University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Comparison of travel durations by sex: Is there really a "meaningful" difference?

(USC Thesis Other)

Comparison of travel durations by sex: Is there really a "meaningful" difference?

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content COMPARISON OF TRAVEL DURATIONS BY SEX
IS THERE REALLY A MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE?
by
Steven James Pinkerton
A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTIES OF THE SCHOOL OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING
AND THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degrees
MASTER OF PLANNING
and
MASTER OF ARTS
(Economics)
December 1988
UM! Number: EP44921
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted,
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UM I
Dissertation Publishing
UMI EP44921
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest*
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES. CALI FORNIA 90007
Ec
P65T
This thesis, 'written by
Steven James Pinkerton
under the direction of h.3$...Thesis Com m ittee,
and approved by a ll its members, has been pre
sented to and accepted by the D ean of T h e
G raduate School, in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t of the
requirements fo r the degree of
Master of Arts
Dean
J )a te Gct°ber 24, 1988
THESI. O M M IT T E E
Chairman
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION ......................................... 1
METHODOLOGY ......................................... 9
RESULTS............................................. 13
ANALYSIS............................................. 2 3
ii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
TABLE 1: JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION: 1983 . . 27
TABLE 2: JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY OCCUPATION: 1983 ..................... 28
TABLE 3: JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY SEX: 1983 ............................ 29
TABLE 4: COMPARISON OF MALE AND FEMALE
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY OCCUPATION: 1983 ..................... 3 0
TABLE 5: UNMARRIED HOUSEHOLDS JOURNEY TO WORK
TRAVEL DURATIONS BY SEX: 1983 ........... 31
TABLE 6: UNMARRIED HOUSEHOLDS-COMPARISON OF MALE
AND FEMALE JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL
DURATION BY OCCUPATION: 1983 ............. 32
TABLE 7: MARRIED COUPLES JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL
DURATION BY SEX: 1983 33
TABLE 8: MARRIED COUPLES— COMPARISON OF MALE AND
FEMALE JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY
OCCUPATION: 1983 .......................... 34
TABLE 9: MARRIED COUPLES— ONE WORKER FAMILIES
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY
SEX: 1983 35
TABLE 10: MARRIED COUPLES ONE EARNER FAMILIES
COMPARISON OF MALE AND FEMALE JOURNEY
TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY
OCCUPATION: 1983 36
TABLE 11: MARRIED COUPLES— TWO WORKER FAMILIES
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY SEX: 1983 37
Page
TABLE 12: MARRIED COUPLES TWO EARNER FAMILIES—
COMPARISON OF MALE AND FEMALE JOURNEY
TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY OCCUPATION: 1983 38
TABLE 13: HOUSEHOLDS BY PRESENCE OF CHILDREN
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION: 1983 . . 39
TABLE 14: HOUSEHOLDS BY PRESENCE OF CHILDREN
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY OCCUPATION: 1983 40
TABLE 15: HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION'
BY SEX: 1983... ............................ 41
TABLE 16: HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN BY SEX
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY OCCUPATION: 1983 42
TABLE 17: HOUSEHOLDS WITH NO CHILDREN
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY SEX: 1983 ............................ 43
TABLE 18: HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN BY SEX
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY OCCUPATION: 1983 44
TABLE 19: JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION
BY SEX: 1977 ............................ 45
IV
INTRODUCTION
Female entry into the labor force has steadily
increased over the past 40 years. Since 1950, the labor
force participation rate of females has nearly doubled.
Women now account for 45 percent of all workers, up from
38 percent just fifteen years ago. While non-married
women have always had high labor force participation
rates, it has been married women, especially those with
children, who have fueled the significant increase in
female employment.
Nearly 60 percent of all women with children now
work. In 1950, less than one in five mothers held jobs.
Since 1970, mothers with children six years and older have
added nearly 7 million employees to the work force.
Mothers with a child under six years of age increased
their labor force participation rate from 30 percent to 50
percent.
The working mother trend and its consequences has
become an active research subject: sociologists look at
its impacts on the family structure; psychologists fear it
puts additional stress and time pressures on mothers;
geographers claim it is changing settlement patterns and
mobility; economists analyze its impact on the composition
of the labor force; and planners try to apply the findings
of the research when they build roads, site facilities,
and direct growth. While much of the work has
concentrated on economic, spatial, and social consequences
of working mothers, transportation issues have been a
subarea of extensive research.
The transportation impacts of an increase in working
mothers has focused on three major areas. First, much of
the literature deals with the differences between male and
female travel patterns. Additional research has focused
on the unique characteristics of women with children,
especially those under six. Finally, transit planners
have studied the failure of public transit to respond to
the needs of working mothers.
A considerable number of theories and assumptions
have been proposed in this previous research. In each of
the three areas noted, certain generalizations are now
established and referenced in subsequent works. For
example;
o Women make fewer trips than men (Giuliano 1979).
o Women's trips are shorter in distance than men's
trips (Giuliano 1979, and Madden 1981).
o Although women make fewer trips than men, their
trips satisfy a wider range of activities and
tasks. (Madden 1981, and Pickup 1981).
o Shopping, child care, and chauffering for
children's activities are almost exclusively
women's duties (Hanson and Hanson 1981).
o Women are more likely to choose work locations as a
function of residential location (Palm and Pred
1974) .
o Women are more likely to use public transit and are
more often passengers than drivers in automobiles
(Giuliano 1979).
o Women's journey to work travel durations are
shorter than men's durations (Pratt 1911, Taafe et
al. 1963, Madden 1977).
In each finding, male-female variations are explained
by occupational segregation, income differences, or family
status. Usually, male tendencies are assumed ubiquitous,
while female characteristics are heavily dependent on
marital status, job type, and income level. This is
especially true of journey to work travel durations.
Certain theories rely on income and occupational
differences to explain male-female travel pattern
durations. Other theorists put the blame on family
status. The differences in journey to work travel
durations is a centerpiece of all three categories which
explain the variations.
Occupational segregation refers to the large number
of women in low-paying, ubiquitously available, clerical
occupations. Since these jobs do not pay high wages,
travel time and its cost are a higher percentage of the
worker's income. However, clerical jobs also offer a wide
range of work locations, both in the city center and the
suburbs. Therefore, in order to minimize travel costs,
low-paid workers choose shorter commutes to maximize net
income (Rosenfeld and Sorensen 1979).
While occupational segregation results in lower
income for females, women are also paid less than men in
equivalent jobs. This factor is also used to explain the
difference in male and female travel patterns. Once
