 1. Yes 2. No For how many total nights would you guess? Have you ever been in Michigan? 1. Yes 2. No And how many total nights would you guess you have spent in Michigan? Okay, now we are going to discuss how your family makes certain decisions on a trip. You will have to base your response on past experience. Think back on your trip(s) and try to recall. Before we do this, though, do you have children in the house- hold now? 1. Yes 2. No How many? What is the age of your oldest child here at home now? Okay, that makes a difference because first I want you to imagine taking a trip without the children--just you and your wife/husband. (If no children or no children on last trip, explain that they can do this without imagining.) (hand card 1 to reapondent) You and your husband/wife are on a long trip involving several nights away from home. Who would have chosen the destination of the trip. (where to go) Wife Wife Joint Husband Husband Always Usually Usually Always Page 6 37. Who would have chosen the route to take? 8 15 Wife Wife Joint Husband Husband Always Usually Usually Always 38. Who would typically decide where to eat? 9 16 Wife Wife Joint Husband Husband Always Usually Always Usually 39. Who would typically decide where to take a rest stop? 10 17 Wife Wife Joint Husband Husband Always Usually Always U5ua11y 40. Who would typically decide where (accommodations) to 11 18 spend the night? Wife Wife Joint Husband Husband Always Usually Usually Always 12 13 19 Sum 7-11 Sum 14-18 if no children in household-go to #46 Now, let's include the children in these questions. You are on a trip. You are driving to the destination. The children (child) are (is) with you. (hand respondent card 2) 41. Who would have chosen the destination? 20 27 One or both One or both Joint Child/ Child/ Parents Parents Children Children Always Usually Usually Always 42. Who would have chosen the route to be taken? 21 28 One or both One or both Joint Child/ Child/ Parents Parents Children Children Always Usually Usually Always 22 29 23 3O 24 31 25 26 132 Sum 20-24 Sum 27-31 33 34 35 36 37 38 43. 44. 45. Page 7 Who would typically decide where to take a rest stop? (not gasoline stop) One or both One or both Joint Child/ Child/ Parents Parents Children Children Always Usually Usually Always _-_____, Who would typically decide where to eat? One or both One or both Joint Child/ Child/ Parents Parents Children Children Always Usually Usually Always _.—— Who would typically decide where to spend the night? One or both One or both Joint Child/ Child/ Parents Parents ' Children Children Always Usually Usually Always - fl- —. -—. -__—-—_ Okay, these next few questicns may seem a bit strange, but they are here for a good purpose. (hand respondent Sheet 1) All you have to do is mark the space which you think is appropriate. There are seven spaces—-they range from strcng agreement with the statement to strong disagreement. Just read the statement and mark the space that fits your ideas on the statement. (Make sure they understand.) 46. (1) 47. (2) 48. (a) 2.9. (4) so. (5) 51. (6) 39 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 4? 50 51 52 S3 S4 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. Page 8 52. ('D 53. (8) 54. (9) 55. (10) 56. (1]) 57. (12) Okay, now let's turn tc>your habits of watching Tvg reading the newspaper and so on. First, let's cover television... Is there a television in the household: 1. Yes 2. No if no, see if they watch TV somewhere else--if still no, go to #60 Can you estimate how much television you watch on a typical day? (put in a Specific estimate of minutes per day) Is there a radio in the house or in your car? 1. Yes 2. No if no, go to #63 How much do you listen to the radio? (put in specific estimate of minutes per day) When do you usually listen to the radio? Throughout the day Morning Afternoon Evening 59 60 61 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 62 63 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. Page 9 Okay, now newspapers... i Does your family take a newspaper? 1. Yes 2. No Do you read a newspaper(s) regularly? 