Project no.: 518368

Project acronym: MAX

Project title: Successful Travel Awareness Campaigns and Mobility Management Strategies

Integrated Project

6.2 Sustainable Development1.6.2 Sustainable Surface Transport Objective3.1.1.1.3 Advancing Knowledge on innovative measures in urban transport

Title of Report:

WPA TF3: Synthesis of country interviews reports

Period covered: Date of preparation: 2 January 2009

Start date of project: 1 Oct. 2006 Duration: 36 months

Version:

Prepared by: AUTH

Checked by:

Verified by:

Status:

Dissemination level: PU (public)

Project co-funded by the European Commission within the Sixth Framework Programme (2002-2008)

MAX - introduction

MAX is the EU's latest framework research project on Mobility Management (MM) and Travel Awareness (TA) in transport. The following four thematic Work Packages (WP) have linked these topics and cater to the development of products useful to MM and TA practitioners.:

WP A New approaches and innovative campaigns in MM WP B Development of a new behaviour change model and a prospective assessment tool WP C Linking MM to Quality management - leading to MM certification WP D Integrating planning and MM

Accompanying Work Packages 1 - 5 integrate the project research efforts. MAX started in October 2006, the State of the Art analysis was completed in April 2007 and the main research was carried out over the following 18 months.

Previous EU research on MM has studied MM and TA separately, but the aim of MAX has been to link those in order to demonstrate the synergies between them and, most importantly, to develop products that will be of wider applicability and usefulness than the pilot demonstrations that tended to predominate in earlier projects.

Special focus was given to new EU Member States, as reflected in the MAX partnership, since four out of the total 16 partners come from new Member States. The consortium has provided excellence, know-how and experience from various disciplines, including marketing, psychology and social science. The main project results are to be translated into the most important languages of these countries, while the final conference will be in the largest new EU Member State, Poland, in the city of Krakow, in September 2009.

Austrian Mobility Research, AMOR (project leader) – AT

  Compagnia Transporti Laziali Societa’ Regionale spa, COTRAL – IT

synergo, R. De Tommasi + W. Schenkel, synergo, Zürich – CH

Mobiel 21vzw, M21 (leader WPA) – BE   Cracow University of Technology, CUT – PL

Tallina Linn, Tallinn – EE

Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungs-forschung d. Landes Nordrhein-Westfahlen, ILS NRW (leader WPB) – DE

Eric N. Schreffler, Transportation Consultant, ESTC – US

Timo Finke Consult Aachen, TFC Aachen – DE

University of Piraeus Research Centre, UPCR (leader WPC) – GR

Equipo de Tecnicos en Transporte y Territorio SA; ETT – ES

Traject nv, TRAJECT – BE

University of Maribor, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Uni MB (leader WPD) – SI

  FIT Consulting SRL, FIT – IT Trivector Traffic AB, TRIV – SE

Agencia Municipal de Energia da Almada, AGENEAL – PT

  Stad Kortrijk, Kortrijk - BE University of Central Lancashire, UCLAN – UK

City Council of Almada, Almada – PT   Lyle Bailie International Limited, LyleBailie – UK

Otto-von-Guericke-University of Magdeburg, UMAG – DE

Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, AUTH – GR

  Napier University, NU– UK University of Giessen, Institute for applied and empirical social research, Uni Gießen – DE

Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique – Délégation Rhone-Auvergne, CNRS-LET – FR

  Austrian Standards Institute, Ö-Norm – AT

Vilnius Gedimas Technical University, VGTU – LT

http://www.max-success.eu

Table of Contents

1 Summary Report.............................................................................................................................................7

2 Identity of the survey......................................................................................................................................8

3 Interviews and their findings.........................................................................................................................9

3.1 Interview aims, structure and preparation................................................................................................9

3.2 Interview process....................................................................................................................................10

4 Initial information about interview sites.....................................................................................................11

4.1 City context..............................................................................................................................................11

4.2 Participants grouping.............................................................................................................................11

4.3 Basic information about the transport systems of the interview sites.....................................................12

5 Interview results............................................................................................................................................14

5.1 Findings regarding current travel behaviour.........................................................................................14

5.2 Results from stimulus boards..................................................................................................................185.2.1 Positive stimulus boards..................................................................................................................185.2.2 Negative stimulus boards................................................................................................................195.2.3 Emotional stimulus boards..............................................................................................................205.2.4 Rational Stimulus Boards................................................................................................................215.2.5 Environment Related Stimulus Boards...........................................................................................215.2.6 Health Related Stimulus Boards.....................................................................................................225.2.7 Economy Related Stimulus Boards.................................................................................................22

5.3 Cross country stimulus board comparisons............................................................................................23

5.4 Rolemodels and message givers..............................................................................................................255.4.1 Overall role model choice...............................................................................................................255.4.2 Per stimulus board and per group classification of role model preferences...................................265.4.3 Per group classification of role model preferences.........................................................................285.4.4 Per gender classification of role model preferences.......................................................................29

6 Sponsoring organisations..............................................................................................................................30

7 Overall findings and Conclusions................................................................................................................31

8 Appendix 1: In depth interviews guide.......................................................................................................32

Actual questions..................................................................................................................................................32

Recruiting participants........................................................................................................................................39

/tt/file_convert/5e2ef292789422328131ffbb/document.doc

page 5 / 42

Writing up the interview......................................................................................................................................39

Context for the interview.....................................................................................................................................40

9 Appendix 2: interview reporting template......................................................................................................41

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1. COUNTRIES AND CITIES WHERE INTERVIEWS TOOK PLACE.....................................................................11TABLE 2. INTERVIEWEES GROUPING........................................................................................................................12TABLE 3. CAR OWNERSHIP......................................................................................................................................14TABLE 4. INTENSITY OF CAR USE............................................................................................................................14TABLE 5. TRIP LENGTH PER WEEK (CAR DRIVERS)..................................................................................................15TABLE 6. TRAVEL AS/WITH PASSENGERS (CAR DRIVERS).......................................................................................15TABLE 7. TIME SPENT TRAVELLING EACH DAY (CAR DRIVERS)..............................................................................15TABLE 8. PT USE INTENSITY....................................................................................................................................16TABLE 9.PT TRIP LENGTH........................................................................................................................................16TABLE 10. PT TRIP DURATION (DATA ONLY FOR THESSALONIKI)..........................................................................16TABLE 11.BICYCLE USE INTENSITY.........................................................................................................................16TABLE 12. BICYCLE TRIP LENGTH...........................................................................................................................17TABLE 13. FREQUENCY OF WALKING EACH WEEK..................................................................................................17TABLE 14. WALKING TRIP DISTANCE......................................................................................................................17TABLE 15.MOST INFLUENTIAL PICTURES OF THE STIMULUS BOARD.......................................................................19TABLE 16.NEGATIVE STIMULUS BOARDS................................................................................................................20TABLE 17. ABSOLUTE AND RELATIVE RANKING OF STIMULUS BOARDS IN EACH COUNTRY...................................24TABLE 18.GROUP RANKING IN ALL SITES................................................................................................................24TABLE 19. CROSS-SITE COMPARISON ACROSS MALES-FEMALES............................................................................25TABLE 20. OVERALL ROLE MODEL CHOICE.............................................................................................................26TABLE 21. PER STIMULUS BOARD AND PER GROUP CLASSIFICATION OF ANSWERS IN PRESTON............................27TABLE 22. PER STIMULUS BOARD AND PER GROUP CLASSIFICATION OF ANSWERS INTHESSALONIKI....................27TABLE 23. PER GROUP PREFERENCES OF ROLEMODELS IN VILNIUS........................................................................28TABLE 24. PER GROUP PREFERENCES OF ROLEMODELS IN ROME...........................................................................28TABLE 25. PER GROUP PREFERENCES OF ROLEMODELS IN LEUVEN........................................................................28TABLE 26. PER GENDER PREFERENCES OF ROLEMODELS IN VILNIUS.....................................................................29TABLE 27. PER GENDER PREFERENCES OF ROLEMODELS IN ROME.........................................................................29TABLE 27. PER GENDER PREFERENCES OF ROLEMODELS IN THESSALONIKI...........................................................29Table 28. Per gender preferences of rolemodels in Leuven....................................................................................29

/tt/file_convert/5e2ef292789422328131ffbb/document.doc

page 6 / 42

1 Summary Report

In the Annex A of Comprehensive Research Plan, where research activities are described, (http://www.max-success.eu/intern/docs/MAX_CRP_AnnexA_ResearchPlanWP_A.zip) it is foreseen that, while studying various themes and aspects of a Travel Awareness campaign, special interest must be dedicated to the credibility of the message giver of the campaign.

To answer the various questions that arose regarding this issue, a bibliographic review to draw lessons from other sectors was performed and a round of in-depth interviews with people in different countries was scheduled (in replacement of the focus group research initially planned, that was rejected on advice from external experts).

The following report will summarise the findings of the interviews that were held in 5 countries (Greece, UK, Lithuania, Italy and Belgium) and explore similarities and differences1.

1 Also in Estonia (Tallinn), in depth interviews were carried out. Unfortunately, at the time of finalising this report the interviews were not transcribed and translated for analysis.

page 7 / 42

2 Identity of the survey

Before the interview survey was initiated, an interview guide was compiled, including structured advice on how the interviewee would proceed with the in depth interview. The common guide ensured that interviews in all countries would be carried out along the same lines and answers would be comparable. This interview guide is taken up in appendix 1 to this document as well as the interview reporting template in appendix 2.

