Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Transportation Research Part F

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/trf

Habitual or reasoned? Using the theory of planned behavior,

technology acceptance model, and habit to examine switching
intentions toward public transit
Ching-Fu Chen , Wei-Hsiang Chao
Department of Transportation & Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, 1 University Rd., Tainan 701, Taiwan

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 1 August 2009
Received in revised form 18 August 2010
Accepted 11 November 2010

Keywords:
Mode switching intentions
TPB
TAM
Habit
Public transit

a b s t r a c t
How to reduce private vehicle use and to encourage public transit have always been the
fundamental policy goals of transportation authorities. Whether mode choice behaviors
are reasoned action or habit has also been debated, resulting in mixed arguments. This
study proposes an integrated model combining the theory of planned behavior (TPB), the
technology acceptance model (TAM), and habit to examine the switching intentions
toward public transit by private vehicle users (both car and motorcycle users). The results
reveal that through a comparison with the TPB variables, the habitual behavior of private
vehicle use hinders an individuals intention to switch from a car or motorcycle to public
transit. Furthermore, motorcycle commuters are more likely than car commuters to resist
their habitual mode use behavior in switching to public transit through their reasoned
evaluation process. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In the context of urban transport, governments generally seek to implement policies aimed at reducing car use and to
promote more environmental friendly modes, such as public transport (Domarchi, Tudela, & Gonzalez, 2008). Unfortunately,
these policies usually fail, or have unsatisfying results. Travel mode choice is determined by several factors, such as contextual factors (e.g., available travel modes environment), an individuals abilities and constraints (e.g., car ownership), and various psychological factors (e.g., evaluations and motives) (Thogersen & Moller, 2008). To explore the reasons behind the
unsatisfactory results of such policies, past studies on modal choice adopt two main approaches: utility-maximizing of
microeconomic theory and psychological behavior theory. Although the traditional studies based on the microeconomic
viewpoint and frequently using discrete choice models have given useful insights (Domarchi et al., 2008), the factors that
inuence an individuals decision-making in this area, especially the psychological ones, still remain relatively unclear.
1.1. TPB and habit
In the literature that utilizes psychological behavior theory in modal choice research, the theory of planned behavior (TPB,
Ajzen, 1985) has been widely used in predicting and explaining intended behavior across a variety of disciplines. The main
components of the TPB are a persons own attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, intentions, and behavior. More specically, the TPB is based on the proposition that an individuals behavior is a direct function of behavioral

Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 6 2757575x53230; fax: +886 6 2753882.

E-mail addresses: cfchen99@mail.ncku.edu.tw (C.-F. Chen), shangsheeper@gmail.com (W.-H. Chao).
1369-8478/$ - see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.trf.2010.11.006