again, a lower income causes the women to choose a shorter
commute due to the income/travel time trade off. Lower
incomes are also said to reduce a womans rate of
automobile ownership — thus reducing the number of
potential job locations. The steady increase of the
suburban work force is often attributed to the rise in
female employment, and the preference of females—
especially mothers— to work near their suburban homes
(Madden 1981).
Family status also plays a important role in the
women's short commute. Women are said to work closer to
home since they are not the major wage earner in the
family and are responsible for a majority of the household
tasks. This is especially true of women with children.
Women must live closer to home in order to serve the
child's needs (Ericksen 1977). In fact, availability of
childcare is often determines whether or not a mother
works (Stolzenberg and Waite 1984). The jobs with the
highest percentage of female workers are also the jobs
most accomodating to working mothers (Darian 1975). Wages
are not the most important factor in a woman's job choice
until after the family is complete (Waite 1980). In fact,
a family's residential location is frequently chosen on
the basis of minimizing the mother's commute (White 1977).
Conversely, most migration decisions depend on the work
opportunities available for the male wage earner (Duncan
and Perucci 1976, Lichter 1982). Therefore, marital
status, a woman's age, the age of her children, and the
husband's occupational status all contribute to a woman's
choice when considering a prospective job and its
commuting time.
Thus, the current mainstream of theory proposes that
the combination of occupational segregation, income, and
family status explain why women work closer to home. The
studies which arrived at these conclusions usually focused
on a specific group of households in a specific
metropolitan area; national studies are quite rare
(Rosenbloom 1987, Hanson and Hanson 1981, Madden 1981).
The limited number of national studies are usually
socioeconomic or attitudinal in focus with a limited
amount of transportation information included as part of
the household data (White 1977). For example, the 1972
National Longitudnal Survey and the 1976 Panel Survey of
Income Dynamics and the 1970 and 1980 Census' are the most
common databases used for nationwide studies. Each of
these studies only include a few transportation questions,
and the former two surveys do not show the linkages
between residential location and job location. No studies
have analyzed male-female transportation at a national
level using a large and comprehensive database.
This study will specifically examine nationwide male
and female journey to work travel durations.
Historically, female journey to work durations have ranged
from ten to fifty percent shorter than male journey to
work durations. Many of the previous studies focused on
public transit-dependent east coast or european cities.
This over-representation of public transit has distorted
the differences between male and female travel patterns.
Public transit use is predominantly female and usually
consists of the commuters with very longest and shortest
journeys to work. The prevailing theory also attributes
much of the difference to female dominance in lower
paying, short commute occupations, and the women's role as
the spouse primarily responsible for childcare. Many of
the studies attempting to explain travel duration
differences via occupational segregation or family status
automatically assume that distinctions do exist. None of
the studies have really examined whether or not
socieconomic factors actually influence travel patterns by
sex. Few alternative explanations have been explored.
Admittedly, many studies have strong evidence that
distinctions by sex occur, but the results are often
derived from small, unrepresentative samples of the
general population.
Male and female travel durations will be analyzed in
this study holding occupation and family status constant.
The traditional explanations for differences in male and
female journey to work durations will be tested for
validity. A recent national survey will be used, which
differentiates respondents by sex, occupation, and family
status. Public transit riders will represent less than 10
percent of the sample.
Variation in journey to work durations by occupation
and family status will be analyzed using the passenger
travel surveys conducted in 1977 and 1983 by the U.S.
Department of Transportation. The Nationwide Personal
Travel Study (NPTS) surveyed households regarding their 24
hour "travel day" and collected detailed data regarding
each trip. Demographic and economic information was also
collected for each household. The 1977 survey included
24,466 households while the 1983 survey interviewed 6,438
households. Households from all fifty states and the
District of Columbia were included in both surveys.
METHODOIj OGY
NPTS is one of the few data files which consists of
randomly selected households from throughout the United
States. The households were drawn from expired Current
Population Survey units selected by the U.S. Bureau of the
Census. People in the selected households were
interviewed only once. Each month, for a year, people in
a different group of households were interviewed. Each
household in the sample was assigned a specific 24-hour
'•travel day" for which detailed information on all travel
was collected. The data includes information about all
people who were members of the sample household on the
date of the interview. Surveys were conducted by the
Bureau of the Census' staff, located in 12 Regional
Offices throughout the United States.
NPTS separates the observations into five separate
files:
1. Household Characteristics
2. Vehicle Characteristics
3. Person Characteristics
4. Travel Day Trips
5. Travel Period Trips
Each database was narrowed to the specific variables and
observations relevant to the research. The Travel Period
Trip File, which includes trips away from home, and the
Vehicle File, which includes detailed information on each
automobile, are not used in this study. The following
variables were used in the analysis:
HOUSEHOLD FILE
1. Family Income
2. Number of Household Vehicles
3. Inside or Outside Central City of SMSA
4. SMSA Size
5. Number of Licensed Drivers in Household (1983 only)
6. Number of Workers in Household (1983 only)
7. Family Type (Grouped by marital status, employment
status, age of youngest child)
PERSON FILE
1. Relation to Respondent
2. Age
3. Sex
4. Marital Status
5. Highest Grade Attended
6. Employment Status
7. Occupation
8. Principal Means to Work
9. Distance to Work
10. Journey to Work Duration
11. Licensed Driver
Occupation is divided into three categories: Executive &
Professional (1980 Census Occupational Code Equivalents
003-285), Clerical (Code Equivalents 303-407), and Blue
Collar (Code Equivalents 413-889).
TRAVEL DAY TRIP FILE
1. Time trip took
2. Trip Distance
3. Trip Purpose
4. Mode of Transportation
Nine data sets were created for specific analysis:
1. All respondents over age 15 who live in an SMSA
2. Males
3. Females
4. Married respondents
5. Married: One worker families (1983 only)
6. Married: Two worker families (1983 only)
11
7. Unmarried respondents
8. Licensed Drivers
9. Respondents who travel by private automobile to work
All of the data sets are limited to households residing in
an SMSA. Travel characteristics were only analyzed for
household members over the age of 15. All modes of travel
were included in the first seven data sets. In fact, the
data sets which concentrated on private transit showed
little variance with the data sets which included all
modes of travel. As a result, all modes of travel were
used for journey to work durations, unless otherwise
noted.
Interval frequencies and means of pertinent variable
combinations were computed for each data set. All
interval frequency combinations included a Chi Square
test, while the standard deviation and the standard error
were computed for each variable's mean. Due to the large
sample sizes of each file, no problems with statistical
significance were encountered.
12
RESULTS
Male journey to work travel durations exceeded female
