Skip to main content

An Open Access Journal

Table 4 Attitudinal factors uncovered by the EFA

From: Assessing the intention to uptake MaaS: the case of Randstad

Category

Attitudinal factors—F1

Surveyed items

Loading

Mobility integration

F1. Individuals’ expectations of the mobility services integrated by MaaS

(α = 0.759)

MaaS integrates information on physical activity developed

0.778

MaaS integrates information on parking at destination

0.770

MaaS integrates information on accessibility

0.725

MaaS integrates information on transport modes

0.725

ICT integration

F2. Tech-savviness

(α = 0.889)

Apps help me in my daily life

0.856

I regularly use apps for payment, reservations, etc

0.834

I am enthusiastic about GPS and travel apps

0.811

I find it exciting to try new apps

0.810

F3. Privacy issues

(α = 0.765)

I agree to share my profile, opinions, etc. with other users when using apps

0.750

I agree to share my personal information with companies when using apps

0.730

I agree to my personal information being checked to get personalized recommendations

0.599

‘New mobilities’

F4. Need for reliability (α = 0.705)

For the same destination, I usually travel with the same mode of transportation

0.747

I prefer a travel option that has predictable travel times

0.741

I want to have the flexibility to go wherever I want, and to leave whenever I want

0.724

F5. Control concerns over the network (α = 0.795)

Before travelling, I always check for real-time travel or route information

0.831

During my trip, I always check for real-time travel or route information

0. 643

I always check multiple sources of travel information to compare several travel options

0.536

F6. Green values (α = 0.773)

I would switch to a different form of transport if it would help the environment

0.810

I am willing to pay more for my trips if it would help the environment

0.810

To help improve air quality I avoid travelling by car in the city

0.778

  1. α = 0.868; KMO = 0.865; p = 0.000
  2. 1Following the “two-indicator rule” [12], we considered at least two items per factor, and set the cut off of 0.5