C.-F. Chen, W.-H. Chao / Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

129

intention and perceived behavioral control. Intentions are themselves shaped by attitudes, subjective norms and perceived
behavioral control (Ajzen, 1991). The three determinants of behavioral intentions are each based on an underlying belief
structure: behavioral, normative, and control beliefs. In their respective aggregates, behavioral beliefs produce a favorable
or unfavorable attitude toward the behavior; normative beliefs result in a perceived social pressure or subjective norm;
and control beliefs give rise to perceived behavioral control with regard to performing the behavior. Taken together, attitude
toward the behavior, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control translate to the formation of a behavioral intention
which is the immediate determinant of actual behavior. The TPB has been used to examine the mode choice behavior in past
studies (Bamberg, Ajzen, & Schmidt, 2003; Bamberg, Rolle, & Weber, 2003; Bamberg & Schmidt, 2001, 2003).
From a psychological perspective, travel mode choice may be perceived as not only a deliberate process (i.e. the TPB) but
also originating from behavioral habits (Thogersen & Moller, 2008). Moreover, it has been argued that past behavior is the
best predictor of future behavior (Bamberg, Ajzen, et al., 2003; Bamberg, Rolle, et al., 2003).
Unlike the TPB, which assumes that behavior is reasoned, deliberately controlled, and deliberately planned, habit has
been perceived as an automatic link between a goal and a specic behavior or as a behavioral script stored in memory (Aarts
& Dijksterhuis, 2000; Aarts, Verplanken, & van Knippenberg, 1997, 1998; Fujii & Garling, 2003; Verplanken & Aarts, 1999). In
other words, as habitual behavior demands only a small amount of attention, the individuals control over behavioral intention as well as the behavior itself becomes weak. As long as circumstances remain relatively stable, past mode choice behavior can easily affect latter choice behavior. Therefore, the behavior under consideration is not completely reasoned, and past
behavior measured as a proxy for habit plays an important role in predicting future behavior, as supported by previous studies (Bamberg, Ajzen, et al., 2003; Bamberg, Rolle, et al., 2003; Ouellette & Wood, 1998). The theory of behavior driven by
habit has been applied into the mode choice behavior research along with TPB, in works such as Aarts et al. (1998), Bamberg,
Ajzen, et al. (2003), Domarchi et al. (2008), Eriksson, Garvill, and Nordlund (2008), Garling, Fujii and Boe (2001), Thogersen
and Moller (2008), Verplanken, Aarts, van Knippenberg, and van Knippenberg (1994), Verplanken, Aarts, and van
Knippenberg (1997), and Verplanken, Aarts, van Knippenberg, and Moonen (1998).
1.2. TAM
The introduction of a mass rapid transit system in an urban area can be viewed as a new transport technology from the
traveler perspective. Traveler perceptions of mass rapid transit may be rather different from those of not only private vehicles, but also traditional public transport services, such as buses. In the technology adoption context, the technology acceptance model (TAM) is among the most commonly employed theories for examining technology acceptance (Davis, 1989). The
appeal of TAM lies in that it is both specic and parsimonious, and displays a high level of predictive power with regard to
technology use. Overall, TAM has proven empirically successful in predicting about 40% of a systems use (Hu, Chau, Liu
Sheng, & Yan Tam, 1999). TAM suggests that perceived ease of use (PEOU) and perceived usefulness (PU) are the two most
important factors in explaining technology use. PEOU is the perception that a particular system or technology is easy to use,
whereas PU is the degree to which an individual believes that using a technology will enhance his or her performance (Davis,
1989). Both the importance and wide application of TAM in technology-driven contexts have been examined (Venkatesh &
Davis, 2000). Therefore, our study also includes perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness to explore their effects on
private vehicle users switching intentions with regard to public transit from the perspective of transport technology adoption. The rationale of including TAM and TPB is that both models are extended from the theory of reasoned action (TRA)
(Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), but have different foci, making the inclusion theoretically compatible and potentially complementary (Chau & Hu, 2002). This approach follows the rationale that the cognitive inuences specied by TAM, i.e. PEOU and PU,
may serve as important antecedents of attitude in TPB, which reciprocally may enhance the explanatory power of TAM (Chau
& Hu, 2002). As claimed by Taylor and Todd (1995), combining TAM and TPB can adequately dene an individuals behavior
with regard to using new technology. For example, the combined TAM and TPB model has been empirically applied to explore the factors affecting motorists usage intention with regard to an Electronic Toll Collection (ETC) service in Taiwan by
Chen, Fan, and Farn (2007).
1.3. The present study
The present study proposes an integrated model by taking into account rational (both TPB and TAM) and habitual variables (see Fig. 1), and furthermore explores the relationships between both these sets of variables and private vehicle users
switching with regard to public transit. Kaohsiung Mass Rapid Transit (KMRT), a public transit system that has operated in
Kaohsiung City, Taiwan, since 2008, is chosen as the research object. The passenger transport market of this southern city is
almost dominated by private vehicles, especially cars (19%) and motorcycles (65%), whereas public transport (such as buses)
accounted for only 6% of the market before the introduction of the KMRTs introduction. Reducing private vehicle use and
encouraging public transit use issues of immense concern for most cities around the world are especially challenging
for the transportation authority of Kaohsiung City. Having a better understanding on the perceptions of public transit for
private vehicle users and the effects of their habitual use of private vehicles on switching intentions with regard to public
transit are important and useful in designing effective marketing strategies. The effects of both rational and habitual factors
on their switching intentions are thus examined in this work, and the ndings from both car and motorcycle users compared.

130

C.-F. Chen, W.-H. Chao / Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

H4

TAM

Perceived
usefulness
H2
Attitude toward
public transit

H1

Switching
intentions toward
public transit

H5

H3
Perceived ease
of use

H7
H6

H10

Perceived behavior
control

H8

Subjective norm
H9

TPB

Habit

Fig. 1. Conceptual model.

