Early evaluations of travel change programs demonstrated dramatic success in
shifting people out of cars and into transit and active travel. Yet methodological shortcomings
of early studies combined with newer more rigorous evaluations have called into
question the dramatic early results. In this study, we use a randomized field experiment of
incoming graduate students at the University of California, Los Angeles to answer two
research questions. First, do travel behavior change programs work? And second, why do
they tend to work for movers, but not non-movers? We test two competing hypothesized
mechanisms for how travel interventions work: (1) by breaking travel habits during a period
of self-reflection (habit pathway), or (2) by improving the transit quality of one’s home
neighborhood (residential location pathway). We find that a low-cost, informational program
effectively altered the travel patterns of movers, but not non-movers. Overall, we find little
support for the residential location pathway. Members of the treatment group did not live in
significantly different neighborhoods compared to members of the control group. In addition,
the treatment remained effective when controlling for residential location. This provides
indirect evidence for the habit pathway, by which travel behavior programs influence travel
behavior through information provided during periods of reflection. Behavioral change
campaigns targeted at recent movers are likely just as effective as campaigns targeting those
preparing to move as both groups are undergoing periods of reflection.

• The role of habit and residential location in travel behavior change programs, a field experiment