1. Yes 2. No if no, go to #66 How much time do you Spend daily with the newspaper or news- papers? (put in specific minutes per day) Okay, now magazines... Do you subscribe to or regularly buy a magazine? 1. Yes 2. No if no, go to #68 I'll read off different types of magazines and you tell me if you read one or more regularly. (Ask them to name them as you proceed.) N News (Time, Newsweek) Sports (Sports Illustrated) Hobby (Photography, Cars) Travel (AAA) Decorating (Better Homes & Gardens) Opinion (Harpers, Saturday Review) TV Guide Reader's Digest 73 74 75 76 77 78 '79 80 (Card #2) 1-6 same as #1 68. 69. 70. 71. Page 10 Men's (Playboy, Esquire, True) Ladies (McCall's, Redbook) Farm Total read Now, to switch back to travel, have you ever written Michigan for travel information? 1. Yes 2. No Have you ever written Ontario for travel information? 1. Yes 2. No Have you ever written Wisconsin for travel information? 1. Yes 2. No Have'you ever written Minnesotaaforvtravel.information? 1. Yes 2. No 0 That's all we need to know about your reading, viewing, and listening habits. Now let's turn to see how you feel about these states and the Canadian province that I've just mentioned. Hand respondent Sheets 3-6 and pen or pencil. Would you please go over these quickly and mark one of the Spaces between each set of Opposites. A "l" or a "7" means "extremely" or "very" whatever. Between these extremes are "2" through "6" --they mean "slightly" or "somewhat" except for "4" which is a neutral Space reserved in case you don't have a definite Opinion about the state or province using these words. Page ll Minnesota Wisconsin Egghig§g_ Qggggig, 9. ‘;____. 21. _______ 33. _______ 45. 10. 22. _______ 34. .______ 46. ll. _______ 23. _______ 35. ______ 47. 12. ______. 24. ______. 36. _______ 48. 13. 25. _______ 37. _______ 49. 14. 26. ____m_ 38. ______ 50. 15. 27. _______ 39. _______ 51. _______ l6. _______ 28. _______ 40. _______ 52. 17. 29. _______ 41. _______ 53. 18. 30. _______ 42. _______ S4. _______ 19 20 31 32 43 44 55 56 57 6O 58 59 72. There has been a lot of talk lately on the TV and radio that the United States does not have enough fuel to meet the needs of everyone. Some poeple have said fuel prices will be going up and that fuel may even be rationed. Others say that a fuel shortage does not even exist. These next few questions are here to find out if your recre- ational trips have changed as a result of any increased price in gasoline or any decreased availability of gasoline. For purposes of this study gasoline availability has to do with whether you can get as much gas as you need when you want it and gasoline price is the amount you have to pay per gallon of gas. (Hand Card 3 to reapondent) Using this scale from one to five can you tell me how much the present availability and price of gasoline is-affecting your travel at present? 1. not at all 2. very little 3. a little 4. quite a bit 5. a lot 73. 61 74. 62 75. 63 76. 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 77. 72 73 Page 12 How much would you say gasoline availability and price affected your travel six (6) months ago? 1. Not at all 2. very little 3. a little 4. quite a bit 5. a lot How much do you feel gasoline availability and price will affect your travel six (6) months from now? 1. not at all 2. very little 3. a little 4. quite a bit 5. a lot In the last 12 months have you cancelled plans or drastically changed a pleasure trip as a result of gasoline prices or gasoline availability? yes no go to 77. What destination (distance) When For what reason In the last 12 months have you chosen to use some form of tranSportation other than an automobile on a pleasure trip because of gasoline shortages or high gasoline prices? yes no go to 79. _.jflf__ 75"— 76 8O 77 78 Card # 79 78. 