1.4. Hypotheses
Based on the ideas outlined above, this study proposes the following hypotheses.
H1: Perceived ease of use has a positive effect on perceived usefulness.
H2: Perceived usefulness has a positive effect on attitude toward public transit.
H3: Perceived ease of use has a positive effect on attitude toward public transit.
H4: Perceived usefulness has a positive effect on switching intention toward public transit.
H5: Attitude toward public transit has a positive effect on switching intention toward public transit.
H6: Subjective norm has a positive effect on switching intention toward public transit.
H7: Perceived behavioral control has a positive effect on switching intention toward public transit.
H8: Habitual private mode use has a negative effect on attitude toward public transit.
H9: Habitual private mode use has a negative effect on perceived behavior control.
H10: Habitual private mode use has a negative effect on switching intention toward public transit.
2. Method
2.1. Procedure
A self-administered questionnaire survey was conducted to collect data from commuters in Kaohsiung during February
2009, based upon a convenience sampling method at various main locations, such as shopping malls, public transportation
stations, and parking lots. Participants were rst asked whether they used private vehicles for commuting purposes and if
they had any experience of using the KMRT. If so, after being briey informed of our research purpose, they were invited
to participate and complete the survey questionnaire on the spot.
2.2. Participants
A total of 550 questionnaires were distributed and 442 useful samples, including 202 from motorcycle users and 220 from
users, were obtained after excluding the incomplete ones, yielding an effective response rate of 88.4%.
The respondent data consist of both male (51.4%) and female (48.6%) respondents, with those aged 2034 (69.4%) accountings for the majority of the sample, followed by 3544 (14.8%). While 24.2% of the respondents indicated their monthly
income was less than NT$20,000 (around U$625), 50.5% reported their monthly income was within the range of
NT$20,001NT$40,000 (or U$625$1250), and 25.3% reported a monthly income of more than NT$40,000 (or U$1250). A
majority of the respondents were university of college graduates (88.3%). In addition, before KMRT started operations,
motorcycles (58.5%) and cars (32.2%) were reported as the two major modes used for commuting.

C.-F. Chen, W.-H. Chao / Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

131

2.3. Measures
The questionnaire with all the measures under investigation was designed based on an extensive review of the literature.
A pre-test was carried out with randomly selected commuters in Kaohsiung. Based upon feedback from a pilot sample of 50
commuters, the survey instrument was revised to improve clarity and reliability. The questionnaire examined the following
variables.
2.3.1. Attitude to public transit (ATT)
Attitude to public transit was assessed using the following seven items with the basic sentence of For me, taking the KMRT
to commute next time would overall be: (1) cheap, (2) fast, (3) comfortable, (4) convenient, (5) safe, (6) good, and (7)
pleasant.
2.3.2. Subjective norm (SN)
Subjective norm (SN) was measured with the following four items: (1) Most people who are important to me would support that I take the KMRT to commute, (2) Most people who are important to me think I should take the KMRT to commute, (3) Public opinion will affect my choice of taking the KMRT, and (4) Government policy will inuence my
choice of taking the KMRT.
2.3.3. Perceived behavioral control (PBC)
Perceived behavioral control was assessed with the following two items: (1) For me to take the KMRT to commute is easy
and (2) My freedom to take the KMRT to commute is high.
2.3.4. Perceived ease of use (PE)
Perceived ease of use was measured with the following ve items: (1) My interaction with the ticketing system of the
KMRT is easy and understandable, (2) My interaction with the information system of the KMRT is easy and understandable, (3) My interaction with the facilities and services of the KMRT is easy and understandable, (4) It is easy for me to
take the KMRT for commuting purposes, and (5) Overall, it is easy to use the KMRT.
2.3.5. Perceived usefulness (PU)
Perceived usefulness was measured using ve items, as follows: (1) Taking the KMRT to commute would cost me less (2)
Taking the KMRT to commute would make my time more efcient, (3) Taking the KMRT to commute would reduce my
commuting time, (4) Taking the KMRT to commute would make my transferring more convenient, and (5) Overall, taking
the KMRT is useful for me when commuting.
2.3.6. Switching intention toward public transit (SI)
Switching intention toward public transit (SI) was measured by the following three items: (1) My intention to switch
from motorcycle (or car) to the KMRT when commuting next time is strong, (2) The likelihood of my switching to the
KMRT when commuting next time is high, and (3) I will make an effort to switch to the KMRT when commuting next
time.
The above mentioned items were all measured by using a ve-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (=strongly disagree)
to 5 (=strongly agree).
2.3.7. Habit (HAB)
Habit was used to ask respondents to indicate how often on average they use a motorcycle (or car) when commuting
within a week. The response alternatives were (1) 1 day, (2) 2 days, (3) 3 days, (4) 4 days, and (5) 5 days.
2.4. Data analysis
Following Anderson and Gerbings (1988) two-step approach, a measurement model is rst estimated using Conrmatory
Factor Analysis (CFA) to assess its adequacy, and then Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is utilized to examine the model
tness and to test causal relationships.
The t of the conceptual models to the empirical data is assessed with the Chi-square (v2) statistics, the goodness-of-t
index (GFI), the normed t index (NFI), the comparative t index (CFI), and the root mean square of approximation (RMSEA).
For each of these statistics, values of 0.9 or higher indicate acceptability, except for the RMSEA, for which values up to 0.08
indicate an acceptable t to the data (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006).