durations in every instance when holding occupation and
family status constant. Furthermore, both intra- and
inter-occupation and household travel durations were
significantly longer for males. Male journey to work
durations are longer under every circumstance.
Overall Totals;
The 1983 study sample included all respondents living
in an SMSA and over the age of 15. There were 21,860
individuals— 53 percent female, 47 percent male. Over 90
percent were licensed drivers, and the average age was 38.
Almost 60 percent of the respondents were married, and
only one in four married couples lived in a single earner
family. Over half the households included children, with
one in five households including children under the age of
six.
Table 1 shows overall journey to work durations for
all modes. Mean journey to work duration was 2 0.92
minutes in 1983. Nearly 60 percent of all work durations
are less than 20 minutes, while only 21 percent last over
30 minutes. Table 2 separates journey to work durations
and frequencies by occupation. Approximately 82 percent
of all work trips are equally divided between executive
and professional workers and blue collar workers.
Clerical workers account for the remaining 18 percent.
Blue collar workers have the shortest travel durations
(19.75 minutes), while clerical workers have the longest
(22.25 minutes). Executive and professional workers have
journey to work durations averaging 21.37 minutes.
Division by Gender is shown in Table 3. As borne out
in every study previously cited, male journey to work
durations are clearly longer than female journey to work
durations. Male travel durations are almost 3 minutes
longer (22.23 minutes versus 19.49 minutes) and males
constitute a majority of trips longer than 3 0 minutes.
The disparities in travel time remain when analyzed by
occupation (Table 4). As noted earlier, one of the major
reasons explaining a woman's shorter commute was her
dominance of low-paying clerical occupations. The overall
numbers already show that clerical occupations experience
the longest journey to work travel durations, not the
shortest. The same finding is true when analyzed by
14
gender. The shortest commute for women workers are those
with executive and professional occupations, the longest
are for women in clerical jobs. Clerical males travel
23.11 minutes to work, clerical females, 22.05 minutes.
Executive and professional males travel an average of 2 3.4
minutes to work while their female counterparts take 18.97
minutes. Blue collar female travel durations are over
four minutes shorter than male blue collar workers travel
durations (17.03 minutes to 21.06 minutes). Overall,
occupation fails to explain any of the difference in male
and female journey to work travel durations. In each
case, the male travel durations are significantly longer.
Female occupational achievement and the likelihood
that a women will remain single is usually positively
correlated (Mueller and Campbell 1977). Therefore,
occupation, income, and family status are less likely to
be a factor influencing a woman's travel time. However,
occupational achievement doesn't seem to have much effect
on male-female commuting times. While there is slightly
less disparity in journey to work travel duration times
for single males and females, the difference remains for
every occupational category.
Table 5 contrasts unmarried households by sex.
Overall journey to work durations are over one minute
longer for males (21.71 minutes) than for single females
(20.66 minutes). Table 6 shows that the longer travel
durations for males are consistent across all occupations.
Occupational segregation, income, and family status should
be especially insignificant for executive and professional
women. These women do not have a family to influence the
type or location of their job, nor do they have children
to interrupt their career and hamper their earning
potential. Instead, female workers have significantly
lower travel durations for executive and professional
occupations (19.82 versus 22.14 minutes). Also, single
females have shorter travel durations for clerical jobs
(21.16 minutes) than single males (23.42 minutes) and for
blue collar jobs (16.52 minutes versus 21.45 minutes).
Specific analysis of married couples by gender also
does not change the results found when comparing all
households by sex. As expected, married men travel
significantly longer to work (23.65 minutes) than their
spouse (19.07 minutes) (Table 7). While less than one in
five men (23.7%) work within ten minutes of home, almost
one in three married women (32.2%) have less than a ten
minute commute. Table 8 again notes the recurring theme
of higher journey to work travel durations for men. Men
travel approximately five minutes longer to work
irrespective of occupation.
Women also have significantly shorter travel times
than their male counterparts when they are the sole wage
earner. In a comparison of married couples with only one
income, females earners had commutes nearly six minutes
less than male earners (Table 9). Male average travel
duration is over 24 minutes, with 15.2 percent of all
trips exceeding 40 minutes. Female average travel
duration is 18.59 minutes, with 3 3.1 percent of all trips
less than 10 minutes. These travel disparities are
exemplified further by the occupational differences (Table
10) . For example, male clerical worker commutes are over
eight minutes longer than female clerical worker commutes
(29.22 minutes versus 21.05 minutes). This result
certainly contradicts conventional wisdom. As the sole
wage earner, one would expect that sex would be less
influential in determining travel duration. Assuming that
a worker's income is more important in a single earner
family, the income/travel time tradeoff would be expected
to skew the choice towards additional income. Instead,
the female workers have shorter travel durations than
under other family status classifications.
Also surprising is the similarity in results when
comparing one earner and two earner couples. Two earner
couples show only slightly less variation than those shown
in single earner families. Overall male journey to work
durations are still over five minutes (23.61 versus 18.43)
longer than female journey to work durations. (Table 11).
Occupational differences in travel durations are also less
dramatic for two earner families, but nontheless are
clearly longer for males (Table 12). Male clerical and
executive and professional workers experience commutes
five minutes longer than females. Male blue collar
workers commutes average over seven minutes longer than
females in two earner families. This similarity between
one earner and two earner couple travel durations
challenges much of the research regarding two earner
couples. These figures dispute the evidence in other
studies that the increase in two earner couples is
changing travel durations.
As previously noted, the presence of children is
often cited as a significant factor in the shorter
commutes for women. Overall, families with children did
have shorter commutes than families without children, but
in most cases the differences in journey to work travel
durations were minor. Additionally, the presence of
children did not explain any further the consistently
shorter travel durations of women.
Table 13 contrasts households with and without
children. Childless families had average commutes
approximately 15 seconds longer than families with
children. Families with children had marginally more
commutes less than 10 minutes and more than 40 minutes.
Travel durations by occupation were also slightly longer
for childless families (Table 14). In no case were the
differences more than 25 seconds.
Travel time disparities by gender in families with
children are similar to those found when examining married
couples in general (Table 15). The convenience factor,
availability of childcare, and the age of children all
fail to differentiate families with children from families
in general. Male journey to work travel durations are
almost five minutes longer than female travel durations
(23.08 minutes versus 18.26 minutes). One in three
female's journey to work travel duration is less than 10
minutes. The longest female travel times are for clerical