1-6 same as 1 ll 10 12 14 15 16 13 17 l9 20 18 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. Page 13 What destination (distance) When For what reason Mode of travel Is there any particular destination which you have prev- iously visited but now consider it too costly because of high gasoline prices, or too far because of slower speed 'limits, or unreachable because of gasoline shortages? yes no go to 81. destination what reason Are you planning a recreational trip of 100 miles or more in the next six months? yes no go to 84. How many trips are you currently planning? Where do you plan to go on the longest trip planned if more than one trip is planned? no decision destination Have you decided not to take a trip this year? yes no go to 86 Can you tell me why? 21 22 28 29 .30 23 24 25 26 27 31 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. page 14 How much would you say gasoline availability_influenced your decision on where to go or where not to go? not at all very little a little quite a bit a lot How much would say gasoline prices influenced your decision on where to go or where not to go? not at all very little a little quite a bit a lot Compared to past years, would you say that your recreation trips this year will be? a) fewer in number ( ) more ( ) or about the same ( ) b) longer in time ( ) shorter ( ) or about the same ( ) c) shorter in distance ( ) longer ( ) or about the same ( d) more costly ( ) less costly ( ) or about the same ( ) e) more thoroughly planned ( ) less thoroughly ( ) or about the same ( ) Think back to how you would have rated Michigan as a travel distination one year ago. When you take into consideration any possible fuel conditions how would you rate Michigan now in comparison to your rating last year? less desirable more desirable about the same How would you rate Wisconsin now in comparison to last year? less desirable ‘ more desirable about the same How would you rate Minnesota in comparison to last year? less desirable more desirable about the same How would you rate Ontario in comparison to last year? less desirable more desirable about the same 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 80 (Card #) 42 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. pagellS We're almost finished with this questionnaire. In order to compare different groups, I need to get some background information on you and your family. Sex of respondent 1. Male 2. Female Race of respondent 1. White 2. Black 3 Other (Indian, Chicano, etc.) How many years of education did you complete? What is the occupation of the head of this household? Can you tell me how much net pre-tax income this household earned last year? How old are you? APPENDIX A2 PHI-TEST INTERVIEW SCHEDULE INTERVIEW NUI IBER ”u“.— l 2 3 COUNTY I‘TUMBER _———‘ 4 INTERVIEWER NUMBER TOURISM STUDY PRE—TEST INTERVIEW SCHEDULE Introduction: Try to put the respondent at ease. Assure him/her that his cooperation is appreciated and that his/her candor is necessary if the results are to be meaningful. "Just relax". Present the order of the interview: "These are the areas we will be covering during the next few minutes. The interview is broken into six areas and I'll read them to you in order to show you where we're going. 1. Travel experiences. 2. Travel ideas and attitudes in relation to family attitudes. Sources of information (newspaper, TV, magazines). Impressions of Great Lakes Region. Influence of gas shortages on trip planning. Personal background information. O‘U‘L‘w STATE 9 10 REGION 11 DISTANCE 12 13 16 17 18 19 Page 2 The first area we need to cover is your travel experiences. Remember, before we get started, that vacations are taken for a number of different reasons -- to visit relatives, to see new places, to get away from it all, to camp out and so on. This means that we cannot strictly define vacations. You do. If you think of a trip as travel for pleasure, then it is. So, ... first question. 7. 10. 11. Have you ever taken a pleasure trip by car or bus that involved traveling over 100 miles total? 