3. Results
Descriptive statistics and Cronbach alpha coefcients were calculated for all measures in the study prior to model
estimation. Table 1 reports the number of items, means, standard deviations, and internal consistency (i.e., Cronbach alpha

132

C.-F. Chen, W.-H. Chao / Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

Table 1
Number of items, mean scores, and Cronbach alpha values for all measures.
Measures

No. of item

Meana

SD

Cronbachs alpha

Perceived ease of use (PE)

Perceived usefulness (PU)
Attitude to public transit (ATT)
Subjective norm (SN)
Perceived behavior control (PBC)
Switching intention toward public transit (SI)
Habit (HAB)

5
4
6
2
2
3
1

3.70
3.23
3.71
3.08
3.55
3.10
4.47

0.62
0.75
0.58
0.75
0.77
0.77
1.09

0.84
0.78
0.80
0.75
0.72
0.86

1 = 1 day, 2 = 2 days, 3 = 3 days, 4 = 4 days, and 5 = 5 days for HAB.

a
1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree for all measures except HAB.

coefcients) for all measures. All Cronbach alpha values are greater than the suggested minimum acceptable level of 0.7
(Hair et al., 2006), indicating that internal consistency is acceptable.
3.1. Measurement model
Following the two-step approach proposed by Anderson and Gerbing (1988), CFA was rst conducted to analyze the
validity and reliability of the constructs in our conceptual model. The model adequacy was assessed by the t indices, as
suggested by Jreskog and Srbom (1996) and Hair et al. (2006). A preliminary CFA was then conducted. As their standardized factor loadings (SFL) did not meet the minimum criterion of 0.5 (Hair et al., 2006), ve items including two of the perceived usefulness items Taking the KMRT to commute would cost me less and (Taking the KMRT to commute would
make my transferring more convenient), one of the attitude items (cheap), and two of the subjective norm items (public opinion will affect my choice of taking the KMRT, and government policy will inuence my choice of taking the KMRT).
were eliminated to increase reliability and decrease measurement error. After removing these items, the remaining items
were again subjected to CFA. The convergent validity of the CFA results should be supported by the item reliability, construct
reliability, and average variance extracted (Hair et al., 2006).
According to the goodness-of-t indices from the CFA results, the measurement model was parsimonious (see Table 2).
Specically, although the Chi-square statistic (v2 = 539.0, df = 176) was signicant, the ratio of the chi-square value to

Table 2
Convergent validity.
Potential variable

Item

SFLa

Error variance

Standard error

CRb

AVEc

Perceived ease of use (PE)

PE1
PE2
PE3
PE4
PE5

0.74
0.68
0.78
0.78
0.76

0.45
0.54
0.39
0.40
0.43

0.05
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.04

0.86

0.56

Perceived usefulness (PU)

PU1
PU2
PU3

0.77
0.76
0.66

0.41
0.42
0.57

0.04
0.05
0.05

0.77

0.54

Attitude to public transit (ATT)

ATT
ATT
ATT
ATT
ATT
ATT

0.70
0.74
0.78
0.58
0.80
0.87

0.51
0.45
0.4
0.67
0.36
0.25

0.05
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.04

0.88

0.56

Subjective norm (SN)

SN1
SN2

0.68
0.89

0.54
0.20

0.05
0.05

0.77

0.63

Perceived behavior control (PBC)

PBC1
PBC2

0.71
0.71

0.49
0.50

0.07
0.07

0.67

0.50

Switching intention toward public transit (SI)

SI1
SI2
SI3
HAB

0.93
0.14
0.04
0.87
0.69
0.86
0.26
0.04
0.68
0.54
0.04
1.00
0.00
0.03

2
Comparative-t index: v = 539.0, df = 176 (p < 0.001); v2/df = 3.06, RMSEA = 0.07, GFI = 0.9
Normed t index: CFI = 0.95, NFI = 0.94

Habit (HAB)
Goodness-of-t indices
a
b
c

SFL: standardized factor loading.

CR: construct reliability.
AVE: average variance extracted.