The interview survey was conducted from May to September 2008 in the various countries. Participants came from various socioeconomic backgrounds and from both sexes. All participants received gift vouchers as a reward for their taking part in the interviews, after interview completion.

In the following chapters, the interview findings are presented.

page 8 / 42

3 Interviews and their findings

In the following paragraphs, the interview process will be described first and then, the findings on the specific interview queries will be presented.

3.1 Interview aims, structure and preparation

As it was described in the Annex A of MAX Comprehensive Research Plan, the aim of the research undertaken in WP3 were to:

“-Investigate the importance of the spokesman in relation to the sponsoring organisation behind the campaign.

-Test the theory of a social influence network [i.e. does the role of the message giver enhance the effective word of mouth marketing which is a core element of social marketing]

-Investigate the credibility of different message givers regarding travel awareness.

-Investigate differences in acceptance of the message giver according to the following factors:o The nature of the messageo The different type of message givero In between different countries (cultural differences) and o Between different market segments e.g. age groups, mobility profile, etc”

Interviews in partner countries were finally judged as the most suitable mean to pursue the aims mentioned above. It was decided that 6 partner countries would participate (Belgium, Greece, Estonia, Italy, Lithuania and UK). After discussions, it was decided that the interviews would be taped, so it could be transcribed later. Before the interview started, each interviewee was presented with a written form of legal consent to the recording of the interview, so that no legal issues due to unauthorised taping could arise later on.

The interviews had two main parts: in the first part, some basic information about the travel behaviour of the interviewee were recorded, such as; level of car use, reasons of the specific mod choice, as well as intentions of mode choice. In the second part, a “stimulus board game” was organised, where a number of visual “stimuli” (different sets of printed “mix-up” of colour pictures organised across the same notion) were presented to the interviewee and his reactions during a structured discussion were recorded. This second part was by far the most lengthy. At the end of the interview, each respondent was awarded with a small-value gift voucher.

In order to assure comparability of results, interviewers from all countries were presented with the same “stimulus boards” (apart of course from the role model stimulus board, that included pictures with which inhabitants of each country were familiar), transcribed the interviews using the same templates, and carried out their interviews in the same structured way, that was presented in the Interview Guide.

The core of the interview was devoted to the structured discussion of stimulus boards. These stimulus boards were paper leafs that included a printed patchwork of assorted pictures against a specific theme. These themes included a “negative-positive” bipole, where the pictures included in these two boards had respectively a negative or positive essence, relating merely, but not exclusively, to transport (and especially, transport by car). Another bipole was the “rational-emotional” one: in the rational stimulus board, pictures are accompanied by relative “hard” data, whereas in the emotional stimulus board only pictures creating strong emotions were included. In addition to these four stimulus boards, three more were presented with pictures relating to health, the environment and the economy. The final stimulus board contained images of people and characters that could be used as role-models in a Travel Awareness campaign.

page 9 / 42

The Interview Guide was created and distributed to partners in order to avoid improvisations of interviewers and keep a uniform style. The Interview Guide was very detailed, including guidance and exemplary questions for each step of the conversation, thus facilitating the transcription of the interview.

3.2 Interview process

First of all, each interviewing team made a list of the possible interviewees, out of which the final sample would be chosen, having in mind the applicable provisions, i.e. a 50-50 split between sexes (or as close to it as possible) and an equal representation of the various age groups in the final sample. Although the social networks of each interviewing team were deployed in order to recruit participants, it was assured that an adequate level of impartiality and open-mindedness would be a characteristic of the sample.

Some pretest interviews were made with people other than the final participants, in order to ensure that all questions were easily understandable and all wording was easy to comprehend. These pilot interviews showed no need for major rewording or major changes in the structure of the interview.

Following this, contact with the prospective interviewee was made, and if they agreed to participate, a meeting was scheduled. At the agreed place and time, and before the actual interview began, the interviewer presented the interviewee with the form of legal consent. Recording only began after the form was signed.

The interview, in total, lasted on average between 45 mins to 1 hour. The interviewee was asked for their current travel behaviour and then presented the stimulus boards and asked to state the feelings and thoughts that each gave them, as well as the influence these pictures would have upon them if these were part of a Travel Awareness campaign (and which of them would be more likely to make them change their current behaviour). The stimulus boards were presented both separately and in comparison to the other stimulus board of the same bipole. The interviewer was tasked with finding out how the respondent actually feels at the sight of the pictures of each stimulus board, and not just follow the respondent’s words.

Finally, a common template for notes during the interview was created that included four fields: the first one contains the basic “identity” of the interview (name of the interviewee and the interviewer, place & time of the interview and some notes of the interviewee’s profile). The second field includes basic details on the current travel behaviour of the respondent (how heavy car users they are, what other travel modes they are using, the reasons they are using the current mode and whether rhey would be interested to switch to a mode other than car)

The third part of the template contains five sub-parts: the first sub-part is for the negative and positive stimulus boards (examined both separately and in comparison), the second sub-part is about the emotional and rational stimulus boards, the third sub-part is for the triplette of the health-related/economy-related/environment related stimulus boards, the fourth part is for the role model stimulus board and the fifth sub-part is for the notes on the sponsoring organisation.

The fourth part of the template is for general comments that may be made during the whole interview, both from the side of the interviewer and the interviewee.

The diversity of cities from which respondents were chosen from enhances the possibility of spotting the different trends and opinions throughout different countries and cities. In the following chapters the results of the interviews are presented.

page 10 / 42

4 Initial information about interview sites

In the following chapters, some basic information about the cities where the interviews were held, as well as their transport systems is given. Moreover, information about participants’ grouping is also offered.

4.1 City context

Ιnterviews were conducted in cities with different characteristics. To be more specific, in the New Member States (i.e. Lithuania), interviews were carried out in the capital cities, ie Vilnius

Vilnius is a city with a great percentage of its acreage (~44%) covered with green, whereas almost 20% of the total Lithuanian population is located there (about 600.000 inhabitants); it also has a steady flow of tourists and a large number of students.

Another country where interviews were held in its capital is Italy, where the interviews were carried out in Rome. Rome is the largest city of all in our sample in terms of population and acreage, with approximately 2.500.000 of resident population and a world-known tourist attraction.

In Greece, interviews were held in the second largest city, Thessaloniki. Thessaloniki has a population of approximately 1.000.000 and is located in the North of the country; the University of the city (Aristotle University) is the largest university in Greece in terms of enrolled students

Leuven, Belgium, is a small city (~90.000 inhabitants) with a fledgling student community of about 35.000, that attend the Leuven University (Katholieke Universitat Leuven). Leuven is located in the centre of Belgium, a very short distance from the country’s capital, Brussels, and Brussels’ national airport

Finally, Preston, UK, is also a “university town” , hosting the campus of the University of Central Lancashire, with a total population of 129.000. Preston is located in Lancashire, in the North-West of England, a distance of 30 miles to Manchester.

In the following table, the different cities where interviews took place along with their population are presented

Table 1. Countries and cities where interviews took place

Country City Apx Population

Belgium Leuven 90.000

Greece Thessaloniki 1.000.000

Italy Rome 2.500.000

Lithuania Vilnius 580.000

UK Preston 129.000

4.2 Participants grouping

In each city, 15 people participated in the interviews, split into 3 age groups (Group 1, 2 and 3). Group 1 comprised of people aged less than 30, Group 2 comprised of people between 30 and 50 years of age and finally, Group 3 comprised of people older than 50. Moreover, in Thessaloniki, one more provision was taken, besides the age criterion; this provision was the existence (or not) of children. This means that in Thessaloniki, Group 1

page 11 / 42

included people under 30 and single, Group 2 included people between 30 and 50 that also have dependent children and finally Group 3 included people over 50 that have grown-up kids, no longer staying with them.

The split between sexes was also on a 50-50 basis, with the exception of groups 1 and 3 in Preston. The grouping of interviewees is presented in the following table

Table 2. Interviewees groupingLeuven

BEThessaloniki

GRRome

IT

Vilnius LT

Preston UK

  M F M F M F M F M F

Group 1 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 4 1Group 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 3Group 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 1 4

Group Total Male 8 8 7 8 7

Group Total Female 7 7 8 7 8Total male 38Total female 37

4.3 Basic information about the transport systems of the interview sites

A brief overview of the transport system of each city is given in the following paragraphs

Leuven has a very frequent rail connection to Brussels and a very satisfying bus connection to the residential suburbs. Both rail and bus services are of satisfying frequency at both on- and off-peak times. There is a quite restrictive car parking policy in place, with limited parking time in the city centre; at many places, only paid parking is available. No tram exists in Leuven; cycling is very common, partly thanks to the student population. There is a very friendly pricing policy on public transport (PT) for young (under the age of 12) and old (over 65 years): people belonging to these age groups can travel on PT for free. However, the provision of company car, when someone moves up the corporate ladder, contradicts the effort to expand the PT patronage in middle aged population. As a result, almost 60% of everyday travel in Leuven is done by car.