1. Yes if no, go to 22 2. No If yes ... Thinking back, can you remember the last trip by car that you took that was over 100 miles long? 1. Yes if no, go to 14 2. No If yes ... Where did you go on that trip or, more specifically, where were you when you were furthese from your present home on that trip? (Get particular location and state) (Distance) How many nights were you gone on that trip? If you can't remember exactly, estimate the number of nights. What was the single most important reason for taking it? (If response is visitation of relatives -- find out which side or both) 1. Rel - H 2. Rel - W 3. Rel - B Page 3 12. Now, you were gone about nights on that trip. Can you remember where you spent those nights? By this I mean with friends, relatives, motel, hotel, campgrounds, ... wherever. TYPE # OF NIGHTS Type of accomodation Number of nights in each 20-22 20 21 22 23_25 23 24 25 26-28 26 27 23 ”‘31 —— 32-34 29 30 31 35_37 32 33 34 (Try to account for each night) 35 36 37 13. Can you remember the month and year in which the trip was taken? 38 39 Number of months passed since trip was taken: (Exclusing the month of the trip and the present month included) Now, let's look at some other trips by car that you've tab“ 14. How many auto pleasure trips of over 100 miles do you think 40 41 you took during the last year? 15. Where did you go on the largest one during the last year? 42 43 - (specifically) (Distance) 44 45 46 47 16. What was the single most important reason for taking it? 48 49 17. Now to go back a little further, would you say that you've -§6—- taken at least one trip of 100 miles every year during the last five years? 1. Yes 2. No 18. Where did you go on the longest automobile trip you've 51 52 taken during the last five years? ‘jgg 54 55 56 (specifically) Distance 57 59 62 66 70 71 19. 58 20. 60 61 ”6'5" 64 65 21. 67 22. 23. 24. 25. 72 Page 4 What was the single most important reason for taking it? (specificallV‘ We've been talking about the longest trip in the last fLTe years ~- what about the most memorable trip? This could be in the United States or outside it. Could you tell no where you went on the trip that you best remember as being pleasant? Distance (U. S. only) Why did you take that trip? Now I'm going to ask you to describe yourself in several ways regarding how you travel. First, he! often do you take trips of over 100 miles. Compared to your friends, relatives, co—workers, and so on —- do you travel. 1. Very often 2. Often 3. Occasionally 4. Seldom 5. Never NOW. describe how far you typically would go on such‘trips. Again, “re relatives, friends, neighbors, as compar‘cnwc Do you usually take trips that are: 1. Very close by (no 100 mile limit 2. Within a short distance here) 3. Medium distance 4. Long distance 5. Very long distance Now, describe ycurself or your fam’ly in terms of Bifnflifil . trip. Do you plan out the trip (where to go, where to stay, what to do, ...) 1. Not a“ all 2. A little 3. Quite a bit 4. Carefully 5. Very carefully If you had questions on where to go or how to get there C‘ where to stay on a trip, where would you go for inforz;tir Page 5 Now, let's look at four particular places. We need to know if you have been to any of these areas and for how long. 26. First, have you ever been in the Canadian province of Ontari:? 73 1. Yes 2. No if no, go to 28 _____ _____ _____ 27. Can you estimate the total number of nights you have spent 74 75 76 in Ontario? _____ _____ _____ 28. Have you ever been to Minnesota? 77 78 79 CARD # 1. Yes 2' No if no, go to 30 —_—__ 80 1-6 Same as 1 7 29. Can you estimate the total number of nights you have spent 8 9 10 in Minnesota? 30. Ever been in Wisconsin? 11 1. Yes 2. No if no, go to 32 31. For how many total nights would you guess? 12 13 14 32. Have you ever been in Michigan? 15 1. Yes 2. No if no, go to 33. And how many total nights would you guess you have spent in Michigan? 16 17 18 Okay, now we are going to discuss how your family makes certain decisions on a trip. You will have to base your response on past experience. Think back on your trip(s) and try to recall. 