workers— 22.13 minutes— still well below the average
travel duration for male workers with children. As in
every other instance, female travel duration by occupation
are lower than their male counterparts in all three
categories (Table 16).
The smallest disparity in travel duration by sex and
occupation is in households without children (Tables 17
and 18). However, male durations are still consistently
longer. Mean travel duration for males is slightly less
than one minute longer than for females (21.50 minutes
versus 20.55 minutes). Females also have one occupational
category in which their travel duration exceeds that of
males— although the difference is too small to be
statistically significant. Female clerical workers
average journey to work travel duration is approximately
one second longer than the average male clerical workers
travel duration (21.97 minutes versus 21.99 minutes). For
the other two occupational categories, male travel times
are consistent with the previous results, and
significantly longer than their female counterparts.
Again, differences between types of married couples fail
to point out the importance of family status in the
woman's commute.
Mean travel durations by sex, marital status, and
presence of children were also computed for the 1977 NPTS
dataset. Occupation was not computed for 1977 due to
changes in variable definitions from 1977 to 1983.
Journey to work travel durations mirrored the 1983
results. Males experienced longer journey to work travel
durations in every category (Table 19). Furthermore, the
numbers did not indicate a narrowing of the gap between
male and female durations. Studies have argued that as
women enter the workforce their commuting patterns will
more closely imitate their male counterparts. The
comparison of the 1977 and 1983 NTPS data fails to support
this theory, nor did the figures regarding working single
women or married women who were the sole wage earner.
Both current and historical data indicate a clear
distinction in travel durations which are unchanged by
time, occupation, income, or family status.
Overall, the data indicates that the journey to work
travel durations are longer for men than they are for
women. However, household composition does little to
explain these differences. In fact, across all
categories, the longest women's travel duration for any
occupation in any household type is 22.13 minutes for
female clerical workers with kids. Ironically, much of
the theory explaining why womens travel times are shorter
is due to their dominance of clerical occupations and
childcare responsibilities. The previous studies made
different assumptions for two basic reasons: 1. most of
the studies were attempting to explain why these variables
were influential, not why there were not a factor. 2.
every study failed to take a representative sample, or use
an applicable survey. In sum, there is little evidence in
this data which indicates that household status or
occupation explains disparities in journey to work travel
durations by gender.
22
ANALYSIS
The results of the study propose two major findings:
1. Males have longer journey to work durations
than females.
2. Gender differences in journey to work
durations are not explained by household
status or occupational segregation.
This is a departure from the current hypotheses proposed
for differences between male and female travel durations.
Typically, the question is which factor is most important
in explaining the differing journey to work travel
durations— not whether or not anv socioeconomic factor is
able to explain the variation.
The variations exposed throughout the data infer that
income cannot explain the differential, nor can
occupation, or household responsibilities, or number of
workers in a household. Consequently, there must be other
factors which cause women to choose shorter journey to
work travel durations. A wide range variables should be
studied in order to discover what stimulates men and women
to choose different travel durations.
Potential variables to analyze could include non-work
travel durations, attitudes towards safety, linkage of
work and non-work trips, part-time work, hours of work,
and work-residence location. While some of these
variables are closely related to those included in the
NPTS data set, each has particular characteristics which
may explain a portion of the variation in male-female
journey to work travel durations.
Non-work trips have increased significantly over the
past decade. Studies have shown that much of the increase
in peak hour travel is due to the number of non-work trips
performed during peak commuter hours (Gordon et al 1987).
The non-work activities of women may influence their
decision to choose shorter travel times. This theory
would assume that in all household types, women are more
likely to perform domestic tasks (Skinner and Bourlag
1978). Assuming that men and women spend an equal amount
of time traveling for all purposes, women are more likely
to reduce journey to work travel duration in order to
increase non-work travel duration. A closer analysis of
the linkage between work and non-work trips could be
helpful in researching this subject.
While the NPTS data set was able to hold occupation
constant by sex, there was not a variable measuring job
tenure. The disparities in travel time could potentially
be linked to differing male-female lengths of employment.
Since much of the increase in female labor force
participation rates have occured in the past decade,
overall employment length is probably greater for males.
Longer job tenure may reduce one's ability to relocate
when household location changes. Longevity pay or
difficulties in obtaining a transfer or a new job reduce
the potential for changing work location. Females
entering the labor force or possessing little job tenure
can be more footloose when choosing a place of employment.
This factor is further reinforced if one assumes that
women hold the majority of part time jobs. Part time jobs
by nature are ubiquitously available and less likely to
promote long term employment.
Though difficult to measure, attitudinal factors may
play as important a role as economic and social
considerations in analyzing the journey to work. Transit
planners often point to differing male and female
perceptions towards safety as an influence in choosing
both mode of travel and employment location (Richards et
al 1978). As the major consumer of mass transit, many
women may choose employment location based on the
perceived safety of the bus or subway route. Now that the
majority of women drive automobiles to work, the
perception that the suburbs provide a safer work
environment that the C.B.D. may also influence a woman's
employment location choice. A potential research subject
could look at the employment location decisions of male
and female suburban residents holding income, occupation,
and household status constant.
Thus, there are many factors perceived as gender
based which may be able to explain the variations in male
and female journey to work travel durations. It would
behoove transportation planners to analyze locational
factors, job tenure, and attitudes towards safety when
trying to derive employment location choices by sex. This
study would argue that the traditional explanations based
on occupation, income, and household status fail to
generate gender based differences. Job type, income, or
children may be a factor when combined with other
influences, but are not the driving force behind
determining journey to work travel durations.
TABLE 1
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION: 1983
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
PERCENT OF TRIPS 27.9
27.9
31.3
59. 2
18.6
77.8
10.5
88.3
11.7
100.0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME: 20.92 MINUTES
I
i
I
i
!
i
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
TABLE 2
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY OCCUPATION: 1983
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
40.79%
25.24
36.93
31.75
41.40
19.44
42.62
11.09
43.10
12 .47
43 .36
CLERICAL
17.63%
19. 62
12.41
31.34
17.67
22.99
21.78
10. 32
17.34
15.73
23 . 65
BLUE COLLAR
41.58%
33.97
50.66
30.80
40.94
15.93
35. 60
9.99
39.56
9.31
32 .99