Thessaloniki, the second largest city of Greece in terms of population, has until now only been served by a bus system; a metro line is currently being built. Bus lines are radial, emanating from certain points of the city centre and ending in municipalities close to the centre; this results in the fact that connection between these municipalities and the city centre is satisfactory and frequent, whilst travel between municipalities is not as convenient.. Also, the connection between distant municipalities and the city centre is served through transfers, which are made in the New Rail Station (in the west) and in the proximity of a housing superstore (in the east). Standard bus ticket price is 0,50 € (0.60 € if issued inside the bus) and is valid for 70 mins after it is validated and for up to three transfers. Moreover, there are special passengers’ categories (like pupils, students etc) that are entitled to reduced price (specifically, half price) on all sorts of tickets and unlimited-travel cards. There is also a daily ticket which costs 2.00€ (reduced price: 1.00€) and a weekly ticket which costs 10.00€ (reduced price: 5.00 €). Available for purchase are also cards for unlimited travel for a specific period (month, 3-month, 6-month, year). Parking is not allowed on arterial streets in order to increase street capacity. However, in certain cases, parking is permitted on arterial streets when they are within Central Business Districts (CBDs) or along corridors with pedestrian concentrations. Parking is, in most cases, free in housing areas, but it is charged along arterial streets in the CBD’s and in other local centres. Parking policy in the city centre offers short-term parking spaces on-street and long-term spaces in parking garages or parking lots. Approximately 10+ kms of bus lanes exist, but they are not strictly enforced. In Thessaloniki, there’s only one bicycle lane

page 12 / 42

In Vilnius, a third of all trips are made by PT, however, buses and trolleys services (operated both by private and public operators) are not of great quality and lines are not well interconnected. Tickets are valid just for one trip, thus discouraging trip linking or transfer between lines. Prices differ between lines operated by different providers. The situation is worse in connecting rural areas, where bus frequencies drop significantly and services stop very early in the afternoon. There are also ongoing discussions on the development of a new, fixed-line mode and what would this be (underground or tram).Bike lanes are also not well interconnected.

Preston is a city that is the home of the University of Central Lancaster, with a relatively small population of 129.000 and close to several towns or cities like Lancaster, Blackpool or Manchester. Preston is flat in the centre of the city, but the surrounding countryside is more hilly.What’s interesting (and not found in other cities) is that in Preston, 25% of the daily trips are made on foot. Still, car use is prevalent in Preston, (65% of daily trips are made by car) but, as Preston is a CIVITAS city and car use deterrence measures are in place, car use is expected to decline in the coming years. Parking is limited in the main street, Fishergate, and surrounding area.The public transport system comprises several bus services, the main ones being Stagecoach (national company) and Preston Bus (owned by its employees). Daily, weekly or monthly tickets are available for purchase.Preston is also a major railway stop on the line from London to Glasgow.

Finally, Rome is Italy’s capital and it is divided into 20 administrative districts, with a total population of over 2,5 million inhabitants. About 85% of working people are employed in services of various kinds and in commerce. In Rome conurbation, 2,4 million vehicles are in circulation every day. The Mobility Agency of Rome is Atac SpA. Atac oversees 360 surface routes (2006 data) with 8,260 stops and 2 underground lines with 48 stops. A number of policies are in place, such as Limited Traffic Zones (LTZ) in which traffic entering those zones is controlled and parking is allowed only to residents.Metered parking is also in place; moreover, there is an integrated fare system (METREBUS), allowing passengers to travel in the whole Latium area with a single ticket, when using the services of the companies participating in the system. In addition, a car sharing experience started in a municipal area in 2005. From a legal perspective, since 1992, Rome, along with every municipality with more than 30 thousand inhabitants, has to produce an Urban Traffic plan that is to be updated every 2 years, although many data on which the plan is based upon are kept confidential

page 13 / 42

5 Interview results

5.1 Findings regarding current travel behaviour

Before moving to the actual game with the stimulus boards, some information regarding certain aspects of travel behaviour are given. The first question asked is about travelling by car and is about car ownership. The results from the various countries have been produced after some minor reclassification.

Table 3. Car ownership

Car Ownership LeuvenBE

Thessaloniki GR

Rome IT

Vilnius LT

Preston UK Total Pctg

total

yes, I am an owner 3 0 0 1 7 11 14,67%

no I am not an owner 1 0 2 0 0 3 4,00%

I use a company car 2 0 0 1 0 3 4,00%

unspecified 9 15 12 13 8 57 76,00%

It can be seen that the greatest percentage of the participants does not specify the exact form of car-ownership, therefore it would not be safe to draw conclusions on the level of the actual car ownership in the different countries from these results

On the contrary, we can see much more regarding the intensity of car use. The total sample results are depicted in the following table. The table categories came out after some small aggregation of individual countries’ tables, since some slight differences existed from country to country in the recording of answers.

Table 4. Intensity of car use

Car use intensity LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

Rome IT

VilniusLT

Preston UK Total Pctg

total

everyday 5 10 3 9 4 31 41,33%

3-6 days a week 2 5 2 2 1 12 16,00%1-3 days a week 8 0 3 0 4 15 20,00%

less frequently than 1 day a week 0 0 2 0 3 5 6,67%

unspecified 0 0 5 4 3 12 16,00%

The above table shows that despite differences between the countries, car use is prevalent in all cities. It can be seen that the heavier car users are in the Greek sample, where 67% of the sample uses their car every day. Very close to that percentage is the Lithuanian one, with 60 % of the sample using their car daily. Preston, Leuven and Rome show a smaller “addiction” to the car, with the sample split between categories of less frequent car use. All in all, above a third of the total sample are everyday car users, with users between 1 and 3 times a week being the next most populous category. Between all cities, Leuven people cycle the most.

The results of trip length per week follow. It can be seen that trips are almost equally split between all selected categories; however, we can say the following;

- a significant percentage of the sample in Thessaloniki, Vilnius and Preston cannot specify their approximate weekly trip length

- greek drivers are “hardcore” drivers, if the answers to this question are compared to the answers of the previous one: it seems that greek drivers use their cars even for small distances

page 14 / 42

- in all cities except Thessaloniki, almost a quarter of the weekly trips corresponds to trips of a total length of over 100kms, or to daily commutes of at least 20 kms. That is quite remarkable for small cities like Leuven and Preston.

Table 5. Trip length per week (car drivers)

Miles/km per week LeuvenBE

Thessaloniki GR

Rome IT

VilniusLT

Preston UK Total Pctg

total

≤10 kms/week 3 6 0 0 0 9 12,00%

10-60 kms/week 5 4 5 3 2 19 25,33%

60-100 kms/week 4 1 2 2 3 12 16,00%

100-200 kms /week 3 0 2 4 3 12 16,00%

over 200 kms/week 0 0 1 6 3 10 13,33%

unspecified 0 4 5 0 4 13 17,33%

Moving forward to the next question regarding “Travel as passenger/with passengers” the results are:

Table 6. Travel as/with passengers (car drivers)

Leuven BE

Thessaloniki GR

Rome IT

VilniusLT

Preston UK Total Pctg

total

Mostly driver only 3 13 6 0 5 14 36,00%

Sometimes driver, sometimes passenger 4 1 1 0 3 8 12,00%

Unspecified 8 0 4 13 4 29 38,67%

Driver with passengers 0 0 0 2 3 5 6,67%

As passengers 0 1 4 0 0 4 6,67%

Again, some differences are spotted between cities; however, it can be seen that the majority of the sample leaves this question unanswered (thanks to, for the greater part, the Vilnius sample, that, almost in its entirety, did not give a specific answer). From the other possible answers, almost 20% of the whole sample stated that they drive alone when using a car. Only a small percentage of the sample said they participated in carpooling.

The following table presents the answers to the question of how many minutes each respondent drives every day.Data for this question was gathered only in Thessaloniki and Preston.

Table 7. Time spent travelling each day (car drivers)

Time spent travelling per day (minutes)

LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

VilniusLT

PrestonUK Total Pctg

total

>10 and <20 mins 4 2 6 20,00%

>20 and <30 mins 1 1 2 6,67%

>30 and <40 mins 3 0 3 10,00%

Unspecified 7 12 19 63,33%

Again, over half of the respondents cannot give specific details on the time they are driving each day, a fact that in the long run may be a problem in realising the benefits from a traffic measure; i.e. if a driver cannot specify how many minutes they are driving everyday, they would not be able to contemplate and calculate the benefits from travel time and cost savings that are produced as a result of taking up a MM measure.

page 15 / 42

The same set of questions is asked in every city again for other travel means, namely, Public Transport, bicycle and walking. The results are presented in the following tables.

Table 8. PT use intensity

PT use intensity Leuven BE ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

Vilnius LT

PrestonUK Total Pctg

total

everyday 0 1 1 1 2 5 6,67%3-6 days a week 2 3 2 0 1 8 10,67%1-3 days a week 0 0 0 2 0 2 2,67%

less frequently than 1 day a week 2 4 1 0 3 10 13,33%never or rarely 6 7 2 9 9 33 44,00%unspecified 5 0 9 3 0 17 22,67%

It can be seen that over 40% of the respondents either do not use PT, or use it rarely and another 20% does not specify even the approximate frequency of use of PT. In the following table, one can see the total results about the trip length of respondents when using PT

Table 9.PT trip length

Miles/km per week LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

Vilnius,LT

PrestonUK Total Pctg

total

≤10 kms/week 1 3 2 0 1 7 9,33%

10-60 kms/week 1 0 2 1 1 5 6,67%

60-100 kms/week 0 0 2 0 0 2 2,67%

100-200 kms /week 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,00%

over 200 kms/week 2 0 2 0 1 5 6,67%

unspecified 11 12 7 14 12 56 74,67%

It can be seen that the majority of respondents just leave this question unanswered, by not specifying, even approximately, the kilometrage of their PT trips during the week. The next table present the time spent when travelling with PT in Thessaloniki, as answers to this question were recorded only there (technically, this question was also asked in Rome, but 14 out of the 15 respondents just left this question unspecified).