34. First, though, do you have children in the household now? 19 1. Yes 2. No 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 21 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. Page 6 How many? Okay, that makes a difference because first I want you to imagine taking a trip without the children-~just you and your wife/husband. (If no children or no children on last trip, explain that they can do this without imagining.) (hand card 1 to respondent) You and your husband/wife are on a long trip involving several nights away from home. Who would have chosen the the destination of the trip? Wife Wife Joint Husband Husband Always Usually Usually Always Who would have chosen the route to take? Wife Wife Joint Hus‘ nd Husband Always Usually Usually Always Who would typically decide where to eat? Wife Wife Joint Husbans Husband Always Usually Usually Always Who would typically decide when to take a rest stop? (not gasoline stop) Wife Wife Joint Husband Husband Always Usually Usually Always Who would typically decide where to take a rest stop? (not gasoline stop) Wife Wife Joint Husband Husband Always Usually Usually Always Who would typically decide where (accommodations) to Spend the night? Wife Wife Joint Husband Husband Always Usually Usually Always 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. if no children in household—go to #49 Now, let's include the children in these questions. You are driving to the destination. are on a trip. children (child) are (is) with you. (hand respondent care 2) Who would have chosen the destination? One or both One or both joint Parents Parents Always Usually Child/ Children Usually Who would have chosen the route to be taken? One or both One or both Joint Parents Parents Always Usually Who would typically decide when to take a rest (not gasoline stop) One or both One or both Joint Parents Parents Always Usually Who would typically decide where to (not gasoline Step) One or both One or both Joint Parents Parents Always Usually Who would typically decide where to One or both One or both Joint Parents Parents Always Usually Who would typically decide where to One or both One or both Joint Parents Parents Always Usually i 1 1H Child/ Children Usually Child/ Children Usually Page 7 You The Child/ Children Always Child/ Children Always stop? Child/ Children Always take a rest stop? Child/ Children Usually eat? Child/ Children Usually Child/ Children Always Child] Children Always spend the night? Child/ Children Usually Child/ Children Always 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. l 52 54 ,Hmmmn U'l U 55 58 59 56 57 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. Page 8 Okay, these next few questions may seem a bit strange, but they are here for a good purpose. (hand reapondent Sheet 1) All you have to do is mark the space which you think is appropriate. There are seven spaces-~they range from strong agreement with the statement to strong disagreement. Just read the statement and mark the space that fits your ideas on the statement. (Make sure they understand.) (Mark down their response number after they have finished.) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) Okey, now let's turn to your habits of watching TV, reading the newspaper and so on. First, let's cover television... Is there a television in the household? 1. Yes 2. No if no, see if they watch TV somewhere else-if still no, go to #71 Can you estimate how much television you watch on a typical day? (put in minutes per day) (hand respondent card 3) 62. 63. You can see we have put the different type shows into categories. Can you tell me how much you watch each type of show? 1 2 3 4 Never Some Regularly Very Regularly if unsure, give examples Westerns Gunsmoke Spy/Detectives Cannon, Kojak, Columbo .. .ll III II. Olin I! 1" III I ‘1 a 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 68 69 77 8O 67 7O 78 71 79 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. Page 9 News/Public Affairs Cronkite, 60 Minutes Situation Comedies All in the Family, Mary Tyler Moore, Lucille Ball Variety Carol Burnett, Bob Hope Specials Sports Football, Baseball, Wide World of Sports Soaps Edge of Night, As the World Turns Womens/Games Dinah's Place Okay, new radio... Is there a radio in the house or in your car? 1. Yes 2. No If no, go to #74 How much do you listen to the radio? (put in minutes per day) When do you usually listen to the radio? Morning Afternoon Evening Throughout the day Okay, now newspapers... Does your family take a newspaper? 