1
2
3
4
5
6

133

C.-F. Chen, W.-H. Chao / Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

degrees of freedom (v2/df = 3.06) was less than the cut-off value of ve suggested by Bagozzi and Yi (1988). Furthermore,
other indices, such as CFI (0.95) and GFI (0.90), were greater than the recommended value of 0.9. Finally, the rootmean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.07, which is less than 0.10 (Hair et al., 2006).
As shown in Table 2, the t-values for all the standardized factor loadings of items were found to be signicant (p < 0.01).
Except for perceived behavioral control (0.67), construct reliability estimates ranged from 0.77 to 0.88, exceeding the critical
value of 0.7, indicating a satisfactory estimation in general. The average extracted variances of all constructs ranged between
0.54 and 0.69, all above the suggested value of 0.5. These results indicate that the measurement model has good convergent
validity. Discriminant validity distinguishes one construct from the others, and Table 3 shows the inter-construct correlation,
whereby a squared root of AVE for each construct is greater than the correlation coefcients of the corresponding interconstructs, indicating discriminant validity is achieved (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). To sum up, the hypothesized measurement
model is reliable and meaningful to test the structural relationships among the constructs.
3.2. Structural model and hypothesis tests
Three structural models were estimated with a maximum likelihood estimation method. First, we estimated an overall
model (Model 1) by using the whole sample (i.e. both motorcycle and car users) to test the hypotheses of the conceptual
model and to examine the factors affecting the intentions of modal switching to public transit for private vehicle users in
general. We then developed two structural models for motorcycle users (Model 2) and car users (Model 3), and used them
to compare the differences in the relationship effects of antecedents on modal switching intentions for both sample groups.
3.2.1. Whole sample model: private vehicle sample
Table 4 reports the estimated results for the whole sample model. The t measures indicate that the proposed model ts
the data well: v2 (df = 184) = 644.58 (p < 0.001), v2/df = 3.06, GFI = 0.91, CFI = 0.94, and RMSEA = 0.077. Fig. 2 shows the estimated model, with standardized path coefcients. For clarity, only signicant paths (p < 0.01) are shown in this gure.
Except for the path of habit ? attitude, all hypothesized relationships are found to be signicantly supported. In terms of
the effects on mode switching intentions, the estimates of the standardized coefcients show that attitude (b = 0.26, t = 5.72),
subjective norm (b = 0.39, t = 7.30), and perceived behavioral control (b = 0.12, t = 2.21) are all positive and signicant,
whereas habit (b = 0.16, t = 3.42) is signicantly negative. This implies that both rational and habitual factors may inuence a travelers decision whether or not to switch from private vehicles to use public transit. Interestingly, when comparing
their strength, subjective norm (0.39) appears to be the most inuential factor followed by attitude (0.26), and both effects
are signicantly greater than that of habit ( 0.16).
Both perceived ease of use (b = 0.46, t = 8.86) and perceived usefulness (b = 0.34, t = 7.11) are found to be signicantly and
positively associated with attitude toward public transit. Furthermore, perceived ease of use (b = 0.42, t = 6.64) has a significant, positive effect on perceived usefulness. In other words, apart from its direct effect on attitude, perceived ease of use
also affects attitude indirectly, as mediated by perceived usefulness.
The relationship between habit and attitude toward public transport is found to be insignicant. However, a signicant,
negative effect of habit on perceived behavioral control (b = 0.16, t = 2.41) is evident, and in turn this is translated to inuence switching intentions toward public transport through perceived behavioral control. In other words, regarding the effects of habit on switching intentions, there is evidence of both direct and indirect paths mediated by perceived
behavioral control.
3.2.2. Model comparison between motorcycle and car samples
To examine the different levels of mode switching intentions between motorcycle and car users, two subsequent SEM
models (see Figs. 3 and 4) were separately estimated by using the motorcycle and car samples, and the results are presented
in Table 4. Regarding the TAM part, the relationships between perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and attitude toward public transit are conrmed as being consistent with the results of the whole sample model. With respect to the TPB
part, three antecedents including attitude toward public transit, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control are all
associated with switching intentions toward public transit for the motorcycle sample model, while in the car sample model

Table 3
Correlations among constructs.
Construct
PU
PE
ATT
SN
PBC
SI
HAB

PU
0.73
0.35
0.53
0.43
0.28
0.42
0.17

PE
0.75
0.58
0.28
0.14
0.26
0.10

Note: The values in the diagonal are the square roots of AVE.

AT

0.75
0.36
0.29
0.46
0.11

SN

0.79
0.16
0.43
0.09

PBC

0.71
0.25
0.14

SI

0.83
0.24

HAB

134

C.-F. Chen, W.-H. Chao / Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

Table 4
Structural parameter estimates and goodness-of-t indices.

*
**

Path

Model 1 whole sample (N = 422)

Model 2 motorcycle sample (N = 202)

Model 3 car sample (N = 220)

PE ? PU
PE ? ATT
PU ? ATT
AT ? SI
PBC ? SI
SN ? SI
HAB ? ATT
HAB ? PBC
HAB ? SI
Goodnessof-t
index

0.42(6.64**)
0.46(8.86**)
0.34(7.11**)
0.26(5.72**)
0.12(2.21*)
0.39(7.30**)
0.03( 1.09)
0.16( 2.41*)
0.16( 3.42**)
v2 = 644.58, df = 184 (p < 0.001); v2/
df = 3.49, RMSEA = 0.077, GFI = 0.88
CFI = 0.94, NFI = 0.92