Table 10. PT trip duration (data only for Thessaloniki)Time spent travelling

(mins/day)Leuven

BEThessaloniki

GRRome

ITVilnius

LTPreston

UK Total Pctgtotal

>10 and <20 minsNo data gathered

3No data gathered

No data gathered

No data gathered

3 20,00%

>20 and <30 mins 0 0 0,00%

>30 and <40 mins 0 0 0,00%

Unspecified 12 12 80%

Moving on to bicycles, the following table presents the intensity of use

Table 11.Bicycle use intensity

PT use intensity LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

VilniusLT

PrestonUK Total Pctg

total

everyday 0 1 0 0 1 2 2,67%3-6 days a week 1 0 1 0 0 2 2,67%1-3 days a week 3 0 1 0 2 6 8,00%less frequently than 1 day a week 7 0 0 0 0 7 9,33%

never or rarely 3 14 13 11 8 49 65,33%unspecified 1 0 0 4 4 9 12,00%

page 16 / 42

As it can be seen, over half of the sample does not use (or uses rarely) bicycles; everyday users of bicycles are a very small percentage of the total sample. The kilometres travelled in the bicycle trips is depicted in the following table.

Table 12. Bicycle trip length

Miles/km per week LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

VilniusLT

PrestonUK Total Pctg

total

≤10 kms/week 0 1 0 0 1 2 2,67%

10-60 kms/week 4 0 0 1 1 6 8,00%

60-100 kms/week 3 0 1 0 0 4 5,33%

100-200 kms /week 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,00%

over 200 kms/week 0 0 0 0 1 1 1,33%

unspecified 8 14 14 14 12 62 82,67%

Again the respondents find it hard to specify the length of their trips. Finally, the next two tables present the intensity of walking and the trip length.

Table 13. Frequency of walking each week

walking use intensity LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

VilniusLT

PrestonUK Total Pctg

total

everyday 1 1 4 1 3 10 13,33%3-6 days a week 3 2 0 0 1 6 8,00%1-3 days a week 0 2 0 3 3 8 10,67%less frequently than 1 day a week 9 4 7 5 0 25 33,33%never or rarely 0 6 4 6 2 18 24,00%unspecified 2 0 0 0 6 8 10,67%

Table 14. Walking trip distance

Miles/km per week LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

VilniusLT

PrestonUK Total Pctg

total≤10 kms/week 0 0 2 1 0 3 4,00%

10-60 kms/week 6 3 4 5 3 21 28,00%

60-100 kms/week 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,00%

100-200 kms /week 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,00%

over 200 kms/week 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,00%

unspecified 9 12 9 9 12 51 68,00%

The final question in this section of the interview was about the use of other, alternative modes, the respondents said:

--in Leuven, no use of other alternative mode was mentioned, except from a single respondent who said that they use an aeroplane during summer holidays

-- in Vilnius, one respondent spoke about riding a taxi frequently and another about using a quad bike

-- in Rome, 6 respondents stated that they fly (with different frequencies) and two also use scooter

-- in Preston, 8 respondents stated that they fly (with different frequencies), while 6 people use taxis at some time

--in Thessaloniki, no use of alternative modes was reported.

The next phase of the discussion included asking about the most common reasons for using the specific transport mode and the future intentions of continuing (or not) the use of the mode.

page 17 / 42

Regarding the use of private car, respondents in all cities stated relatively the same reasons that included both the benefits of the cars per se (among them: convenience, easiness of use, need to travel as part of the job etc) as well as the shortcomings of PT systems (among them: no service available/no quality service offered). As for the future choice intentions, there is a generalised reluctance in abandoning the private car, although certain respondents, (e.g. some group 1 people in Leuven, or group 2 people of Thessaloniki) stated that they could possibly examine using another mode, if circumstances were appropriate (for example, Thessaloniki people would consider switching to underground rail, when this is built)

When PT users were asked the same questions about the reasons of their choice, they state, among others, the cheapness of PT, its environmental friendliness, the lack of need to search for parking etc. When asked about their intentions, apart from the users who stated that they would not change, PT users spoke little about switching to the car; instead, they merely commented on whether (and under which circumstances) they would turn to other PT alternatives.

Finally, cycling and walking’s greatest benefit is the physical fitness they provide to the people using these modes and most people wish they would bike/walk more.

5.2 Results from stimulus boards

5.2.1 Positive stimulus boards

The positive stimulus boards created messages that were received alike across cities. For instance, the message that by using public transport one does not waste time was reported in Rome, Leuven and Thessaloniki. The message of “better quality of life without car” was explicitly noted in Rome, whereas some aspects of better quality of life (like not having to think about safety) are reported in Vilnius. The positive effect of the shown activities in health is also mentioned in Leuven and Preston. The “environmentally-friendly” result from the use of alternative modes is mentioned explicitly in Leuven; on the contrary, in Thessaloniki, the positive environmental message is not clearly received.

However, not only positive comments came through when positive stimulus boards are shown. In Thessaloniki, not only the message of the stimulus board was perceived as “not realistic” but also, “as not having a link with transport, but just showing people having a good time”. In Preston, images of the stimulus board are seen as “unrealistic and glamorising life without car”.

Some of the feelings mentioned in all cities as created when one views the stimulus board are: happiness, calmness, peacefulness,wellness, gladness, pleasure.

Regarding the most influential images, in Leuven, Thessaloniki and Preston, a detailed scoring of each picture in the board was kept, where in Vilnius and Rome, only a narrative account of what was most appealing was kept. In the following table, the most influential pictures are presented and in which city they received most points and their rank within the city. In Thessaloniki, 3 pictures gathered the same number of preferences as a third pick. What is interesting is that the first and second pick of the most influential picture (cycling and jogging) are the same in Thessaloniki and Preston, 2 cities that have great differences in many aspects; moreover, the third pick (people chatting on the bus) coincided in Thessaloniki and Leuven and the same happened with the picture showing people woring on the bus in Thessaloniki and Preston. As a result, one could infer that probably pictures of athletic activities or pictures of people’s cheerful or creative coexistence attract similarly the attention of people from different cultures.

page 18 / 42

Table 15.Most influential pictures of the stimulus boardPicture

descriptionWhere voted Rank Grade Which group voted

Cycling Leuven, Thessaloniki,Preston

1st (in all 3 sites)

11 in Preston, 10 in Thessaloniki, 7 in Leuven

Group 2 in Leuven, Groups 1 and 3 in Thessaloniki, Group 1 in Preston

Couple walking-jogging

Thessaloniki, Preston 2nd (in both sites)

6 in Preston, 4 in Thessaloniki

Group 1 in Preston, Groups 1 &2 in Thessaloniki

Two people sleeping on bus

Leuven 2nd 4 Groups 2 & 3

Two people chatting on bus

Leuven, Thessaloniki 3rd (in both sites)

4 in Leuven, 3 in Thessaloniki

Group 3 in Leuven, all groups in Thessaloniki

People working on bus

Preston,Thessaloniki 3rd (in both sites)

4 in Preston, 3 in Thessaloniki

Group 2 in Preston, all groups in Thessaloniki

Family on bus Thessaloniki 3rd 3 Group 3

The picture with the sleeping people was also mentioned more frequently in Vilnius and Rome; moreover, the cycling picture ranked high in Vilnius as in Rome too.

Finally, regarding the overall impact that the images have upon the respondent, it could be said that the images that are relevant to transport modes other than car received criticism on the grounds that they are not realistic and present a “glorified” picture of public transport. This lack of realism is perceived in all countries to diminish the impact of the pictures. This fact had a consequence that people who identified themselves less in the people shown in the pictures, stated that the pictures had a lesser impact on them.

Moreover, in Thessaloniki, Leuven, Rome and Vilnius it was stated that cycling is difficult due to dangerous traffic conditions; cycling was also seen merely as a leisure activity and not as a viable solution for travelling to work every day. Instead, actual improvements of cycling facilities or public transport would be much more convincing (this was stated in Preston, Rome and Thessaloniki).

But in the end one can conclude that despite their relative lack of realism, positive pictures give the message that another way of everyday transport other than car use is possible and there are alternative options of travelling that one could at least try.

5.2.2 Negative stimulus boards

The negative stimulus board presented strong images, with a potential for creating strong feelings in the participants. A quite common message that was received at all cities was the linkage of those negative images to transport by car, meaning that driving a car creates stress and has an unwelcome impact to personal health and the environment; this linkage was explicitly rejected in Vilnius (where people said that they could not immediately think that driving is bad). In Rome, some respondents saw a connection of the negative images of car usage to environmental pollution and global warming; this connection was also made in Vilnius.

page 19 / 42

The most common feelings that were mentioned by respondents in all countries were stress, panic, desperation, sadness, nervousness, frustration and anxiety

Regarding the most influential pictures, the picture of traffic congestion was scored among the most influential ones in all countries except Vilnius; moreover the picture of the man filling up a car with petrol was ranked high in Preston, Leuven and Thessaloniki. In addition, the picture of chimneys was ranked high both in Thessaloniki and in Vilnius. In the following table, a presentation of the pictures that received the higher grades is given for Thessaloniki, Leuven and Preston, i.e the sites we have analytical data for. An interesting finding from reading from the following table is that the negative message of the traffic jam was voted almost unanimously as the most influential both in Thessaloniki and Preston by the respondents who belonged to the younger age group, something that is rather surpising, given that the younger generation should be more accustomed to traffic jams in comparison to older people

Table 16.Negative stimulus boards

Picture description Where voted Rank Grade Which group voted

Traffic jam Preston, Leuven, Thessaloniki

1st in Leuven and Thessaloniki, 2nd in Preston

8 in Thessaloniki, 6 in Leuven, 5 in Preston

Group 1 in Thessaloniki, Group 2 in Leuven, Group 1 in Preston

Man filling up with petrol

Preston, Leuven, Thessaloniki

1st in Preston, 2nd in Leuven, 3rd in Thessaloniki

6 in Preston, 5 in Leuven, 4 in Thessaloniki

Group 1 in Preston, Groups 1 and 3 in Leuven (equally),Groups 1 and 2 in Thessaloniki (equally)

Chimneys Thessaloniki 2nd 5 Group 3

Woman with food Leuven 3rd 4 Group 2

As for the impact of the images on the respondent,,a comment that is valid for many sites is that the influence of the negative pictures increased when people identified themselves with (and could relate to) the pictured persons. The comments made in Rome were quite strong in their wording, since it was stated that many people have no option but use public transport. In general, it seems that the negative pictures are perceived as more truthful than the positive ones; this was explicitly stated in Leuven and Preston.

