The importance of neighborhood type dissonance in understanding the effect of the built environment on travel behavior


  • Kevin Manaugh McGill University
  • Ahmed El-Geneidy McGill University



self-selection, mode choice, home location choice


For many years, researchers have struggled to separate the effects of personal tastes—including residential choices—from built environment and transport related factors when attempting to understand and model travel behavior. This paper will briefly describe how issues related to self-selection, if not controlled for in a travel behavior analysis, can lead to over- and under-estimation of the effect of the built environment on travel behavior. A theoretical model is presented, which is followed by an empirical analysis based on survey data capturing residential choice factors to test our theory. Our analysis shows that by separating people that have chosen their current home location based primarily on transport-related concerns from people who have located based primarily on housing and neighborhood characteristics, we are able to gain a nuanced understanding of how various “costs” associated with using public transit (access time, waiting time, and transfers) affect the likelihood of taking transit. We find a strong aversion to transfers as well as different responses to these factors based on reasons for living in a given location. We demonstrate how model predictions vary greatly especially when self-selection factors are included in the analysis. Findings from this research shed light on the importance of self-selection in travel behavior research, giving transport planners and engineers clear examples how ignoring these factors can lead to misleading findings.


Cao, X., and D. Chatman. 2012. How will land use policies affect travel? The importance of residential sorting. Paper presented at the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, January 22-26 Washington, DC.

Chatman, D. 2009. Residential choice, the built environment, and nonwork travel: Evidence using new data and methods. Environment and Planning A 41(5).

de Vos, J., B. Derudder, V. Van Acker, and F. Witlox. 2012. Reducing car use: Changing attitudes or relocating? The influence of residential dissonance on travel behavior. Journal of Transport Geography 22: 1–9.

Lund, H. 2003.Testing the claims of new urbanism: Local access, pedestrian travel, and neighboring behaviors, Journal of the American Planning Association 69:4: 414–429.

Naess, P. 2009. Residential self-selection and appropriate control variables in land use: Travel studies. Transport Reviews 29(3): 293–324.

Norusis, M. 2010. PASW Statistics 18 Guide to Data Analysis. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentiss Hall.

Schwanen, T., and P. Mokhtarian. 2005. What if you live in the wrong neighborhood? The impact of residential neighborhood type dissonance on distance traveled. Transportation Research Part D 10(2): 127–151.

Schwanen, T., and P. Mokhtarian. 2007. Attitudes toward travel and land use and choice of residential neighborhood type: Evidence from the San Francisco bay area. Housing Policy Debate 18(1): 171–207.




How to Cite

Manaugh, K., & El-Geneidy, A. (2015). The importance of neighborhood type dissonance in understanding the effect of the built environment on travel behavior. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 8(2).