0.45(5.19**)
0.42(5.16**)
0.63(6.30**)
0.32(4.15**)
0.19(2.15*)
0.37(5.01**)
0.00( 0.03)
0.11( 1.39)
0.13( 2.09*)
v2 = 366.20, df = 171 (p < 0.001); v2/
df = 2.14, RMSEA = 0.075, GFI = 0.85
CFI = 0.95, NFI = 0.91

0.42(4.49**)
0.41(4.99**)
0.60(6.00**)
0.19(2.39*)
0.10(1.08)
0.34(3.82**)
0.03(0.61)
0.23( 2.24*)
0.20( 2.81**)
v2 = 402.91, df = 193 (p < 0.001); v2/
df = 2.09, RMSEA = 0.070, GFI = 0.86
CFI = 0.94, NFI = 0.90

p < 0.05.
p < 0.01.

0.34
(7.11**)

0.26
(5.72**)

0.42
(6.64**)
0.46
(8.86**)

0.12
(2.21**)
0.39
(7.30**)

-0.03 (-1.09)
-0.16
(-2.41**)

-0.16
(-3.42**)

**denotes p<0.01
2

= 644.58, df = 184 (p<0.001);

/df = 3.49, RMSEA = 0.077, GFI = 0.88, CFI = 0.94, NFI = 0.92

Fig. 2. Estimated model of the whole sample (N = 422).

the effect of perceived behavioral control on switching intention is not signicant, despite the signicant effects found for
attitude and subjective norm.
Finally, various effects of habit show up in both models. Consistent with the results of the whole sample model, the effects
of habit on switching intentions toward public transit are signicantly negative and the effects on attitude toward public
transit are not supported in either transportation mode models. However, habit turns out to not be associated with perceived
behavioral control in the motorcycle sample model, while in the car sample model it still has a signicant, negative effect on
perceived behavioral control.
The effects of reasoned variables, such as attitude and subjective norm on switching intentions toward public transit, are
all notably greater in the motorcycle sample model (0.32 and 0.37, respectively) than those in the car sample model (0.19
and 0.34, respectively). On the other hand, the negative effect of the habit variable is less in the motorcycle sample model
( 0.13) than that in the car sample model ( .02). These results tends to indicate that given a newly introduced public transit
service, motorcycle commuters, compared to car commuters, are more likely to resist their habitual mode use behavior in
switching to public transit through their reasoned evaluation process.
4. Discussion and conclusions
This study has proposed and applied an integrated mode choice model consisting of the theory of planned behavior, a
technology acceptance model, and habit, to examine switching intentions toward public transit for private vehicle users
in the context of the introduction of a mass rapid transit system. For private vehicle users as a whole, the results reveal that
all three TPB variables i.e. attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control have the expected signicant,

135

C.-F. Chen, W.-H. Chao / Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

0.63
(6.30**)

0.32
(4.15**)

0.45
(5.19**)

0.42
(5.16**)

0.20
(2.31**)
0.37
(5.01**)

-0.00 (0.03)

-0.11 (1.39)

-0.13
(2.09**)

**denotes p<0.01
2

= 366.20, df = 171 (p<0.001);

/df = 2.14, RMSEA = 0.075, GFI = 0.85, CFI = 0.95, NFI = 0.91

Fig. 3. Estimated model of the motorcycle sample (N = 202).

PU
0.60
(6.00**)

0.19
(2.39**)

ATT

0.42
(4.49**)
0.41
(4.99**)

SI

0.10 (1.08)
-0.00 (0.61)
PBC

PE

-0.23
(-2.24**)

HAB

0.34
(3.82**)

SN

-0.20
(2.81**)

**denotes p<0.01
2

= 402.91, df = 193 (p<0.001);

/df = 2.09, RMSEA = 0.070, GFI = 0.86, CFI = 0.94, NFI = 0.90

Fig. 4. Estimated model of the car sample (N = 200).

positive inuences on switching intentions toward public transit, and subjective norm is the most inuential factor among
the three TPB variables. A signicant negative effect of habit on switching intentions is evident, while a comparison with the
TPB variables shows that it is less than that of subjective norm and about the same as that of attitude. This implies that the
habitual behavior of private vehicle use would to some extent hinder an individuals intentions to switch from car or motorcycle use to public transit.
Successful strategies in increasing an individuals subjective normative cognition and positive attitude toward public
transit through the reasoned behavioral process could offer possibilities that inuence the habitual mode choice behavior,
so as to encourage individuals to switch from using private vehicles to using public transit. Both TAM variables perceived
ease of use and perceived usefulness are found to have signicant, positive effects on an individuals attitude toward public
transit, indicating the importance of a well-functioning system design and effective marketing strategies in increasing individual positive perceptions of public transit as a new transport technology when a public transit system is rst introduced to
an environment dominated by private vehicle use.