It must be stated, though, that in Preston the negative images also received criticism on the grounds of lack of realism due to the total elimination of car use advantages and PT disadvantages (albeit not as strong as with the positive images); the same criticism was phrased in Leuven. Moreover, in Vilnius and Preston, some respondents criticised these pictures as already known issues, taken into account during travel mode choice

5.2.3 Emotional stimulus boards

The main message received by the respondents in all cities after presenting this board is that driving a car is dangerous and potentially lethal (and on the contrary, public transport is generally “good”). However some respondents in Vilnius focused more on road accidents than using the car less (“This board doesn’t show anything related to mobility or its management-it shows only disasters!”), some respondents in Leuven saw in these pictures the reasons for not walking or cycling (“not to be knocked down by a car”) and in Thessaloniki, the picture of the bride in a bus was criticised (“unrealistic”).

page 20 / 42

Regarding the influential pictures, in Leuven and Thessaloniki the picture of the woman lying after the accident as the most influential one, while the accident picture was commended highly in Vilnius and Preston. The bride picture was criticised in Rome and Thessaloniki as outwardly “silly” (and in Preston, as “unusual”), whereas the funeral picture was commented as being “over the top” in Rome and Vilnius. In Preston, more people found themselves associated with the positive pictures, whereas in Leuven people were more touched by the negative pictures.

Feelings reported on sight of the emotional stimulus boards are,among others: panic, rage, scariness, cruelty, sadness, shock. There were also (in Preston and Vilnius) positive feelings, such as cheerfulness and happiness. There are different propositions on the images that could be added: in Vilnius, pictures of motorcycle riders were proposed, in Thessaloniki, pictures of children running on the grass, or of men with grandchildren on the bus; images of ethnic minorities should also be included, according to the Preston respondents.

The impact of the images on the respondents did not vary greatly from site to site and a great deal of criticism was aimed at this board. For instance, in Rome it was stated that it is not a productive tactic to imply a connection of danger and car driving. In Leuven, it was commented that pictures of the board should be connected more directly to transport and not be exaggerating (like, in showing that accidents happen only with cars,but with PT too). This last comment was also made in Preston.

5.2.4 Rational Stimulus Boards

The rational stimulus board included two pictures: one with endless car queues and a desparate driver holding his head and a second one with two young women speaking joyfully in the convenient interior of a bus. The message that goes through in all sites is that by moving with public transport, one moves more quickly, more conveniently and it would be better if the car was left at home.

Despite the fact that the message went through, in Thessaloniki, Rome, Leuven and Preston it was stated that the money and travel time data should be more realistic and comparable.This is the reason that the negative pictures were more influential, whereas the positive ones do not create that much of an impact(in Rome it was stated that there could be no bus with such plenty room during rush hour); of course, some people received the images well, even with these overwhelming differences in cost and trip time

As for the feelings created by the rational boards, some of the feelings mentiones are relaxation, positiveness and happiness

It was felt (in Thessaloniki, Leuven and Vilnius) that the images would have a greater impact, if they were more realistic (if, for instance, realistic time savings were depicted).

5.2.5 Environment Related Stimulus Boards

In the case of the environmental stimulus board, the message could not go through as intended. This means that the stimulus board merely confers messages about the environmental pollution in general, without making explicit the connection between environmental pollution and private car use (or, that, in order to lessen environmental pollution, to lessen car use too). Of course, some people in all sites are able to make the connection, especially after some probing, but this is not always the case

Some of the positive feelings created with this stimulus board is optimism, wellness, whereas some of the negative feelings creates by the corresponding images are depression sorrow, fright.

The picture of polar bears generally was commented as the most influential, and also the chimneys and the iceberg (in Preston) received comments as influential pictures.In Preston again, it was noted that other pictures, that are more attention-grabbing should be used

page 21 / 42

Interchangeably, other pictures that could be used are pictures of cyclists going to work, of children, of car in the countryside, of extinct species, etc

As for the impact the images had on the respondents: in Leuven, it was stated that these pictures would certainly make them think about the environment, but not necessarily in relation to transport, or in relation to changing their current travel behaviour. However, they said that if other images, more car-related, were picked, this board would be much more effective.In Preston, reception was much more cooler, and respondents said that these pictures presented nothing new to them. In both Preston and Leuven the people that could not internalize the message of the boards were the ones that thought that their private actions could in no way make a differencein the environmental issues (therefore creating an opportunity for advertising that would convince people that their action matter). Moreover, in Thessaloniki it was noted that these pictures could incite people to reduce their short distance trips

5.2.6 Health Related Stimulus Boards

Various messages go through this message board and especially the message that the people create problems to their health, the health of other people and the health of little children with the uncontrollable use of private cars. Another message is that the effects of the negative pictures can be ameliorated by switching to more environmentally friendly modes, as public transport or walking. In Leuven, a direct link to transport is reported but not in Preston

The most influential picture was the one with the asthma-suffering child using the inhaler. In general too, the negative pictures create a bigger impact htan the positive ones; that’s exactly what happened in previous boards too

Additional images that could be used include pictures of skin damage from pollution, other medical images, or smog-covered cities(especially in contrast withpicture of cities with clean air)

In general the negative pictures seem to be more influential than the positive ones. More specifically, in Preston it was noted that the negative images would be more influential for parents of young children, who would be more likely to re-examine their car use; in Preston, Rome and in Leuven it was noted that this stimulus board inspires them to change, but the lack of proper facilities for cycling prevents them from doing so. In Thessaloniki and Vilnius another aspect of the pictures was spotted, that was about the use of alternative energy sources

5.2.7 Economy Related Stimulus Boards

The main message conferred from this stimulus board was that driving a car makes you waste money;on the contrary, avoiding excess car use saves you money, that you can use for other purposes. This message is explicitly stated in all interview sites.

In Vilnius and Preston the picture of people putting money in their petrol tank was seen as most influential, whereas in Rome, Thessaloniki and Leuven, the holidays image was more appealing (although in all sites, it was criticised as a bit unrealistic, since the economies of scale would not be that many in order to compensate for an exotic holiday).

Additional images that could be possibly used are more pictures with figures on the actual use of car. Also, instead of a holiday, pictures of parents buying things for their children, or paying for medical fees could be used

Feelings stated from looking at the pictures are relaxation, calmness, happiness and stress

In Preston it was noted that the images would be much more influential, if, in the light of the current financial crisis, the pictures of the stimulus board wee accompanied by actual figures on how much would be the average saving from switching to other modes. Moreover, in Preston, two more interesting comments were made: the

page 22 / 42

first one regarded an intra-board comparison, stating that the economy and the environmental stimulus boards contradict each other because by going to holidays with the money one saved from driving less, he will produce more fumes with his travelling, which is not very environmental friendly. The same critique was also made in Leuven. The second one was that only the cost difference from stopping car use is not enough by itself to make current car drivers switch to other modes; issues like PT coverage or the existence of facilities also play an important role in choosing car as the transport mode.This last criticism was also made in Rome and Vilnius

5.3 Cross country stimulus board comparisons

After completing the discussion on the findings of the stimulus boards, it is worthwhile making a cross sountry check of the findings. We can see that

1)The rational stimulus board is more popular in 3 sites (Preston, Thessaloniki, Leuven) whereas the health stimulus board is more popular in Rome and Vilnius

2) The popularity of the rational board can be put down to the fact that it gives instant information on the cheaper mode

3)The popularity of the health board can be put down to the fact that it deals with an important aspect of human existence; the picture of the child with the asthma inhaler was an exceptionally vivid one, made people connect with it and feel responsible for it.

4)It is worth noting that the negative stimulus board was voted twice (in Preston and Vilnius) as the second more popular.This can be put down to the fact that the negative board contained stark images that grossly influence respondents

5) At the moment, one cannot get to conclusive results on the relationship between age and board popularity. For instance, if one sees the countries who chose the rational board for most popular, one could see that

- In Thessaloniki, the ages <50 preferred more this board

- In Preston and Leuven, the first and the third group preferred more the rational board

In the following table, the preferences of people in each site are presented. It must be noted that each respondent voted for 3 stimulus boards of his preference, so the total of ranks of each test site is 15*3=45. For each site, there is a second column where the first three choices are marked

page 23 / 42

Table 17. Absolute and relative ranking of stimulus boards in each country

Stimulus board LeuvenBE ThessalonikiGR* Rome

ITVilnius

LTPreston

UK

Abs.rank

Rel.Rank

Abs.rank

Rel.Rank

Abs.rank

Rel.Rank

Abs.rank

Rel.Rank

Abs.rank

Rel.Rank

Positive 8 3 10 2 10 2 6 0 6 0

Negative 8 3 5 0 8 0 8 2 9 2

Emotional 2 0 4 0 7 0 5 0 5 0

Rational 13 1 11 1 8 3 8 2 10 1

Environmental 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 4 0

Health 11 2 9 3 11 1 9 1 6 3

Economy 3 0 3 0 1 0 4 0 5 0

* one individual could not choose between health and environmental board

To be more specific, we present the rankings of each site, divided in the comprehensive groups. Highest rankings are entered with a bold font.