TOTAL 27.88 31.28 18. 61 10.50 11.73
MEAN TRAVEL TIMES:
EXECUTIVE & PROFESSIONAL: 21.37 MINUTES
CLERICAL: 22.26 MINUTES
BLUE COLLAR: 19.75 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
28
TABLE 3
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY SEX: 1983
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
MALE 26.6
26.6
30.6
57.2
17.9
75. 1
11.5
86.6
13 .4
100.0
FEMALE 29.5
29.5
32.0
61.5
19.5
81.0
9.3
90.3
9.7
100.0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR MALES: 22.23 MINUTES
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FEMALES: 19.49 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
29
TABLE 4
COMPARISON OF MALE AND FEMALE
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY OCCUPATION: 1983
MALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
41.91%
23 .19
36.58
29.27
40.03
19.77
46. 37
11.89
43.24
15.88
49. 68
CLERICAL
6.22%
12.62
2.96
34.20
6.94
23 . 25
8 . 10
9.10
4.91
20.83
9. 68
BLUE COLLAR
51.87%
30.97
60.47
31.33
53.02
15.68
45.53
11.52
51.84
10. 50
40.64
TOTAL 26.57 30. 65 17.86 11.52 13.40
FEMALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
39.45%
27.85
37.30
34.89
42.96
19.04
38.51
10.08
42.88
8.14
32 .97
CLERICAL
31.26%
21.29
22 .59
30. 66
29.91
22.93
36.75
10.62
35.78
14.51
46.61
BLUE COLLAR
29.30%
40.32
40.11
29.67
27.13
16.46
24.74
6.76
21.34
6.79
20.42
TOTAL 29.45 32.04 19.50 9.27 9.73
MEAN TRAVEL TIMES:
Males: Females:
EXECUTIVE & PROFESSIONAL: 22.40 MINUTES
CLERICAL: 23.11 MINUTES
BLUE COLLAR: 21.06 MINUTES
18.97 MINUTES
22.05 MINUTES
17.02 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
30
TABLE 5
UNMARRIED HOUSEHOLDS
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY SEX: 1983
I
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
MALE 26.4
26.4
32.9
59. 3
20.6
79.9
8.7
88.6
11. 4
100. 0
FEMALE 31.6
31.6
34.2
65.8
15.2
81.0
8.4
89.4
10. 6
100. 0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR MALES: 21.71 MINUTES j
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FEMALES: 2 0.66 MINUTES
f
i
i
i
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
31
TABLE 6
UNMARRIED HOUSEHOLDS-COMPARISON OF MALE AND FEMALE
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY OCCUPATION: 1983
MALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
32.48%
22.01
25.29
36.66
29 .43
20.84
40.96
11.46
36.26
9. 03
48. 57
CLERICAL
8. 37%
18.95
4. 60
28.61
9.95
23.41
12.20
9.37
6.57
19. 66
10. 46
BLUE COLLAR
51.87%
38.74
70. 11
32.34
60.62
17.66
46.84
4.77
57.16
6.49
40.97
TOTAL 26. 35 32 .85 20. 62 8.72 11.46
FEMALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
38.07%
24.62
31.80
31.02
42.49
19.12
38.48
9.34
50. 07
15. 90
29.99
CLERICAL
30.41%
17.38
21.87
40.67
26.48
22.10
34.53
6.57
32 . 68
13.28
52.17
BLUE COLLAR
31.52%
37.46
46.33
35.08
31.03
12.00
26.99
8.08
17.25
7.36
17.84
TOTAL 31.61 34.23 15.16 8.36 10. 63
MEAN TRAVEL TIMES:
Males: Females:
EXECUTIVE & PROFESSIONAL: 22.14 MINUTES
CLERICAL: 23.42 MINUTES
BLUE COLLAR: 21.45 MINUTES
19.82 MINUTES
21.16 MINUTES
16.52 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
TABLE 7
MARRIED COUPLES
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY SEX: 1983
I
I
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
MALE 23.7
23.7
28.6
52.2
19.4
71.7
13 .4
85. 0
15. 0
100. 0
FEMALE 32.2
32.2
31.3
63.5
18.5
82 . 0
9.8
91.8
8.2
100.0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR MALES: 23.65 MINUTES
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FEMALES: 19.04 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
33
TABLE 8
MARRIED COUPLES— COMPARISON OF MALE AND FEMALE
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY OCCUPATION: 1983
MALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
47.36%
22.62
45.30
28.58
47.37
20.02
48.82
12.90
45.77
15.87
50. 13
CLERICAL
4.98%
8.00
1. 68
27.91
4.86
24.37
6.25
11.55
4.31
28. 17
9.35
BLUE COLLAR
47.66%
26.31
53.02
28. 64
47.76
18.32
44 .93
13 .98
49.92
12 . 75
40.51
TOTAL 23.65 28.58 19.43 13.35 15. 00
FEMALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
40.66%
32.69
41.29
33.43
43.40
17.54
38.54
8.94
38.22
7.40
39. 74
CLERICAL
32.01%
23.25
23 .12
32.38
33.09
22.52
38.94
11.67
38.22
10.19
39.74
BLUE COLLAR
27.33%
41.92
35.60
26.95
23.52
15.25
22.51
8.78
24 .57
7. 09
23 . 62
TOTAL 32.19 31.33 18.51 9.77 8.21
MEAN TRAVEL TIMES:
Males:
EXECUTIVE & PROFESSIONAL:24.04 MINUTES
CLERICAL: 25.97 MINUTES
BLUE COLLAR: 22.96 MINUTES
Females:
19.07 MINUTES
20.06 MINUTES
17.60 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
34
TABLE 9
MARRIED COUPLES— ONE WORKER FAMILIES
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY SEX: 1983
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
MALE 25.9
25.9
30.7
56. 6
16.8
73.4
11.4
84.8
15.2
100.0
FEMALE 33.1
33.1
32.9
66.0
18.1
84 . 0
9.5
93.5
6.5
100. 0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR MALES: 24.12 MINUTES
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FEMALES: 18.60 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
35
TABLE 10
MARRIED COUPLES
ONE EARNER FAMILIES— COMPARISON OF MALE AND FEMALE
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY OCCUPATION: 1983
MALES:
| ROW PERCENTAGE
j COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
47.94%
27.12
50.16
30.36
47.44
15. 68
44.69
12.45
52. 32
14.39
45.45
CLERICAL
! 5.13%
i
2 . 06
0.41
40.37
6.74
4.32
1.32
5.01
2.25
48.24
16.29
! BLUE COLLAR
| 46.94%
i
27.29
49.43
29.95
45.82
19.35
53.99
11. 04
45.43
12.37
38.26
TOTAL 25. 92 30.68 16.82 11.41 15.17
FEMALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
39.13%
19.45
23.00
38.65
46.03
24.54
53.09
15.58
64.26
1.78
10.76
CLERICAL
19.49%
25.92
15.26
36.35
21.56
8.12
8.75
10. 13
20.79
19.48
58.71
BLUE COLLAR
41.38%
49.38
61.74
25.74
32.42
16. 68
38.16
3.43
14.95
4 .77
30.54
TOTAL 33.10 32.86 18.09 9.49 6.47
MEAN TRAVEL TIMES:
Males:
EXECUTIVE & PROFESSIONAL: 24.75 MINUTES
CLERICAL: 29.22 MINUTES
BLUE COLLAR: 22.81 MINUTES
Females:
17.89 MINUTES
21.05 MINUTES
17.67 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
36
TABLE 11
MARRIED COUPLES— TWO WORKER FAMILIES
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY SEX: 1983
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
MALE 21.8
21.8
28.6
50.4
20.5
70.9
13.2
84.1
15. 9
100. 0
FEMALE 30.8
30.8
31.3
62.2
19.4
81.6
10. 4
91. 9
8 . 1
100. 0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR MALES: 23.61 MINUTES
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FEMALES: 18.42 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
TABLE 12
MARRIED COUPLES
TWO EARNER FAMILIES— COMPARISON OF MALE AND FEMALE
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY OCCUPATION: 1983
MALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
20.93
45.57
29.61
49. 01
21. 05
48.56
11. 66
41.72
16.76
50. 01
47.34%
CLERICAL 11.51 23.67 34 .40 9.58 20.84
4. 66% 2 .46 3.85 7.80 3.37 6.11
BLUE COLLAR
47.98%
23 .56
51.96
28.11
47.14
18.67
43 . 64
15.14
54.91
14.51
43.87
TOTAL 21.75 28.61 20.53 13.23 15.87
FEMALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
34 . 11
46.05
33 . 05
43 . 87
15. 03
32.19
8.65
34 .76
9.16
47. 30
41.61%
CLERICAL 20.86 32.48 25.68 11.97 9.01
35.03% 23 .71 36.31 46.31 40.49 39.19
BLUE COLLAR
23.36%
39.89
30.24
26.60
19.82
17.88
21.50
10.98
24 .76
4.66
13.52
TOTAL 30.82 31. 34 19.43 10.36 8. 06
MEAN TRAVEL TIMES:
Males: Females:
EXECUTIVE & PROFESSIONAL:
CLERICAL:
BLUE COLLAR:
23.31 MINUTES
24.92 MINUTES
23.77 MINUTES
18.17 MINUTES
19.82 MINUTES
16.62 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
38
TABLE 13
HOUSEHOLDS BY PRESENCE OF CHILDREN
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION: 1983
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
CHILDREN 28. 3
28. 3
29.9
58.2
18. 1
76.3
11.5
87.8
12.2
100.0
NO CHILDREN 27.5
27.5
32.4
59.9
19.1
79.0
9.7
88.7
11.3
100.0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN: 20.79 MINUTES
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FAMILIES WITHOUT CHILDREN: 21.04
MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
TABLE 14
HOUSEHOLDS BY PRESENCE OF CHILDREN
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY OCCUPATION: 1983
WITH CHILDREN:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
39.21%
27.73
38 . 39
30.17
39.56
16.94
36.77
11.99
41.00
13.17
42.19
CLERICAL
17.42%
17.53
10.78
32.32
18. 83
22 .97