1. Yes 2. No (Card) 74. 75. 12 “1‘3— 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 "2‘1— 22 Page 10 (1-6 same as #1) Do you read a newspaper(s) regularly? I. Yes 2 . No if no, go to #77 How much time do you spend daily with the newspaper or newspapers? (put in minutes per day) 77. 78. 23 25 26 24 79. 80. Okay, now magazines... Do you subscribe to or regularly buy a magazine? 1. Yes 2. No if no, go to #80 I'll read off different types of magazines and you tell me if you take or read one or more regularly. (Ask them to name them as you proceed.) News (Time, Newsweek) Sports (Sports Illustrated) Hobby (Photography, Cars) Travel (AAA) Decorating (Better Homes & Gardens) Opinion (Harpers, Saturday Review) TV Guide Reader's Digest Men's (Playboy, Esquire, True Ladies (McCall;s, Redbook) Total read Now, to switch back to travel, have you ever written Michigan for travel information? 1. Yes 2. No Have you ever written Ontario for travel information? 1. Yes 2. No 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 81. 82. 83. (1) 84. (2) 85. (3) 86. (4) 87. (5) 88. (6) Page 11 Have you ever written Wisconsin for travel information? 1. Yes 2. No Have you ever written Minnesota for travel information? 1. Yes 2. No That's all we need to know about your reading, viewing, and listening habits. There has been a lot of talk lately on the TV and Radio that the United States does not have enough fuel to meet the needs of everyone. Some people have said fuel prices will be going up and that fuel may even be rationed. Others say that a fuel shortage does not even exist. These next few questions are here to find out what you think about this possible fuel shortage and to see if your recrea- tional trips have changed as a result of any increased prices or shortage of gasoline. Do you thjnk there has been a fuel shortage of any kind in the last 6 months? Yes go to 2 No go to 3 How severe did you consider this shortage? Insignificant l to 9 Extremely severe In the last 6 months were you ever concerned that you might not be able to get enough gasoline? Yes go to 4 No go to 5 How much did this concern influence your decision to take pleasure trips? Very little a little quite a bit very much Do you think there is a fuel shortage of any kind at the present time? Yes go to 6 No go to 7 How severe do you consider this present shortage? 1 ------ 9 35 36 37 38 39 4O 41 42 43 44 89. (7) 90. (9) 91. (10) 92. (15) 93. (16) 94. (17) 95. (18) 96. (19) 97. Page 12 Do you think there will be a fuel shortage of any kind 6 months from now? Yes go to 8 No go to 9 How severe do you think this shortage might be? 1 —————— 10 How much do you think this shortage will affect your pleas- ure trip(s) in the future? Very little a little quite a bit very much In these next few questions you will need to see a difference between gasoline availability and gasoline prices. For pur— poses of this study gasoline availability has to do with whether you can get as much gas as you need when you want it. and gasoline price is the amount you have to pay per gallon of gas. Have you ever cancelled or drastically changed a pleasure trip as a result of gasoline prices or gasoline availability? Yes go to 16 No go to 17 Explain: When, why. On any of your previous trips were you ever hampered (slowed down) because of gasoline shortages or high gasoline prices” Yes go to 18 No go to 19 Explain: When, why. Have you ever chosen to use some form of transportation other than an automobile because of gasoline shortages or high gasoline prices? Yes go to 20 We go to 21 When, what mode 98. (21) 46 99. (22) 47 100. (23) 101 O (24) 49 50 51 52 53 102. (25) 54 103. (26) 55 104. (27) 56 105. (28) 57 106. (29) 58 107. (30) 59 Page 13 Is there any particular destination which you have previously visited but now consider it too costly because of high gaso— line prices, or too far because of slower speed limits, c unreachable because of gasoline shortages? ’ Yes go to 22 No go to 23 