Table 18.Group ranking in all sites

Stimulus board LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

VilniusLT

PrestonUK

Gr 1

Gr 2

Gr 3

Gr 1

Gr 2

Gr 3

Gr 1

Gr 2

Gr 3

Gr 1

Gr 2

Gr 3

Gr 1

Gr 2

Gr 3

Positive 1 3 4 2 4 4 5 3 2 2 4 0 2 1 3

Negative 4 1 3 3 1 1 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 4 2

Emotional 0 2 0 1 1 2 1 3 3 1 1 3 1 3 1

Rational 5 3 5 4 4 3 4 2 2 4 3 1 4 2 4

Environmental 3 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 0 2 1 1 2 1

Health 2 5 4 2 3 4 4 3 4 2 4 3 2 1 3

Economy 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 3 0 1 2 2 1

In what follows, a comparison of the preferences between males and females are given for each site.

page 24 / 42

Table 19. Cross-site comparison across males-females

Stimulus board LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

VilniusLT

PrestonUK

Μ F Μ F Μ F Μ F Μ F

Positive 4 4 7 3 4 6 3 3 2 4

Negative 4 4 1 4 3 5 3 5 5 4

Emotional 1 1 2 2 3 4 2 3 3 2

Rational 7 6 6 5 2 6 4 4 4 6

Environmental 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 3

Health 6 5 4 5 3 8 3 6 3 3

Economy 2 1 3 0 1 0 4 0 3 2

The most interesting findings are the following

-In Vilnius, male interviewees show more interest for the economy stimulus board than females. However, females were much more influenced from negative and health stimulus boards.

-In Thessaloniki, males are much more influenced by the positive stimulus board, whereas women are more influenced by the negative one.Moreover, males were also more influenced by the economy stimulus board. However, no great difference was spotted between genders when examining emotional and rational stimulus boards

-In Preston, the biggest difference were spotted for environmental,rational and positive stimulus boards; however, not much can be concluded from that finding since more females than males were interviewed

- In Leuven, genders are equally split between positive and negative stimulus boards. The same holds for the other families of stimulus boards (emotional/rational, environmental/health/economy)

-In Rome, females are much more influenced from the rational and health stimulus boards

5.4 Rolemodels and message givers

The final part of the discussion was about the role model that the sample would most like to see delivering the message of a campaign. The first finding of this part of the interview was the comparison of various role models in general. It must be noted that the presented role models slightly differ from country to country, in order to represent the local experience, since local interviewers are more aware on what amendments the initial list should need. We move on presenting the analysis of various findings:

5.4.1 Overall role model choice

In the following table, the aggregated choice of rolemodels in all sites is presented. We can see that from the specific sample that was interviewed in the framework of this survey, in Leuven and Thessaloniki, an expert would be the more preferred person to deliver the message of a campaign. In these two survey sites, the second picks coincide too, since in both the general public was chosen as second. In a sense, these two findings inform us that the specific samples in Belgium and in Greece would prefer either a distinguished, and a more knowledgable person than themselves to give the message, or a “common man”, like themselves, with whom they could identify themselves with.

page 25 / 42

Rome and Vilnius take a different stance: in Rome, people showed no great preference for some rolemodel (from those presented to them) in particular; as a result, the answer with most answers was “none”. This may indicate either an unsuccessful choice of the list of rolemodels presented in Rome (i.e, another possible list, with other possible rolemodels could attract more preferences) or that people are in general a bit “fed up” from the exposure in campaigns. In Vilnius, the sample would prefer a more “light” figure, not “burdened” with authority or knowledge, just like a cartoon or a celebrity. Perhaps, this can be put down to the fact that the sample in Vilnius could likely have been exposed for a long period to a “stiff-upper-lip” attitude and now they would like to taste the “sunny side” more.

Finally, in Preston, it can be seen that the sample preferences are divided in three, almost equal parts; this means that in Preston, a celebrity, a common man, or a scientist would be equally welcome to head a campaign. The overall preferences are depicted in the following table:

Table 20. Overall role model choice

Role model LeuvenBE

ThessalonikiGR

RomeIT

VilniusLT

PrestonUK

Celebrity 3 16 2 4 21

Expert 7 40 0 2 0

Journalist/Newsreader 2 0 0 0 7

Weatherman 3 0 0 0 0

Politician 2 0 3 1 10

General public 6 36 3 3 22

Cartoon 2 20 3 5 11

Scientist 0 0 1 0 21

President of the democracy 0 0 0 2 0

Children 0 0 0 1 0

None 0 0 4 1 0

5.4.2 Per stimulus board and per group classification of role model preferences

In two survey sites, Preston and Thessaloniki, the analysis moved more in depth, by creating an analysis per stimulus board produced to the respondents, in order to find if there are specific relationships between the choices of any group regarding and a stimulus board. In the following table we depict the findings from Preston and Thessaloniki

page 26 / 42

Table 21. Per stimulus board and per group classification of answers in Preston

Stimulus board Preston,UK

Celebrity Scientist Journalist Politician General Public Cartoon

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Positive 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 2

Negative 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 1

Emotional 2 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 3 0 0 1 0

Rational 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0

Environmental 0 1 1 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 1

Health 3 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1

Economy 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1

TOTAL 11 4 6 10 6 5 3 2 2 3 4 2 7 10 5 0 4 6GRAND TOTAL 21 21 7 9 22 10

It can be seen that in Preston, young people would like to see celebrities delivering campaign messages; scientists trail in the preferences of the young people. Middle aged people prefer other “common people” to deliver campaign messages. What’s interesting is that elderly people prefer celebrities and cartoons to be message givers (where one, could expect that these people would prefer a scientist or a journalist as a central person in a campaign).

In the next table, we present the relevant findings for Thessaloniki

Table 22. Per stimulus board and per group classification of answers inThessaloniki

Stimulus board Thessaloniki, GR

Celebrity Expert/ Journalist General Public Cartoon

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Positive 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 0 0 3

Negative 2 0 1 0 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2

Emotional 2 1 1 0 1 1 3 3 1 1 0 3

Rational 0 0 1 2 3 4 2 1 1 1 1 1

Environmental 2 0 0 1 2 4 2 1 1 0 1 1

Health 1 0 0 2 3 4 2 1 1 0 1 1

Economy 0 1 0 2 2 2 3 2 2 0 1 1

TOTAL 9 3 4 8 14 18 16 12 8 3 5 12GRAND TOTAL 16 40 36 20

In Thessaloniki, it can be seen that elderly people preferred an expert to deliver the message in a rational/environmental/health campaign. It’s also interesting that people of the Thessaloniki sample would like to see the messages of an economic stimulus board delivered by an expert or a member of the general public, not a celebrity or cartoon, since the economy is a “no-nonsense” subject. This tendency exists in all age brackets. Finally, it is also interesting that positive and emotional messages would be better delivered by a cartoon; even more interesting is the fact that elderly people like this solution best.

page 27 / 42

5.4.3 Per group classification of role model preferences

In the other 3 sites the analysis was made on a per group preference basis. In the following table we see the analysis made for Vilnius, where groups vote for celebrities and cartoons. It is interesting that celebrities are liked more by young and old people, whereas cartoons are preferred more from the sample that belongs in the middle age bracket.

Table 23. Per group preferences of rolemodels in Vilnius

Vilnius,LT

Celebrity President of the Republic Politician Expert/Person

with Authority General Public Cartoon Children

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

2 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 4 1 0 1 0

Total 4 2 1 2 3 5 1

Next in the line are the findings from Rome. Here we see that in our sample, the group that has the greatest lack of fondness for any rolemodel whatsoever are the young respondents.The findings in Rome per respondent group are depicted in the following table

Table 24. Per group preferences of rolemodels in Rome

Rome, IT

Celebrity Scientist Politician General Public Cartoon None

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 2 0 2 1 3 1 0

Total 2 1 3 3 3 4

Finally, we present the findings in Leuven, where general public is preferred by themedian and older age respondents, whereas the experts are equally liked by all age groups. It is also interesting to note that a special category was created only in Leuven: that is the category of weathermen, that received, by itself, more votes than the category of journalists and equal votes with the category of celebrities.