22.15
11.25
17.10
15.93
22.66
BLUE COLLAR
43.37%
33 .19
50.83
28. 69
41. 61
17 .12
41. 09
11.08
41.90
9.92
35.15
TOTAL 28.32 29.90 18.07 11.47 12.24
WITHOUT CHILDREN:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
42.10%
23.32
35. 68
32.98
42.81
21.38
47.22
10.40
45. 15
11.92
44.41
CLERICAL
17.81%
21.32
13 .80
30.54
16.77
23 . 01
21.50
9.57
17.58
15.57
24.53
BLUE COLLAR
40.09%
34 . 67
50.52
32.69
40.42
14 .87
31.28
9 . 01
37.27
8.76
31.06
TOTAL 27.52 32. 43 19.06 9 . 70 11. 30
MEAN TRAVEL TIMES:
Children: No Children:
EXECUTIVE & PROFESSIONAL: 21.13 MINUTES
CLERICAL: 22.58 MINUTES
BLUE COLLAR: 19.59 MINUTES
21.56 MINUTES
21.99 MINUTES
19.89 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
40
TABLE 15
HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY SEX: 1983
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
MALE 24.4
24.4
29.2
53.6
17.8
71.4
13 .8
85.1
14.9
100.0
FEMALE 32.8
32.8
30.8
63 . 6
18.4
82.0
8.8
90.8
9.2
100.0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR MALES: 23.08 MINUTES
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FEMALES: 18.26 MINUTES
I
I
J
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S. |
Department of Transportation — 1983
I
41 j
TABLE 16
HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN BY SEX
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY OCCUPATION: 1983
MALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
i COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
1 EXECUTIVE &
iPROFESSIONAL
!40.64%
21.92
36.48
28.56
39.79
17.10
39.08
14.45
42.69
17.97
49.07
t CLERICAL
!5.49%
1
i
15.37
3.46
26.51
4.99
21.47
6.63
10. 09
4.03
25.56
9.80
J BLUE COLLAR
|53.87%
27.21
60. 06
29.89
55.22
17.93
54.30
13.60
53.28
11. 36
41.13
TOTAL 24.41 29.17 17.79 13.75 14.88
FEMALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
34.94
40. 01
32.17
39.30
16.74
34.21
8.94
37.98
7.22
29.43
37.57%
CLERICAL 17.97 33 .50 23.27 11.49 13 .77
31.11% 17. 04 33.90 39.37 40.44 46.52
BLUE COLLAR
31.31%
45. 00
42.95
26.32
26.80
15.52
26. 42
6.09
21.58
7 . 07
24.04
TOTAL 32.81 30.75 18. 39 8.84 9.21
MEAN TRAVEL TIMES:
Males:
EXECUTIVE & PROFESSIONAL: 24.68 MINUTES
CLERICAL: 24.81 MINUTES
BLUE COLLAR: 21.58 MINUTES
Females:
16.83 MINUTES
22.12 MINUTES
15.56 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
42
TABLE 17
HOUSEHOLDS WITH NO CHILDREN
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY SEX: 1983
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
MALE 28.3
28.3
31.8
60.1
17.9
78.1
9.7
87.8
12.2
100. 0
FEMALE 26.6
26.6
33.2
59.7
20.5
80.2
9.7
89. 8
10.2
100.0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR MALES: 21.50 MINUTES
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FEMALES: 2 0.55 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
43
TABLE 18
HOUSEHOLDS WITHOUT CHILDREN BY SEX
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY OCCUPATION:
MALES:
1983
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
42.93%
24.15
3 6.64
29.82
40.21
21.79
52.19
9.95
43.87
14.29
50.28
CLERICAL
6.81%
10.84
2 . 61
39.18
8.38
24.41
9.27
8.45
5.91
17.12
9.55
BLUE COLLAR
50.26%
34.21
60.75
32.57
51.41
13.75
38.54
9.72
50. 21
9.75
40.16
TOTAL 28.30 31.84 17.93 9.73 12.21
FEMALES:
ROW PERCENTAGE
COLUMN PERCENTAGE
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
EXECUTIVE &
PROFESSIONAL
41.06%
22.25
34.41
37. 05
45.88
20.85
41.85
10.99
46.75
8 .86
35.73
CLERICAL
31.38%
24.13
28. 52
28.22
26.72
22.63
34 .72
9.87
32. 09
15.15
46.67
BLUE COLLAR
27.55%
35.73
37.07
32.96
27.40
17.39
23.43
7.41
21.16
6.51
17.60
TOTAL 26.55 33.15 20.46 9.65 10.19
MEAN TRAVEL TIMES:
Males:
EXECUTIVE & PROFESSIONAL: 22.37 MINUTES
CLERICAL: 21.97 MINUTES
BLUE COLLAR: 20.57 MINUTES
Females:
20.62 MINUTES j
21.99 MINUTES
18.47 MINUTES '
1
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1983
44
TABLE 19
JOURNEY TO WORK TRAVEL DURATION BY SEX: 1977
ROW PERCENTAGE
CUMULATIVE PCT.
> 10
MINS.
10-19
MINS.
20-29
MINS.
30-39
MINS.
< 40
MINS.
MALE 28.2
28.2
29.3
57. 5
16.4
73 .9
12 . 2
86. 1
13.9
100.0
FEMALE 31.1
29.5
32.8
64.3
19.1
83.4
7.8
91.2
8.8
100.0
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR MALES: 21.00 MINUTES
MEAN TRAVEL TIME FOR FEMALES: 17.83 MINUTES
SOURCE: Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — U.S.
Department of Transportation — 1977
r
BIBLIOGRAPY
Ahking, F. (1979). Study of the Labor Force Participation |
Rate of Single Women. American Economist. 23(3) . 50-
55.
I Betak, J. & Harman, E. (1978). Individual Spatial
| Behavior. In S. Rosenbloom, ed., Women's travel
( issues: Research needs and priorities, (pp. 243-284).
j Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation,
Research and Special Programs Administration.
Bird, G.A. & Bird, G.W. (1985). Determinants of Mobility
in Two-Earner Families: Does the Wife's Income Count?
; Journal of Marriage and the Family. 47(3). 753-758.
| Brooker-Gross, S. and Maraffa, T. (1985). Commuting
{ Distance and Gender among Non-Metropolitan University
I Employees. Professional Geographer. 37 (3) . 303-310.
Clifford, W. & Tobin, P. (1977). Labor Force Participation
of Working Mothers and Family Formation: Some Further
Evidence. Demography. 14 (3). 273-284.
Cramer, J. (1979). Employment Trends of Young Mothers and
the Opportunity Cost of Babies in the United States.
Demography. 16(2). 177-197.
Darian, J.C. (1975). Convenience of Work and the Job |
Constraint of Children. Demography. 12(2). 245-258. ;
I
i
Darian, J.C. (1976). Factors influencing the rising labor i
force participation of married women with pre-school
age children. Social Science Quarterly. 56(4). 614-
630.
Diamond, D. Jr. (1980). Income and Residential Location:
Muth Revisited. Urban Studies. 17(1). 1-12.
Duncan, R. and Perucci, C. (1976). Dual Occupation
Families and Migration. American Sociological Review. |
41(2). 252-261.
Ericksen, J. (1977). Analysis of the Journey to Work for
Women. Social Problems 24(4) . 428-435.
Ewer, P. (1979). Analysis of the Relationship between
Husband's Income, Family Size adn Wife's Employment in
the Early Stages of Marriage. Journal of Marriage and
the Family. 41(4). 727-738.
46
Ferber, M. & Huber, J. (1979). Husbands, Wives, and
Careers. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 41(21.
315-325.
Fox, M. (1983). Working Women and Travel: The Access of \
Women to Work and Community Facilities. Journal of the !
American Planning Association. 49(11. 156-170. i
I Giuliano, G. (1979). Public transportation and the travel j
j needs of women. Traffic Quarterly. 33(41 . 607-616.
Gordon, P., Kumar, A, and Richardson H.W. (1987). !
Congestion and Citv Size. Los Angeles, CA: University
of Southern California, School of Urban and Regional
Planning and Department of Economics.
Gordon, P., Kumar, A, and Richardson H.W. (1987). Urban
Analysis beyond the Journey-to-Work. Los Angeles, CA:
University of Southern California, School of Urban and
Regional Planning and Department of Economics.
Gordon, P. & Wong, D. (1984) . The l f Costs of Urban Sprawl11:
Some New Evidence. Los Angeles, CA: University of j
Southern California, School of Urban and Regional
Planning and Department of Economics.
!
Guest, A. (1976). Occupation and the Journey to Work. j
Social Forces. 55(21. 166-181. I
Guest, A. (1979). Patterns of Suburban Population Growth: j
1970-1975. Demography, 16(31. 401-415.
Hanson S. & Hanson, P. (1981). The impact of married J
women's employment on household travel patterns: A 1
Swedish example. Transportation. 10(21. 165-183. !
Hanson, S. & Hanson, P. (1981). Travel-Activity Patterns
of Urban Residents: Dimensions and Relationships to
Socidemographic Characteristics. Economic Geography.
57(41. 332-347.
I
I
Hayghe, H. (1982). Marital and Family Patterns of Workers: ;
An Update. Monthly Labor Review. 105(5). 53-56. j
Hayghe, H. (1981). Husbands and Wives as Earners: an !
Analysis of Family Data. Monthly Labor Review. 104 (21.
46-59.
47
Hock, C. (1978). Residential Location and Transportation
Analyses: Married Women Workers. In S. Rosenbloom,
ed., Women's travel issues: Research needs and
j priorities, (pp. 285-303). Washington D.C.: U.S.
I Department of Transportation, Research and Special
j Programs Administration.
I
! Holahand, C. & Gilbert, L. (1979). Conflict between Major
l Life Roles: Women and Men in Dual Career Couples.