Explain; When, where, why. Are you planning a recreational trip of 100 miles or more in the next six months? Yes go to 24 We go to 35 Where do you plan to go on the longest trip planned if P”"” than one trip is planned? No decision ' Decision Did fuel availability influence your decision of where to ' Yes go to 26 No go to 27 How much would you say availability influenced your docic Very little a little _quite a bit a lot Did fuel prices influence your decision? Yes go to 28 No go to 29 How much would you say prices influenced your decision? Very little a little quite a bit a lot Did the slower speed limits that many states have enacted influence your decision? Yes go to 30 No How much would you say slower speed limits influenced yov" decision? Very little a little quite a bit a lot 108. 60 109. 61 110. 62 111. 63 112. 64 65 113. 66 67 114. 68 69 70 115. 71 72 Page 14 As a result of gasoline availability, cost, and any other recent change such as lower speed limits and banning Sunday gasoline sales, which of these six travel patterns will you most likely do: Think back to how you would have rated Michigan as a travc‘ destination one year ago. When you take into consideration any possible fuel conditions how would you rate Michigan new in comparison to your rating last year? Less desirable about the same more desirable We're almost finished with this questionnaire. In order to compare different groups, I need to get some background in- formation on you and your family. Sex of respondent 1. Male 2. Female Race of respondent White 1. 2. Black 3 Other (Indian, Chicano, etc.) How many years of education did you complete? What is the occupation of the head of this household? Can you tell me how much pre—tax income this household he‘ last year? (Use list in l,000's)-coded How old are you? APPENDIX B AREA OF THE STUDY AND SELECTED COUNTIES Ill IFIIIII.1 hf! -LlNOlS 'Ounties, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, and Selected Places 10 JO DIVIISS (“lots _——_— . lSLAND-MOLINE wmuslm DAVENPORT-R ’ C F251,. , scon ,.-. :- -' :55; *‘ . DAVENPORT. O -,'.'-:-:_' nocx 15111 6., Home ‘RCCI Inn“) r 3H 'HIDUSOI .2590" :' ‘.«.-:~:-‘:':. -. »' {WV .. 7’ ROC K F OR 0 w 'NNIIlSO C0) . I ' ‘.'~\‘-'- I not MINI! Us! ’8 gi- WAUKEGAN CHICAGO ’ ‘_.‘_f Elam-5'. .: ‘m. -. :-. ' ; -_L r 0 o m crow mom: 5': o r . «32:5 of KM! _-_,_ -... .f. 00 '16! l IAN! _____, or I .u *1" our PA ,- CHICAGO 3.5 immunsrq .‘ g; 502021. new _ . """“" fits IIND‘H. ...._———‘:g ' ..'.‘A'.‘.V.‘.- -' . 7 ’5'". .u'[w t‘ S‘LL' " "a. -. 5+ ;- '---_g::; HEN-V .33: f cluuov IIICI. :9 451’”: \- x l-'l."hll [Ahlbl‘l 7 W" - KANKAKEE GAIESBURG "*“ul 1...— luo‘ ._ ,- _ ».-. ‘, ... . ..” ..V'..-\‘" _’._.,.__ .' L‘yguchm 8‘; "..(~ PEOR IA . . . - .9. . 2' ; no-u — wooorono :3." .3 . .. "' ’ ~— Psoal/O' .. .. ... °°°°' _. g _, .BLOOMINGT Ll- NORMAL Z"; 27'3"". NORMA" " 36.6 uuwtu j' ' 0 w: ton .. nc oonoucu . "mo“ 3.39.37, ”so” ....... i4}. 3 “Hmo- scwrun , 0“ MING :0 URBA'NA O :3 1;! DANVlllE u - \--.-.. . "‘" .53 (annual. 3:21 0 a. u; u t u A l o 33553:;1'9523c2-ug I; ' no as: ..., 2.23? :33 CHAM PAIGN-URBA NA owmr w” , 3"". '- 3.1:,- . ..... i-i- DECAT‘UR Sitting-tiff??? '1": r 3:» . a: ' v - -: ~~~~~~~ 3-' ""* 59 IE 0 ..zzs-z ' '95:): affirm! "°"°"' c- N . .... g 31. "futon S: 33.-=3: 3': .222»..- mt KO" SPRI ,x louunu CHRISHAI W SutLav estrus tun Incounn acumen!" "’"'"“'° 0 '1 F (V 1 ins "um _ (transom: ”9" '. (””0” .I:_."-" 321,353.;.~_:3.3;§.-:5:g:§.._<;.;:.:\ .. s. {45:3 ;-. h" '41 ”'00 l £;‘$‘;::.;<.;‘3:;,:_1. .~:~ " ' ..., ‘1‘: , 3 1 J:_ ...fitfig . .;-._ ./.\_" “‘0. so" 313:3: 33: fl 0 RlSSANr ' ' 3’3." CHI-us '3 an nicuuuo Lawn-(l ’3‘.‘ SI lOUlS 3': 5,2 "3.5:, ,. ~ 57 Lows can ® 0 ~ ' cumou "m' '_ i: 3313-1932... at .66.. £451 57 lOUlS gs; --.-..;-‘.g:.: f. 5‘.“ '1' 35.3: ' ”fl " 13321.‘ s, cm, i 5...: "AMILIN $1 ' ’j'y; In": 3'"; 0‘“ v9 . '3 wasmncvoq ST Lows 1" '2' ”"00",. '1'" annual- wmtt tuuuu l. E G E N D P“ f. - JACISON (”Lan .3, Places at 100,000 or more inhabitants “UH,” mm: 0 Places of 50,000 to 100,000 inhabitants 0 Central cities at SMSA's With fewer than 50,000 inhabitants \ 0 ”ADD!