Table 25. Per group preferences of rolemodels in Leuven

Vilnius, LT

Celebrity Expert Journalist/Newsreaders Weathermen Politician General public Cartoon

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

Gr1

Gr2

Gr3

1 2 0 2 3 2 1 1 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 3 3 1 1 0

Total 3 7 2 3 2 6 2

5.4.4 Per gender classification of role model preferences

In this chapter we explore the differences of choices between genders. This distinction is made again in the survey sites of Vilnius, Rome Thessaloniki and Leuven.

page 28 / 42

In Vilnius, celebrities are equally liked by males and females; the same happens with cartoons, where preferences coincide. However, politicians, experts and general public received no preference from any Vilnius women

Table 26. Per gender preferences of rolemodels in VilniusCelebrit

y

President of the

Republic

Politician

Expert/Person with Authority

General Public Cartoon Children

M F M F M F M F M F M F M F

2 2 0 2 1 0 2 0 3 0 3 2 1 0

Total 4 2 1 2 3 5 1

In Rome, the preferences are equally distributed between genders

Table 27. Per gender preferences of rolemodels in RomeCelebrit

y Scientist Politician

General Public Cartoon None

M F M F M F M F M F M F

1 1 0 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2

Total 2 1 3 3 3 4

In Thessaloniki, it is noted that males prefer more to have experts/journalists to lead a campaign, whereas females would like more to see people from the general public to lead.

Table 27. Per gender preferences of rolemodels in ThessalonikiCelebrit

y

Expert/journalis

t

General public Cartoon

M F M F M F M F

9 7 23 17 16 20 9 11

Total 16 40 36 20

Finally, in Leuven, the greater difference is in the general public rolemodel, where females overwhelmingly prefer the general public in comparison to men.

Table 28. Per gender preferences of rolemodels in Leuven

Celebrity Expert

Journalist/News-reader

Weather-man Politician General

public Cartoon

M F M F M F M F M F M F M F

2 1 3 4 1 1 2 1 2 0 1 5 1 1

Total 3 7 2 3 2 6 2

page 29 / 42

6 Sponsoring organisations

The question about the sponsoring organisation is the one with which the whole interview is closed. In Leuven, Rome and Vilnius, the public administration is preferred as the most trustworthy as the initiating part of a MM campaign. This is completely reversed in Thessaloniki, as ministries/government are regarded as the least influential. In Thessaloniki, the most reputable institutions are research institutions/university, because it is perceived that they would not manipulate data and findings for their own benefit. In fact, in Thessaloniki, there was a great doubt (at about 50% of the sample) on whether sponsoring institutions contributed anything on the total credibility and success of the campaign.

In Leuven, there was also an interesting finding; that although people deemed the sponsoring organisation important, they also admitted that they do not pay attention to who the sponsoring organisation is;furthermore, they noted that it is more likely to notice a sponsoring organisation that they do not like or do not regard its choice as proper. Another finding was the stance against car companies-although some people noted that this is a gracious move on the part of the car company, a lot of people would be suspicious towards such a movement, because they would be thinking that the company is trying to built a more eco-friendly profile or purchase good reputation among society (that is, therefore, its future clientele)

Finally, in Vilnius, it is noted that the “Greens” would be seen in the least favourable way if they backed a campaign.

page 30 / 42

7 Overall findings and Conclusions

The following general findings and conclusions can be draw from the surveys in the 5 cities,

There is no specific relationship between the characteristics of the sample and their preferences with respect to a stimulus coming from a campaign. In some cities for example people seem to prefer rational messages and in others emotional. Similarly some people are mostly touched by environment related stimuli and some others by economy related ones. Drawing concrete conclusions is not possible because the sample is small and it is not possible to associate personal characteristics and experiences to reactions and preferences.

There is no systematic difference between sexes. The same picture described above, seems to be valid also in the case of comparisons between male and female participants.

People seem to be influenced mostly by negative stimuli and especially if they can identify and relate themselves with the picture shown. Apparently, personal experiences play an important role in the way people react in different stimuli.

With respect to role models, the first choice from the respondents favours message givers coming from the public and the second choice favours experts. It is difficult to draw other concrete conclusions by trying to correlate characteristics of persons to message giver role models. One important finding is that peoples’ preferences are strongly influenced by the every day prevailing conditions. In countries for example where people pay much attention to politics, politicians are not welcome and trustful as message givers. It is interesting that in many cases cartoons are preferred by elderly people, i.e. there is an adverse association between age and massager giver role model.

A rather safe finding is that campaign receivers will react in a negative way to a campaign promoting PT or other alternative modes, if their travelling experiences, by bus for example, are bad or if the have reasons not to trust local authorities or PT operators. Securing a good relationship between public and the main Public and private sector actors is important to convey a message with the right message giver. This explains the fact that where such a trust is not present, experts or neutral message givers are more welcome buy people.

Finally, with respect to campaign sponsoring Organisations, the findings clearly indicate that people prefer campaigns sponsored by organisation they trust regardless of their nature (public, private, etc.). What is important is the knowledge of the prevailing conditions in the relationships between people and authorities and the level of mutual trust understaning.

page 31 / 42

8 Appendix 1: In depth interviews guide

Actual questions

For the interviewer: Regarding the type of the message, you should bear in mind that there are three groups of messages:

1. Positive – Negative

2. Rational – Emotional

3. Health – Economy – Environment related

We want respondent’s help in choosing best way of presenting the message, what is the message which is most likely to change how they travel? The interviewee must finally choose one kind of each group. For example, one could choose Positive – Emotional – Environment related whereas another one could choose Negative – Rational – Health related message. However, s/he must not be asked to make her/his choice directly, but after having thoroughly examined the stimulus boards and discussed about how s/he feels and what s/he thinks about the images that are displayed. Make them understand that they don’t have to stick to specific images but they must pay attention to the nature of the message (i.e. when demonstrating the stimulus boards they can mentally form other images than those depicted). Additionally, probe for positives and negatives about each one of the categories 2 and 3 (i.e. rational – positive and rational – negative, emotional – positive and emotional – negative etc.)

When it comes to the message giver (role model), this must be examined in accordance with the pre-selected message. Respondents must choose one of the four categories – celebrity, expert, typical consumer, cartoon - as most convincing. S/he must provide extra information about the characteristics that s/he believes a credible message giver of the kind s/he chose should have. Additionally, the respondent must say which message giver s/he would find most influential as a deliverer of each one of the other types of messages. For example, s/he may prefer the environmental approach delivered by the expert. However, if the environmental approach is not used, who would s/he want to deliver each of the other messages?

We must point that the role of the interviewer is to deeply examine the perceptions and beliefs of the respondent without directing him/her. For this reason s/he must ask questions and make probs when necessary but s/he must not agree or disagree with the interviwee or show any emotionals during the conversation. Additionaly, as mentioned in the “In-depth interviews protocol” (paragraph 2.2.2) the interviewes must observe and record non-verbal behaviours and actions on the field notes as they occur - which pictures the interviewee looked at, pointed to, for how long, facial expressions etc. For example - positive / negative might be a harder choice than emotional rational and may be reflected in the amount of time it takes people to make a choice.

When conducting the interviews you should follow the form that is apposed below:

"Good morning. I am ________ (introduce self).

This interview is being conducted to get your input about advertising campaigns promoting methods of travel / transport other than car. Additionaly, we would like to find out about your travel methods. What methods you use for specific journeys and if you have thought of alternatives. I must point that there is no right answer for the questions. Any recommendations are accepted."

(Note to interviewer: We need to understand the methods of transport they use and why. Why do they not use alternatives? Use the stimulus to probe what would make them change.)

"If it is okay with you, I would like to record this conversation. The purpose of this is so that I can get all the details, but at the same time be able to carry on an attentive conversation with you. It also means I can listen to it again and so it can be typed up and used in the research analysis. Although we might use what you say in our

page 32 / 42

report, we will not use anyone’s name. Are you happy with that? If you agree to this interview and the tape recording, please sign this consent form."

"I'd like to start by having you briefly describe your “relationship” with public and private transport.

How many times a week do you use private car? What are the characteristics of these trips - distance, time, purpose, driver/passenger, number of passengers? Do you use public transport (or bicycle, walking) as well (if yes how often)? Why/why not? Approximately how many miles / Km do you travel per week? Break the miles/Km by method of transport e.g. how many by car / how many walking / how many by bus / train etc? What different methods of transport do you use for specific journeys? E.g. car for work / walk children to school. (Probe reasons e.g. traffic, faster, healthier, car share, public transport too packed.)Would you like to walk/cycle/use public transport more? Why/why not? Would you like to use the car less? Why/why not?(Note to interviewer: You may need to probe to gather the information you need).

I'm now going to show to you some stimulus boards and ask you some questions regarding them. (Note to interviewer: Mix up the order of the stimulus boards for each interviee. For example, you can shou negative first and positive afterwards etc).

Show Positive stimulus board:

How do you feel about those images? What messages do you receive? Do you understand their meaning? Do you think what it says about the different forms of transport is true? Is it the full picture? Which of these images jump out at you? (Probe why). Do you use any of the transport methods highlighted? If yes, do these images reinforce the benefits? Are there any other benefits you would add? Anything you would take out? Something you feel is not a benefit? Imagine watching a commercial which points out the positives of using sustainable transport (public transport, bicycle, walking) over a car; do you think it would affect you and in which degree?"

page 33 / 42

Which, if any, of these images would encourage you to use public transport more often? Chose the two (2) most influential/most encouraging/most appealing images.(Note to interviewer: Try to understand how the interviewee feels. Does this kind of message have any impact on him/her?).

Show Negative stimulus board:

How do you feel about those images? What messages do you receive? Do you understand their meaning? Do you think what it says about the different forms of transport is true? Is it the full picture? Which of these images jump out at you? (Probe why). Can you identify with any of the images? Probe why. Are there any other negatives you would add? Anything you would remove? Something you feel is not a negative. Imagine watching a commercial which points out the negatives of using a car over sustainable transport; do you think it would affect you and in which degree? Which, if any, of these images would encourage you to use public transport more often?" Chose the two (2) most influential/most encouraging/most appealing images.(Note to interviewer: Try to understand how the interviewee feels. Does this kind of message have any impact on him/her?).

