Those who are younger, male, and have higher incomes generally have higher car pride; less developed countries exhibit higher car pride

Measuring Car Pride and its Implications for Car Ownership and Use across Individuals, Cities, and Countries. Joanna C. Moody. PhD Thesis, Civil and Environmental Engineering Dept, MIT, May 2019. https://mobility.mit.edu/sites/default/files/MoodyDissertation_electronicversion.pdf

As the world recognizes that its growing reliance on private, fossil fuel-based vehicles is unsustainable, understanding how to avoid growth in car ownership and how to shift current users towards more efficient, environmentally-friendly, safe, and inclusive alternatives is acritical vision for meeting sustainable (transportation) development goals. Policy makers looking to shift consumer behavior away from cars need a more rigorous understanding of how different attitudes play a role in influencing car ownership and use and how this might vary by people and place. In this dissertation we provide deep insight into one of the many symbolic and affective motives behind car consumption: “car pride” or the attribution of social status and personal image to owning and using a car. Using data collected from individuals in two U.S. cities and in 51 countries around the world, we develop and demonstrate the reliability, validity, and invariance of polytomous (12, 7-point Likert-format statements) and dichotomous (9, dichotomous statements) survey measures for car pride using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). With these measures, we explore variations in car pride across individuals, cities, and countries using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Across individuals, we find that those who are younger, male, and have higher incomes generally have higher car pride. Controlling for individual characteristics, we find that car pride is influenced by context. Between U.S. cities, we find that Houston has higher car pride than New York City. Across countries, we find that less developed countries exhibit higher car pride. We also disentangle the bidirectional causal relations between car pride and car consumption using instrumental variable (IV) techniques. We find that car pride strongly predicts car ownership, while no statistically significant relation exists in the opposite direction. Car pride additionally predicts car use, but only through itsrelation with car ownership (mediator). In the reverse direction, car use strongly reinforces car pride. While the directions of these relations appear almost universal across contexts, their strengths differ by country, emphasizing the importance of taking national context into account when measuring and interpreting symbolic motivations for car consumption.



7.1 Main Findings

In this section, we summarize the main findings from our empirical investigations into car prideand its relations with car consumption (Chapters 3-6). While each of these chapters includes morein-depth discussions of its results, here we summarize the key findings from across the different chapters. While we cannot directly compare model estimates between our two survey measuresof car pride and our two samples, we do identify overarching findings that are supported by both cases. Therefore, here we integrate findings from across our chapters, synthesizing what we havelearned generally about car pride and its relations with car ownership and use.

7.1.1 Measuring Car Pride

In this dissertation, we develop and test multiple ways of measuring car pride. In a sample of commuters from the New York City and Houston metropolitan areas, we investigate the reliability,validity, and invariance of an explicit measure of car pride derived from a polytomous survey scale(see Chapter 3) using a series of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models. Based on these results, we propose our 12-item, 7-point Likert-scale measure of the attribution of social status and personal image to driving and owning a vehicle as a new, standard measure for car pride that is reliable, valid, and invariant between cities and across individuals with different car consumption.For the U.S. cities sample, we also derive an implicit measure from a car vs. bus social status Implicit Association Test (IAT; see Chapter 4). Comparing the psychometric properties of our explicit and mplicit measures of car pride in our U.S. sample, we find that our explicit measure is a more valid measure. Comparing their correlations with actual car ownership and use, we further find that our explicit measure of car pride is more interpretable and useful than our implicit measure derived from the IAT. These results might suggest that explicit rather than implicit cognitive pathwaysdominate car consumption, including decisions of car ownership and use. The results also suggest that traditional (explicit) survey scales, if carefully developed and well-validated, are likely adequate for probing many attitude-behavior relations.In our international sample of 41,932 individuals in 51 countries, we test a dichotomous versionof the car pride scale, composed of 9 agree-disagree survey items designed for mobile phone-based data collection. Using multilevel CFA, we find that this measure also exhibits reasonable convergent validity, reliability, and invariance across countries and propose it as an alternative, standard measure particularly useful for cross-cultural comparison. However, the dichotomous version of the car pride scale is less able to differentiate among individuals who disagree with statements associatingsocial status and personal image to owning and using a car. Therefore, the polytomous version ofthe car pride scale should be preferred unless, as in our international survey, data collection will bedone via small-screen devices that make display of Likert-format scales difficult. Together this measurement development and validation provides standard, quantifiable survey scales of car pride that can be compared across people, providing consistent, specific, and actionable information for future transportation planning and policymaking. It also provides thefoundation needed for the empirical explorations of car pride and its relations with car ownershipand use in Chapters 5 and 6.