136

C.-F. Chen, W.-H. Chao / Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

The ndings presented in this work can provide public transit managers with useful insights in order to better design
their marketing and promotion strategies to attract more transit riders. In reality, regardless of whether by car or motorcycle,
private vehicle usage is frequently perceived by individuals to be rewarding, such as being a faster and more comfortable
and, convenient way to travel, especially within a transport environment with poor public transport services, like Kaohsiung
City. Therefore, a habit of private vehicle use habit is thus developed through frequent usage in a stable context, and this acts
as an automatic link between a goal (e.g. commuting) and a specic behavior (mode choice). This habitual behavior, in contrast to more deliberately controlled actions, demands only a small amount of attention, and the individuals control over
behavioral intention as well as the behavior itself is minor (Eriksson et al., 2008). To break or reduce private vehicle use
is hence more difcult for individuals with a strong private vehicle use habit than those with a weak habit, because a strong
habit to use a particular travel mode seeks less information and a less elaborate choice of travel mode (Verplanken, Aarts, van
Knippenberg, & Moonen, 1998).
This study has also explored the effects of reasoned factors as well as habit on switching intentions toward public transit
for both car users and motorcycle users. Similar to the results for the whole sample, overall both reasoned factors and habit
have the expected inuences on a travelers switching intentions toward public transit for both transportation mode models,
except for the factor of perceived behavioral control in the car use model. The effect of perceived behavioral control on
switching intentions is found to be not signicant for the car use model, implying car users might perceive greater inconvenience or difculty related to using public transit compared to their car use behavior.
It is noteworthy that in terms of the effects of car (motorcycle) use habit on switching intentions, we nd that compared
to car commuters, motorcycle commuters are more likely to resist their habitual mode use behavior in switching to using
public transit through their reasoned evaluation process. In other words, public transit authorities might prioritize motorcycle users as a target market due to the weaker inuence of habit. In adopted such an approach, it is of critical importance
to design and provide effective marketing and promotional strategies based upon the characteristics and unique needs of
motorcycle users (e.g. reduction in the price of using public transit or even offering free public transit for a certain time period). Moreover, motorcycle users can be provided with more useful information about public transit, be encouraged to try it,
and eventually switch their mode choice behaviors on a more permanent basis. Once the habit is developed through frequent
use of public transit, the effects of habit could be expected to result in the stronger development of publics transit, as well as
a signicant reduction in motorcycle use in the future.
In the models used in this work, this study has only measured and examined switching intentions toward public transit,
but not actual switching behaviors. Although behavioral intention has been widely seen as an appropriate predictor of actual

Table A1
Means and standard divisions of the measure items.
Scale/item

Mean

SD

Perceived ease of use (PE) (a = 0.84)

PE1: My interaction with the KMRTs ticketing system is easy and understandable
PE2: My interaction with the KMRTs information system is easy and understandable
PE3: My interaction with the KMRTs facilities and services is easy and understandable
PE4: It is easy for me to take the KMRT for commuting purposes
PE5: Overall, it is easy to use the KMRT

3.75
3.61
3.76
3.58
3.79

0.83
0.88
0.75
0.79
0.72

Perceived usefulness (PU) (a = 0.78)

PU1: Taking the KMRT to commute would make my time more efcient
PU3: Taking the KMRT to commute would reduce my commuting time
PU4: Overall, taking the KMRT is useful for me when commuting

3.12
3.33
3.23

0.84
0.90
0.98

3.67
3.70
3.60
3.89
3.79
3.62

0.89
0.89
0.91
0.71
0.75
0.79

Subjective norm (SN) (a = 0.75)

SN1: Most people who are important to me would support that I take the KMRT to commute
SN2: Most people who are important to me think I should take the KMRT to commute

3.17
2.99

0.80
0.88

Perceived behavior control (PBC) (a = 0.72)

PBC1: For me to take the KMRT to commute is easy
PBC2: My freedom to take the KMRT to commute is high

3.63
3.48

0.87
0.90

Switching intention toward public transit (SI) (a = 0.86)

SI1: My intention to switch from motorcycle (or car) to the KMRT when commuting next time is strong
SI2: The likelihood of my switching to the KMRT when commuting next time is high
SI3: I will make an effort to switch to the KMRT when commuting next time

2.94
3.06
3.31

0.87
0.90
0.85

Habit (HAB)
HAB: How often on average do you use a motorcycle (or car) when commuting within a week?