Compare negative – positive stimulus boards (Show both boards): Which of the above images would affect you most? Which could convince you stop using your private car and start using sustainable transport? Why? (Note to interviewer: Try to understand what really affects the interviewee. You need to determine which type of message – positive or negative – would affect his travel behaviour. Try to determine if her/his opinion remains the same when s/he compares the stimulus boards as it was when s/he examined them separately. If not, what caused the change? Get them to choose the image – or combination of images - which would most encourage them to change their behaviour. Probe why).

(Note to interviewer: When showing to the interviewee the next stimulus boards you must keep in mind his/her previous answer and point out the relevant aspect of each one. For example, if s/he answered that s/he would be

page 34 / 42

more easily convinced by negative images, you must point out the negative effects of using private car on people’s health, when showing the health related stimulus).

Show Rational stimulus board:

How do you feel about those images? What messages do you receive? Do you understand their meaning? Which of these arguments jump out at you? (Probe why). Which do you find most influential? (Probe why). Imagine watching a commercial which tries to convince you reduce the use of your private vehicle by showing rational arguments – such as that you will save time or/and money etc; do you think it would affect you and in which degree? Do you think that a positive or a negative rational image could influence you more? Which, if any, of these arguments would encourage you to use public transport more often? Are there any other arguments you would add? Anything you would remove? Can you describe any other “rational” image(s) that would influence you? (Note to interviewer: Try to understand how the interviewee feels. Does this kind of message have any impact on him/her?).

Show Emotional stimulus board:

How do you feel about those images? What messages do you receive? Do you understand their meaning? Which of these arguments jump out at you? (Probe why). Which do you find most influential? (Probe why). Imagine watching a commercial which tries to convince you reduce the use of your private vehicle by showing emotional

page 35 / 42

arguments – arguments that try to emotionally affect you, negatively or positively (give examples if necessary); do you think it would affect you and in which degree? Do you think that a positive or a negative emotional image could influence you more? Which, if any, of these arguments would encourage you to use public transport more often? Are there any other arguments you would add? Anything you would remove? Can you describe any other “emotional” image(s) that would influence you? (Note to interviewer: Try to understand how the interviewee feels. Does this kind of message have any impact on him/her?).

Compare rational – emotional stimulus boards (Show both boards): Which of the above images would affect you most? Which could convince you stop using your private car and start using sustainable transport? Why? (Note to interviewer: Try to understand what really affects the interviewee. You need to determine which type of message – rational or emotional – would affect his/her travel behaviour. Try to determine if /his/her opinion remains the same when s/he compares the stimulus boards as it was when s/he examined them separately. If not, what caused the change? Get them to choose the image – or combination of images - which would most encourage them to change their behaviour. Probe why).

Show Health related stimulus board:

How do you feel about those images? What messages do you receive? Do you understand their meaning? Which of these arguments jump out at you? (Probe why). Which do you find most influential? (Probe why). Imagine watching a commercial which tries to convince you reduce the use of your private vehicle by showing health related arguments – negative or positive; do you think it would affect you and in which degree? Do you think that a positive or a negative health related image could influence you more? Which, if any, of these arguments would encourage you to use public transport more often? Are there any other arguments you would add? Anything you would remove? Can you describe any other “health related” image(s) that would influence you? (Note to interviewer: Try to understand how the interviewee feels. Does this kind of images have any impact on him/her?).

page 36 / 42

Economy related stimulus board:

How do you feel about those images? What messages do you receive? Do you understand their meaning? Which of these arguments jump out at you? (Probe why). Which do you find most influential? (Probe why). Imagine watching a commercial which tries to convince you reduce the use of your private vehicle by showing economy related arguments – negative or positive (give examples if necessary); do you think it would affect you and in which degree? Do you think that a positive or a negative economy related image could influence you more? Which, if any, of these arguments would encourage you to use public transport more often? Are there any other arguments you would add? Anything you would remove? Can you describe any other “economy related” image(s) that would influence you? (Note to interviewer: Try to understand how the interviewee feels. Does this kind of message have any impact on him/her?)

Environment related stimulus board:

How do you feel about those images? What messages do you receive? Do you understand their meaning? Which of these arguments jump out at you? (Probe why). Which do you find most influential? (Probe why). Imagine watching a commercial which tries to convince you reduce the use of your private vehicle by showing environment related arguments – negative or positive; do you think it would affect you and in which degree? Do you think that a positive or a negative environment related image could influence you more? Which, if any, of

page 37 / 42

these arguments would encourage you to use public transport more often? Are there any other arguments you would add? Anything you would remove? Can you describe any other “environment related” image(s) that would influence you? (Note to interviewer: Try to understand how the interviewee feels. Does this kind of message have any impact on him/her?).

Compare health – economy – environment related stimulus boards (Show three boards): Which of the above images would affect you most? Which could convince you stop using your private car and start using sustainable transport? Why? (Note to interviewer: Try to understand what really affects the interviewee. You need to determine which type of message – health, economy or emotional related – would affect his travel behaviour. Try to determine if her/his opinion remains the same when s/he compares the stimulus boards as it was when s/he examined them separately. If not, what caused the change? Get them to choose the image – or combination of images - which would most encourage them to change their behaviour. Probe why).

Show Role models stimulus board:

UK role models Italy role models

Greece role models Belgium role models

Lithuania role models

page 38 / 42

I am now going to show you a stimulus board which depicts various role models. What do you think when looking at those images? Tell me your thoughts and feelings about them. (Note to interviewer: Do not stick to specific persons; explain that you are interested on the type of the role model and that the interviewee can propose other role models that fit to the specific categories). Imagine that you watch a positive/negative – rational/emotional – health/economy/environment related commercial which tries to convince you reduce the use of your private vehicle and increase the use of sustainable transport; which type of role model would affect you most and in which degree? Why? Which are the characteristics of the role model you selected that make him/her/it credible? Which are the reasons for rejecting the other categories? (Note to interviewer: The respondent must initially indicate a role model for the kind o message s/he has chosen. Afterwards s/he must do the same for each one of the other types of messages).

Feelings and emotions - if respondents have had difficulty expressing their feelings regarding the stimulus material – once thay have viewed all the material, ask them to look at each one again and tell you how the board makes them feel. You need to probe to get the feelings. You could ask – how does these pictures make you feel? Or if you had to describe how you feel about these pictures is there one word which would define how you feel? If they are still having difficulty you could make suggestions like – happy, sad, angry, frustrated, frightened, relaxed etc.

Sponsoring organization: Finally, I would like your opinion on the sponsoring organization issue. In (country) a travel awareness campaign could be possibly launched by the following organizations/institutions/ministries: (to be completed by each partner). Could the implication of each one of them as the sponsoring organization affect you positively or negatively? Why? Do you usually pay attention to the sponsoring organization?(Note to interviewer: You may need to probe to gather the information you need).

Is there anything else that you would like to add regarding the issues we have already discussed? (Note to interviewer: If so, you may need to probe to gather the information you need)MAX – In-depth Interviews

Recruiting participants

In order to recruit participants use your own networks buts please do not interview everyone in your family. Please ensure that you achieve five interviews in each of the three groups and that they are 50:50 male:female. Try to get a spread of people in terms of age, likelihood of being influenced by a campaign on sustainable transport. Do not just approach people who you know would be in favour of and influenced by such a campaign. This is preaching to the converted hence, it is important to get a spread.

When recruiting participants it is not necessary to tell them too much about the conversation as you do not want them to prepare their answers in advance.

It is enough to say to them that you want to have a discussion about transport. Reassure them that they do not need to prepare anything prior to the interview. Tell them that you want to talk to them about their thoughts, feelings and opinions about transport.

When you get to the interview then you can tell them more by reading to them the opening paragraph on the topic guide.

Writing up the interview

page 39 / 42

Once you have completed the first interview please write it up and send it to me. There is no need to transcribe the interview verbatim but rather in a narrative style providing only the participants words. Do not include the interviewer’s questions. Once I have reviewed the first interview, it may become necessary for you to include the questions.

When you have translated the interview into English can you please check it for grammar, spelling and sense. When you use translation packages downloaded from the internet they generally translate word by word and so you will have to correct the interviews to ensure that they make sense.

Context for the interview

As was agreed the interviews will all be conducted within one city/location as it would not be possible to spread them through out each of the countries.

When you are sending the interviews for your country I will need context in which to interpret the results. Can you please send me a paragraph on the area/city/location in which you conducted the interviews.

Urban or rural areaAccess to public transport - easy/difficultAre there trains, buses, underground, cycle routes, pedestrianisation in the area? Cost of public transport – perceived to be low/medium/high costHow the people in the area usually travel – do they use private cars mostly or public transport?

It is also necessary to put the area in which you are conducting the interviews into the country context.

Is this area typical of the rest of the country in terms of access to transport, patterns of use, cost, and behaviour.

I need to know if this area is atypical of the rest of the country or roughly representative.

page 40 / 42

9 Appendix 2: interview reporting template

page 41 / 42

Comparison: C 3 Health / Economy / Environment related Stimulus boards Health related Stimulus Board: Economy related Stimulus Board: Environment related Stimulus Board: Comparison: Briefing : C 4 Role model Stimulus boards C 5 Feelings - emotions

C 6 Sponsoring organization

Part D: Comments Interviewee comments

Interviewer comments

page 42 / 42