Human Relations. 32(3). 451-467.
j Houseknecht, S. & Macke A. (1981). Combining Marriage and
! Career: The Marital Adjustment of Professional Women.
! Journal of Marriage and the Family. 43(3) . 651-661.
I
j Hout, M. (1982). Association between Husband's and Wive's
I Occupation in Two-Earner Families. American Journal of
I Sociology. 88(3). 397-409.
i
Howe, A. & O'Connor, K. (1982). Travel to Work and Labor
Force Participation of Men and Women in an Australian
Metropolitan Area. Professional Geographer. 34(1). 50-
64.
Kolko, G. (1978). Working Wives: Their Effects on the
Structure of the Working Class. Science and Society.
42X11, 257-277.
Koppelman, F.S., Tybout, A.M., and Syskowski, D.F. (1978).
Role influence in transportation decision making. In
S. Rosenbloom, ed., Women's travel issues: Research
needs and priorities, (pp. 309-353). Washington D.C.:
U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and
Special Programs Administration.
Lichter, D. (1982). Migration of Dual-Worker Families:
Does the Wife's Job Matter? Social Science Quarterly.
63X11, 48-57.
McGinnins, R.G. (1978). Influence of employment and
children on intrahousehold travel behavior. In S.
Rosenbloom, ed., Women's travel issues: Research needs
and priorities, (pp. 75-103). Washington D.C.: U.S.
Department of Transportation, Research and Special
Programs Administration.
Madden, J.F. (1977). A Spatial Theory of Sex
Discrimination. Journal of Regional Science. 17(1).
369-380.
48
Madden, J.F. (1980). Urban Land Use and the Growth in Two-
Earner Households. American Economic Review: Papers
and Proceedings. 70(5). 191-197.
Madden, J.F. (1981). Why women work closer to home. Urban
! Studies. 18. 181-194.
Madden, J. & White, M. (1978). Women's Work Trips: An
! Empirical and Theoretical Overview. In S. Rosenbloom,
ed., Women's travel issues: Research needs and
priorities, (pp. 201-242). Washington D.C.: U.S.
Department of Transportation, Research and Special
Programs Administration.
j Mossman, F. and Faria, A.J. (1975). Mobility Index based
I on the Socio-Economic Characterstics of Households.
; Traffic Quarterly. 29 f3). 347-369.
Mueller, C. and Campbell, B. (1977). Female Occupational
Achievement and Marital Status: A Research Note.
Journal of Marriage and the Family. 39(3). 587-593.
Palm, R. & Pred, A. (1974). A time-geographic perspective
on problems of inequality for women. (Working Paper
No. 236) Berkeley, CA: University of California,
Institute of Urban and Regional Development.
Pendleton, B. (1980). Scales for Investigation of the
Dual-Career Family. Journal of Marriage and the
Family. 42 (2) . 269-276.
Pickup, L. (1981). Housewives' mobility and travel
patterns. (TRRL Laboratory Report No. 971).
Crowthorne, Berkshire, England: Transport and Road
Research Laboratory, Transport Operations Department,
Access and Mobility Division.
Pisarski, A., ed. (1987). Commuting in America. Westport,
Connecticut: Eno Foundation for Transport.
Pratt, E. (1911). Industrial Courses of Congestion of
Population in New York City. New York: AMS Press.
Presser, H. (1987). Work Shifts of Full-Time Dual-Earner
Couples: Patterns and Contrasts by Sex of Spouse.
Demography. 24(1). 99-112.
Quinlan, D. and Schakelford, J. (1980). Labor Force
Participation Rates of Women and the Rise of the Two-
Earner Family. American Economic Review: Papers and
j Proceedings. 70(5). 209-213.
jRecker, W. & Schuler, H. (1978). Sex Differences in Travel
Preferences and Decision Making. In S. Rosenbloom,
ed., Women/s travel issues: Research needs and
I priorities, (pp. 381-416). Washington D.C.: U.S.
j Department of Transportation, Research and Special
] Programs Administration.
JRichards, L., Jacobson, I., Pepler, R., and Bloom, R.
' (1978). Perceived Safety and Security in
Transportation Systems as Determined by the Gender of
the Traveler. In S. Rosenbloom, ed., Women's travel
issues: Research needs and priorities, (pp. 441-478).
I Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation,
i Research and Special Programs Administration.
Rodgers, W. & Thornton, A. (1985). Changing Patterns of
First Marriage in the United States. Demography.
22X21, 265-279.
Rosenbloom, S. (1978). Women's travel issues: The
research and policy environment. In S. Rosenbloom,
ed., Women's travel issues: Research needs and
priorities, (pp. 3-40). Washington D.C.: U.S.
Department of Transportation, Research and Special
Programs Administration.
Rosenbloom, S. (1987). Differences by Sex in the Home-to-
Work Travel Patterns of Married Parents in Two Maior
Metropolitan Areas. Austin, Texas: University of
Texas, School of Urban Design.
Rosenbloom, S. (1988). Why working families need a car.
Austin, Texas: University of Texas, School of Urban
Design.
Rosenfeld, R. & Sorensen A. (1979). Sex Differences in
Patterns of Career Mobility. Demography, 16f1). 89-
101.
Sen, L. (1978). Travel patterns and behavior of women in
urban areas. In S. Rosenbloom, ed., Women's travel
issues: Research needs and priorities, (pp. 417-436).
Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation,
Research and Special Programs Administration.
50
Skinner, L.E. & Shea, C.G. (1981). Impact of compressed
work schedules: Sociodemographic and attitudinal
factors and travel pattern effects. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration.
Skinner, L.E. & Bourlag, K.L. (1978). Shopping trips: Who
makes them and when. In S. Rosenbloom, ed., Women's
j travel issues: Research needs and priorities, (pp.
355-379). Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Research and Special Programs J
Administration. !
I
; Small, K. (1982). Scheduling of Consumer Activites: Work j
i Trips. American Economic Review. 72(6) . 467-479. I
I
Smith, R. (1978). The Movement of Women into the Labor 1
Force. In S. Rosenbloom, ed., Women's travel issues: j
i Research needs and priorities, (pp. 49-73). Washington
D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and
Special Programs Administration.
Sorensen, A. (1983). Womens Employment Patterns after
Marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 45(2),
311-321.
Stolzenberg, R. & Waite, L. (1984). Local Labor Markets
and Labor Force Participation of Wives. Demography.
21(2). 157-170.
Studenmund, A., Kerpelman, L.C., and Ott, M. (1978).
Women's Travel Behavior and Attitudes: An Empirical
Analysis. In S. Rosenbloom, ed., Women's travel
issues: Research needs and priorities, (pp. 355-379).
Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation, !
Research and Special Programs Administration.
Taafe, E., Garner, B., and Yeates, M. (1963). The
Peripheral Journey to Work— A Geographic
Consideration. Evanston, 111.: Northwestern University ,
Press.
U.S. Department of Labor. (1984). Time of Change: 1983 j
Handbook on Women Workers. (Women's Bureau, Bulletin |
No. 298) Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing !
Office.
|
51 !
U.S. Department of Transportation. (1986). Personal Travel
in the United States (Volume 1): A Report on Findings
from the 1983-1984 Nationwide Personal Transportation
Study. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office.
U.S. Department of Transportation. (1986) . Personal Travel
in the United States (Volume 2): A Report on Findings
from the 1983-1984 Nationwide Personal Transportation
Study. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office.
Vickerman, R. (1984). Urban and Regional Change, Migration
and Commuting-The Dynamics of Workplace, Residence,
and Transport Choice. Urban Studies. 21(1). 15-29.
Waite, L. (1980). Working Wives and the Family Life Cycle.
American Journal of Sociology. 86(3). 272-294.
White, M. (1977). A Model of Residential Location Choice
and Commuting by Men and Women Workers. Journal of
Regional Science. 17(1). 41-52.
Young, C. (1978). Work Sequences of Women During the
Family Life Cycle. Journal of Marriage and the Family.
40(2). 401-411.
Zahavi, Y. & Talvite, A. (1980). Regularities in travel
time and money expenditures. In Household activities,
budget constraints, and stability of travel.
(Transportation Research Record No. 750). (pp. 13-19).
Washington D.C.: Transportation Research Board.
Zimmer, B. (1985). Metropolitan Development and the
Changing Journey to Work. Social Science Quarterly.
66(3). 519-532.
52