4.47

1.09

Attitude to public transit (ATT) (a = 0.80)

ATT 1: For me, taking the KMRT to commute
ATT 2: For me, taking the KMRT to commute
ATT 3: For me, taking the KMRT to commute
ATT 4: For me, taking the KMRT to commute
ATT 5: For me, taking the KMRT to commute
ATT 6: For me, taking the KMRT to commute

next
next
next
next
next
next

time
time
time
time
time
time

would
would
would
would
would
would

overall
overall
overall
overall
overall
overall

be
be
be
be
be
be

fast
comfortable
convenient
safe
good
pleasant

C.-F. Chen, W.-H. Chao / Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 128137

137

behaviors, gaps do seem to exist between behavioral intentions and actual behaviors, and this might limit the results of this
study with regard to reecting the actual switching behaviors. However, obtaining information on actual behaviors is always
not an easy task. An appropriately designed intervention, such as offering participants free public transit passes for a limited
time period, might be a good way to collect data on actual behaviors after such an intervention, and this could be a direction
for future research, if sufcient resources are available.
Appendix A
See Table A1.
References
Aarts, H., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2000). Habits as knowledge structures: Automaticity in goal-directed behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
78(1), 5363.
Aarts, H., Verplanken, B., & van Knippenberg, A. (1997). Habit information use in travel mode choices. Acta Psychologica, 96(1), 114.
Aarts, H., Verplanken, B., & van Knippenberg, A. (1998). Predicting behavior from actions in the past: Repeated decision making or a matter of habit? Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15), 13561375.
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior
(pp. 1139). New York: Springer.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179211.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin,
103(3), 411423.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Academy of marketing science. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
16(1), 7494.
Bamberg, S., Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2003). Choice of travel mode in the theory of planned behavior: The roles of past behavior, habit, and reasoned action.
Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25(3), 175187.
Bamberg, S., Rolle, D., & Weber, C. (2003). Does habitual car use not lead to more resistance to change of travel mode. Transportation, 30(1), 97108.
Bamberg, S., & Schmidt, P. (2001). Theory-driven subgroup-specic evaluation of an intervention to reduce private car use. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 31(6), 13001329.
Bamberg, S., & Schmidt, P. (2003). Incentives, morality or habit? Predicting students car use for university routes with the models of Ajzen, Schwartz and
Triandis. Environment and Behavior, 35(2), 264285.
Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J. H. (2002). Investigating healthcare professionals decisions to accept telemedicine technology: An empirical test of competing
theories. Information and Management, 39, 297311.
Chen, C. D., Fan, Y. W., & Farn, C. K. (2007). Predicting electronic toll collection service adoption: An integration of the technology acceptance model and the
theory of planned behavior. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 15(5), 300311.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319340.
Domarchi, C., Tudela, A., & Gonzalez, A. (2008). Effect of attitudes, habit and effective appraisal on mode choice: An application to university workers.
Transportation, 35(5), 585599.
Eriksson, L., Garvill, J., & Nordlund, A. M. (2008). Interrupting habitual car use: The importance of car habit strength and moral motivation for personal car
use reduction. Transportation Research Part F, 11(1), 585599.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equations with unobservable variables and measurement form. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1),
3950.
Fujii, S., & Garling, T. (2003). Development of script-based travel mode choice after forced change. Transportation Research Part F, 6, 117124.
Grling, T., Fujii, S., & Boe, O. (2001). Empirical tests of a model of determinants of script-based driving choice. Transportation Research F, 4(1), 89102.
Hair, J. F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
Hu, P. J., Chau, P. Y. K., Liu Sheng, O. R., & Yan Tam, K. (1999). Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine
technology. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(2), 91112.
Jreskog, K. G., & Srbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: Users reference guide. Chicago: Scientic Software International.
Ouellette, J., & Wood, W. (1998). Habit and intention in everyday life: The multiple processes by which past behavior predicts future behavior. Psychological
Bulletin, 124(1), 5474.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 561570.
Thogersen, J., & Moller, B. (2008). Breaking car use habits: The effectiveness of a free one-month travelcard. Transportation, 35(3), 329345.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal eld studies. Management Science, 46(2),
186204.
Verplanken, B., & Aarts, H. (1999). Habit, attitude, and planned behaviour: Is habit an empty construct or an interesting case of automaticity? European
Review of Social Psychology, 10, 101134.
Verplanken, B., Aarts, H., & van Knippenberg, A. (1997). Habit, information acquisition, and the process of making travel mode choices. European Journal of
Social Psychology, 27, 539560.
Verplanken, B., Aarts, H., van Knippenberg, A., & Moonen, A. (1998). Habit versus planned behavior: A eld experiment. British Journal of Social Psychology,
37(1), 111128.
Verplanken, B., Aarts, H., van Knippenberg, A., & van Knippenberg, C. (1994). Attitude versus general habit: Antecedents of travel mode choice. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 24(4), 285300.