Skip to main content
. 2012 Dec 17;2012:257186. doi: 10.1155/2012/257186

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics, residential character, and location.

Participant car usage (percentage of distance travelled)
100% 90–99% 75–77% 0%
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 P13
Demographics

Age 65 71 75 80 84 63 63 80 87 57 72 67 69
Gender
 Male x x x x x x x x
 Female x x x x x
Marital status
 Married x x x x x x x
 Widowed x
 Not married x x
 Living alone x x
 Living with friends/other people x
Paid work
 None x x x x x x x x x x x
 Part-time x
Annual income
 Under $20k x x x x
 $20k–$40k x x x x
 $40k–$50k x x
 ≥$70K–$100k x x x

Residential character and location

Approx distance to CBD (in kms) 17.0 19.0 8.0 20.0 15.0 4.0 9.0 6.0 10.0 9.0 6.0 20.0 4.0
Density (people per
hectare)
13.7 5.1 21.1 7.1 7.8 25.7 18.2 27.7 13.9 21.4 27.7 17.3 25.7
Available transport
 Car x x x x x x x x x x
 Bus x x x x x x x x x x x x
Service frequency
 Quarter-hourly x x x x
 Half-hourly x x x x x
 Hourly x x x x x x x x x x
 Peak time more frequent x x x x x x x
Suitability of location for ageing in place
 Would need to relocate x x x x x
 Could stay with help from family x x
 Could stay by changing current transport mode x x x x
 Could stay by using local services x
 Not thought about x