7.1.2 Variations in Car Pride

Equipped with well-validated survey measures of car pride, we can visualize and model variations in car pride across individuals, cities, and countries. For individuals in our U.S. cities, we findhigher car pride among those who are younger, male, white, students, and from higher-incomehouseholds. For individuals in our international sample, we find that those who are younger, male, highly educated, full-time employed, who live in larger towns or cities, and from higher-income households have higher car pride, no matter the country they live in. Therefore, acrossboth samples we identify age, gender, and income as significant sociodemographic predictors ofcar pride. However, we also find that individual sociodemographics are limited in their capacityto explain observed variation in car pride, suggesting that many other factors not explored in thisdissertation contribute to the formation of different levels of car pride among different individuals. Next, we compare car pride across cities and countries. Using multigroup and multilevel modeling techniques, we first control for any differences in car pride related to the individuals in the subsamples. Comparing between cities in the U.S., we find that an equivalent individual living in New YorkCity is likely to have lower car pride than one from Houston. While future work would be neededto explore what characteristics of these cities contribute to observed differences, we speculate thatcar pride may be related to car dependency; individuals living in cities like Houston—where urbanform and transportation infrastructure provide little alternative to owning and using a car—mayform greater symbolic attachment to their vehicles.

Similarly, after controlling for the types of people living in different countries, we find that developing countries—with lower national wealth, greater income inequality, and lower rates of carownership and use—report higher values of car pride. This suggests that the effect of nationalcontext on car pride is related to the stage of economic development and motorization of a given country. Again, explaining this observed variation across countries is left for future research.

7.1.3 Car Pride and Car Consumption

Next, we explore how car pride relates to car consumption. We begin by comparing car pridebetween car-owners and non-car owners and car-users and non-car-users. In almost every city andcountry examined, we find that individuals who own and use cars have significantly higher car pride than others. Applying multivariate structural equation modeling techniques, we find thatthese observed relations between car pride and car consumption remain significant after controlling for sociodemographics of the individuals in our U.S. and international samples. Unlike much of the literature that assumes attitudes influence behavior, we explore bidirectional relations between car pride and car ownership and use in our U.S. sample. We find that bidirectionalrelations exist between car pride and car ownership as well as between car pride and car use. However, the relative strengths of these bidirectional attitude-behavior relations depend on thedimension of car consumption. We find that car pride strongly predicts car ownership, which inturn predicts car use; in the reverse direction, car use strongly reinforces car pride (see Figure 7.1).In other words, an individual with higher car pride is more likely to own a vehicle, and, enabledwith this ownership, use it more frequently. In the reverse direction, we find that owning a car hasno statistically significant impact on car pride, but using a car more (in terms of frequency or milesdriven) contributes to greater car pride. All together, these relations create a feedback loop amongcar pride, car ownership, and car use. We find that the directions of car pride-car consumption relations depicted in Figure 7.1 hold onaverage across a diverse set of individuals living in different cities in the U.S. In fact, betweenNew York City and Houston, we do not find a statistically significant difference in the strength of these relations. We then impose these same directions when modeling car pride-car consumptionrelations across individuals in different countries around the world. In our international sample,we see significant variation across contexts. In particular, we find that the per-unit impact of anindividual’s car pride on the likelihood of owning a vehicle varies by country. Therefore, our work emphasizes the importance of taking the social and cultural context into account when measuringand interpreting symbolic and affective motivations for car consumption.