- 0 Places of 25.000 to 50,000 inhabitants Outside SMSA 5 "mo. mm” '0'! $CALI’ Slandafd IOIEI'ODO'l'an . "(Q puggsu .Il$“c o ‘0 ,0 )0 m ” HIL!’ Statistical Areas (SMSA s) 3’?- -1- _. 11:. 10 Yrs—Q IANA - nties, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, and Selected Places /OM lCHIGAN (HY Omtiinr SOUTH "ND(J. 5' lacuna: sttuuu 3 "' (noun 5 . st JOSEPH _ ’~ “ '°'"‘ -- SOUTH BEND - 3 rontui 3 "' '-- ---——-~I 1‘“ '.' , ‘ ———.._._. ' " If 3 want a: nu GARY-HAI . CAG {3; It: I' E," HARSHALL ~ <5 ’ ”All! a ? :--.l .>..‘- itoscmsxo 1.3;» 3 ~ 3. N ti‘évavn. ’. I 5"" I‘ . “mu, roar WAYNE 5;; ° F WAYN PULASKI rum,“ 3; O CRT E usen E; nuu s: "WW" ......... _.,. . i: O ‘:.;‘-'-.('-. . ... . music HUSTING'ON (Ass Mimi nus ”"5 atutbu . . . “'th datum ' E? KOKOMO ‘0 Tiretcmop cm“ ‘50 WIS! Mi ”"qu .___ Howuo cc 1" wan-cu 't an: If r [E . s .‘LAFAYETTE WEST LAFAYETTE ~ - - ~"E CLINTON 0" MUNC 3 ”—"‘“ ..... MUNth "3' ' ~ . I ‘ . a" ;-:r- in?“ :ii-‘T'. -'"' . 3 t 1:. , "', 5.....f,-.I\ - ,r,-2s\ . (-.-_.'.;‘?-,~.-, ;. :“AOISON 4 DEL ‘“ ‘.t k .ANDOL'H '°°"'"" ANDERSON .5 if; HON‘IGOItIV "; soon: """m" _3' I ' ' ' E 53'? ANDERSON #77 3 i . mm C \i. .1 U . ’ i; INDIANA HANCOCK .‘v .3; E uznonicxs é' - 3 eutiuu 0// " .3: ., "115- / { -::2: " ("ta-.33 ., " f' ‘USH anTE - UNION 2f"':3‘::'..-_:.h'13_j‘-::33.-33'. I: ' " :3 INDIANAPOLIS e -. #355 TERRE murfff? . - f sucuv int . no.0 '3‘: Z ' ‘ ' ' t'f. "“"9‘ .3? 'i' (Li-tr: "' 'IANKLIN , :‘I owtu 050"” . . $342535? ' ' cowmus ' "00mm“ 0 °“"'°'” "HMO" CINCINNATI BROWN 0 SARTHOLOHEW . f. C'NC'NN‘I.’ uonnoc I wear ' cactus ’ JENNINGS ucxson r) "‘“”""c‘ Switzmuo ‘ JEN-(RSON nimu LK‘ scort msnmcton ounce cuu ., I \LLQUISVILLE fl" mums “"50” anroeo now _ AlytOUlS'v’WIE ~ “ c . '-" -" f’ unwise-i :33 .3 mania .' ' :W . LEGEND eosn 5°". EVANSVILL etucu run --3 ~ . r O EVANSV‘“ ' 5 67 Places of 100.000 Or more Inhabitants ' "" 0 Places of 50.000 to 100,000 inhabitants 0 Central Cities of SMSA s with lewer than 50.000 Inhabitants 0' inhabitants outsude SMSA's ~. 3 "(ND'ISON -- O PIBCCS OI 25.00010 50.0 I) (. 333933; " sent 3'..._j7""' ' so an no somus ' lszilz"'-=?-'-‘J "‘—='“"'-‘1 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SUSA'S) -ll0 Iunties, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, and Selected Places MOM“)! / .- Ifllc.‘ ‘.“ j . ‘5'"..0“ .' CLEVflAN I - ' . . ‘ _ §| .Ifl.‘ r haunt! ‘ / om“ lumo uncms .._._......__........ -- -. -.--._.___. L" ’ / 'I vourIGSIowN "l WARREN Dun-«t “I“, shows" ‘ 2 :1 I'm-con “---.-- ---. ___._ _ ,__ l ""' AKRON '- “mum L“ l . pom“ F ”mom; ‘ 5010 l , ‘ w..." ’ ooncsloww AIION'EI *’ ammo.“ pun.“ OIINDIAV ll J - t , HARLOCI "' ‘ ‘ “ "“ -’ - " l IL HI r l 5 £ J-..._J '-“"' ' . . l . sun 1 (Ah wtll 1.“_. nut-not { (”Mule asmno ’ ._ 4 (0 on. M“ r" — -—- —---— l MANSFIELD ‘1 "um?" ; ‘ ' ' nu» . _,o ...”... LIMA ,W l f cANION r I "J.” - ... -——— .. . anon. _M . g ....1 "" “...—«J ! .0i(§ (‘.m‘ l Luautu 0 "N“ .4-____‘_ Mayor: “0.”. - . l ....-- ____ r . - ~[' "L— mun-Mus i J - _ LI" LOGAN 3 ... _-.._ I MQLQV I L r... only.” nun-vs T‘. _._ .- umoa _ ouuuu ‘i 7 3 ' "~ - _._ j ——-——— I STEUBENl/ILLE-WEJBTON on"! (nun-Icy. I ‘ ~ ‘ '. _ — win, 1__,._____ UCII'UG 3' . WHEEIING mun COLUMBUS _' nnuu O a ' - “(l “f" .1. 00h! DAYTON ...... ‘ "mm “mom I _r —‘ W“ '"G ‘ A" "‘ 7 .4 “-3, K." .s"lNG"“'D ( . UMI'JS '. . __'.,‘_’,‘..- emu-.1" can»... . . SPR|NGHELD Manson } umnuo : ——- 1.. . . - ‘I __ ,r L7 l canon F!) l “ta-3‘ { .-~.".r‘:. A. 0 ’ L_, w.” ‘ l V“ I "'.L .flflfl'NG I M u‘ _- n ‘ ‘ I: ‘AM‘SI‘. 'l’llv Momma!" g Gill-u - -' n ' . PKI|flAV hi] ‘ ION“. l ‘~ ...: , ~ Mum , Owomnovm ' j NOCII‘IG ' ”m. HAMILTON MIDDLETOWN 0 Hanan '0" (tn-non . wuau CINCINNATI é “‘ : uni not. i. (MKINNAII 0' "99'? -. - Int-Ion ‘ \ L“ ___/ fI/L—WX l nusocu ' soon: ' ———~-... _LL 5 2 J rénwowu O LEGEND . l ’5, Places 0! 100.000 at more mhab-Iants > ‘ wind 0 Pine: 0' 50.000 Ia IOOOOO mmwanis ‘ “‘“n n ”m u D Cenha! (It-es o! SMSl-‘s mm lune! man 50 000 mhab-lanls ' 9» .- 2° '2 x . - 4:: J O Pints u' 25 000 I0 50,000 numb-unis {N's cc SMSA x F Manama Mr'voruol Ian I , Slum-”II Ate.“ ISMSA 5|