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Russian-expansion and state export of capital

PDF

A survey of mediation techniques

PDF

An analysis of recent expert estimates of maximum world population at a minimum adequate standard of living

PDF

Philippine import and exchange restrictions

PDF

Pawnbrokerage in California

PDF

A comparative study of price controls in the United States from 1942 to 1952

PDF

The demand for and the supply of executive talent in the United States

PDF

A study of the special problems of short-run economic prediction

PDF

The contributions of the theory of group dynamics to employee and employer relations

PDF

Inflation and a national wage policy in peacetime

PDF

Labor unions in Iraq

PDF

Theories of the passing of capitalism

PDF

Fringe benefits: History and economic analysis

PDF

An inquiry into the problems and desirability of acreage limitation in the Central Valley Project

PDF

Price in the American economy: A theoretical inquiry

PDF

Determination of consumer demand by the American Music Conference

PDF

A survey of the problems and policies of the National War Labor Board, 1941-1945

PDF

An inquiry into the use of cost-of-living figures in wage adjustments

PDF

Papermaking, printing, and economic growth to 1500 A.D.

PDF

Federal credit union operation: A case study

Asset Metadata

Creator Pinkerton, Steven James (author)

Core Title Comparison of travel durations by sex: Is there really a "meaningful" difference?

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program Economics

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag economics, general,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Phillips, E. Bryant (committee chair), Garis, Roy L. (committee member), Pollard, Spencer D. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c20-464593

Unique identifier UC11264242

Identifier EP44921.pdf (filename),usctheses-c20-464593 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier EP44921.pdf

Dmrecord 464593

Document Type Thesis

Rights Pinkerton, Steven James

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA