CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 246Transportation Planning and OptimizationTransportation and Mobility InnovationsUrban Transport and Accessibility

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mobility in ten countries and associated perceived risk for all transport modes

Open access
Barbieri, Diego Maria, Lou, Baowen, Passavanti, Marco, Hui, Cang, Hoff, Inge, Lessa, Daniela Antunes, Sikka, Gaurav, Chang, Kevin +24 more·2021·PLOS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0245886PMC PMC7850470
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The restrictive measures implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic have triggered sudden massive changes to travel behaviors of people all around the world. This study examines the individual mobility patterns for all transport modes (walk, bicycle, motorcycle, car driven alone, car driven in company, bus, subway, tram, train, airplane) before and during the restrictions adopted in ten countries on six continents: Australia, Brazil, China, Ghana, India, Iran, Italy, Norway, South Africa and the United States. This cross-country study also aims at understanding the predictors of protective behaviors related to the transport sector and COVID-19. Findings hinge upon an online survey conducted in May 2020 (N = 9,394). The empirical results quantify tremendous disruptions for both commuting and non-commuting travels, highlighting substantial reductions in the frequency of all types of trips and use of all modes. In terms of potential virus spread, airplanes and buses are perceived to be the riskiest transport modes, while avoidance of public transport is consistently found across the countries. According to the Protection Motivation Theory, the study sheds new light on the fact that two indicators, namely income inequality, expressed as Gini index, and the reported number of deaths due to COVID-19 per 100,000 inhabitants, aggravate respondents’ perceptions. This research indicates that socio-economic inequality and morbidity are not only related to actual health risks, as well documented in the relevant literature, but also to the perceived risks. These findings document the global impact of the COVID-19 crisis as well as provide guidance for transportation practitioners in developing future strategies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0245886

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Unlike previous transportation semi-disasters that resulted in higher sharing, current shared-mobility fears grasp even the most dedicated communities and reduce ridesharing to nil.

    “Unlike previous transportation semi-disasters (rising oil prices, PT strikes), which resulted in higher sharing, the current shared-mobility fears (Barbieri et al. 2021) grasp even the most dedicated communities, reducing RS to nil.”

    From A cross-cultural study of nonprofit self-organized ridesharing (2024) · cites this paper as Barbieri et al. 2021

    The Results and discussion sections (Transportation perceptions; Changes to travel behavior, pages not provided) report perceived infection risks in public transport and reduced travel, including an increase in respondents who never used a car driven in company. They do not examine especially dedicated ridesharing communities or show that ridesharing fell to nil. The comparison with oil prices and transit strikes precedes the citation and is not clearly attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 74

  1. [2]Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, Ren L, Zhao J, Hu Y, et al Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet. 2020; 395(10223): 497– 506. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5 31986264 PMC7159299 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [3]Sevilla NL. Germs on a plane: the transmission and risks of airplane-borne diseases. Transp Res Rec. 2018; 2672(29): 93– 102. PMC8282645 34285452
  3. [4]Browne A, Ahmad SS t. O, Beck CR, Nguyen-Van-Tam JS. The roles of transportation and transportation hubs in the propagation of influenza and coronaviruses: a systematic review. J Travel Med. 2016; 23(1): 1– 7. 10.1093/jtm/tav002 26782122 PMC7539332 · DOI
  4. [5]Wells CR, Sah P, Moghadas SM, Pandey A, Shoukat A, Wang Y, et al Impact of international travel and border control measures on the global spread of the novel 2019 coronavirus outbreak. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020; 117(13): 7504– 9. 10.1073/pnas.2002616117 32170017 PMC7132249 · DOI · Paper page
  5. [6]Nakamura H, Managi S. Airport risk of importation and exportation of the COVID-19 pandemic. Transp Policy. 2020; 96(April): 40– 7. 10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.06.018 32834679 PMC7328638 · DOI
  6. [8]Acter T, Uddin N, Das J, Akhter A, Choudhury TR, Kim S. Evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: A global health emergency. Sci Total Environ. 2020; 730: 138996 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138996 32371230 PMC7190497 · DOI
  7. [9]Kramer A, Kramer KZ. The potential impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on occupational status, work from home, and occupational mobility. J Vocat Behav. 2020; 119(May): 1– 4. PMC7205621 32390661
  8. [10]Musselwhite C, Avineri E, Susilo Y. Editorial JTH 16 –The Coronavirus disease COVID-19 and implications for transport and health. J Transp Heal. 2020; 16(April): 4– 7. 10.1016/j.jth.2020.100853 32337154 PMC7174824 · DOI
  9. [11]Troko J, Myles P, Gibson J, Hashim A, Enstone J, Kingdon S, et al Is public transport a risk factor for acute respiratory infection? BMC Infect Dis. 2011; 11: 2– 7. 10.1186/1471-2334-11-2 21235795 PMC3030548 · DOI
  10. [12]Shen J, Duan H, Zhang B, Wang J, Ji JS, Wang J, et al Prevention and control of COVID-19 in public transportation: Experience from China. Environ Pollut. 2020; 266 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115291 32829124 PMC7833563 · DOI
  11. [14]De Vos J. The effect of COVID-19 and subsequent social distancing on travel behavior. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020 5; 5: 100121. PMC7180344 34171016
  12. [15]Flaxman S, Mishra S, Gandy A, Unwin HJT, Mellan TA, Coupland H, et al Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe. Nature. 2020; 584(7820): 257– 61. 10.1038/s41586-020-2405-7 32512579 · DOI
  13. [16]Lou J, Shen X, Niemeier D. Are stay-at-home orders more difficult to follow for low-income groups? J Transp Geogr. 2020; 89(October): 102894. PMC7832451 33519126
  14. [17]Shamshiripour A, Rahimi E, Shabanpour R, Mohammadian A (Kouros). How is COVID-19 reshaping activity-travel behavior? Evidence from a comprehensive survey in Chicago. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020; 7: 100216. PMC7474875 34173469
  15. [18]Bohte W, Maat K, van Wee B. Measuring attitudes in research on residential self-selection and travel behaviour: A review of theories and empirical research. Transp Rev. 2009; 29(3): 325– 57.
  16. [19]Müggenburg H, Busch-Geertsema A, Lanzendorf M. Mobility biographies: A review of achievements and challenges of the mobility biographies approach and a framework for further research. J Transp Geogr. 2015; 46: 151– 63.
  17. [20]Schoenduwe R, Mueller MG, Peters A, Lanzendorf M. Analysing mobility biographies with the life course calendar: A retrospective survey methodology for longitudinal data collection. J Transp Geogr. 2015; 42: 98– 109.
  18. [21]Ferrer RA, Klein WMP. Risk perceptions and health behavior. Curr Opin Psychol. 2015; 5: 85– 9. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.03.012 26258160 PMC4525709 · DOI · Paper page
  19. [22]Abdulkareem SA, Augustijn EW, Filatova T, Musial K, Mustafa YT. Risk perception and behavioral change during epidemics: Comparing models of individual and collective learning. PLoS One. 2020; 15(1): 1– 22. 10.1371/journal.pone.0226483 31905206 PMC6944362 · DOI
  20. [23]Law R. The perceived impact of risks on travel decisions. Int J Tour Res. 2006; 8(4): 289– 300.
  21. [24]Bonaccorsi G, Pierri F, Cinelli M, Porcelli F, Galeazzi A, Flori A, et al Economic and social consequences of human mobility restrictions under COVID-19. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2020; 1– 6. 10.1073/pnas.2007658117 32554604 PMC7355033 · DOI · Paper page
  22. [25]Mogaji E. Impact of COVID-19 on transportation in Lagos, Nigeria. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020; 6: 100154. PMC7290214 34171020
  23. [26]Adekunle IA, Onanuga AT, Akinola OO, Ogunbanjo OW. Modelling spatial variations of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Africa. Sci Total Environ. 2020; 729: 138998 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138998 32361455 PMC7195380 · DOI
  24. [27]de Haas M, Faber R, Hamersma M. How COVID-19 and the Dutch ‘intelligent lockdown’ change activities, work and travel behaviour: Evidence from longitudinal data in the Netherlands. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020; 6: 100150. PMC7284275 34171019
  25. [28]Rogers RW. A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. J Psychol. 1975; 91(1): 93– 114. 10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803 28136248 · DOI · Paper page
  26. [29]Boer H, Seydel ER. Protection motivation theory. In: Conner M, Norman P, editors. Predicting health behavior second. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2005 p. 81– 126.
  27. [31]Harrison JA, Mullen PD, Green LW. A meta-analysis of studies of the health belief model with adults. Health Educ Res. 1992; 7(1): 107– 16. 10.1093/her/7.1.107 10148735 · DOI
  28. [37]Stockemer D. Quantitative Methods for the Social Sciences. Vol. 50 Cham: Springer; 2019 185 p.
  29. [38]Barbieri DM, Lou B, Passavanti M, Hui C, Antunes D, Maharaj B, et al A survey dataset to evaluate the changes in mobility and transportation due to COVID-19 travel restrictions in Australia, Brazil, China, Ghana, India, Iran, Italy, Norway, South Africa, United States. Data Br. 2020; 33: 106459 10.1016/j.dib.2020.106459 33163599 PMC7607379 · DOI
  30. [40]Brög W. Surveys on daily mobility are not “surveys to go.” Transp Res Procedia. 2015; 11: 98– 107.
  31. [41]De Beuckelaer A, Lievens F. Measurement equivalence of paper-and-pencil and internet organisational surveys: A large scale examination in 16 countries. Appl Psychol. 2009; 58(2): 336– 61.
  32. [43]Coughlin SS. Recall bias in epidemiologic studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990; 43(1): 87– 91. 10.1016/0895-4356(90)90060-3 2319285 · DOI · Paper page
  33. [44]Jaspers E, Lubbers M, De Graaf ND. Measuring once twice: An evaluation of recalling attitudes in survey research. Eur Sociol Rev. 2009; 25(3): 287– 301.
  34. [45]Solga H. Longitudinal surveys and the study of occupational mobility: Panel and retrospective design in comparison. Qual Quant. 2001; 35(3): 291– 309.
  35. [46]Barsky AJ. Forgetting, fabricating, and telescoping. Arch Intern Med. 2002; 162(9): 981 10.1001/archinte.162.9.981 11996606 · DOI
  36. [47]Hipp L, Bünning M, Munnes S, Sauermann A. Problems and pitfalls of retrospective survey questions in COVID-19 studies. Surv Res Methods. 2020; 14(2): 109– 14.
  37. [48]Smith TW. Recalling attitudes: An analysis of retrospective questions on the 1982 GSS. Public Opin Q. 1984; 48(3): 639– 49.
  38. [49]Cartenì A, Di Francesco L, Martino M. How mobility habits influenced the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the Italian case study. Sci Total Environ. 2020; 741 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140489 32599395 PMC7313484 · DOI
  39. [50]Bish A, Michie S. Demographic and attitudinal determinants of protective behaviours during a pandemic: A review. Br J Health Psychol. 2010; 15(4): 797– 824. 10.1348/135910710X485826 20109274 PMC7185452 · DOI
  40. [51]World Population Review. Gini coefficient by country 2020 [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gini-coefficient-by-country
  41. [54]Ajide KB, Ibrahim RL, Alimi OY. Estimating the impacts of lockdown on Covid-19 cases in Nigeria. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020; 7(June): 100217. PMC7474887 34173470
  42. [55]Oztig LI, Askin OE. Human mobility and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a negative binomial regression analysis. Public Health. 2020; 185: 364– 7. 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.07.002 32739776 PMC7351378 · DOI
  43. [56]Sax LJ, Gilmartin SK, Bryant AN. Assessing response rates and nonresponse bias in web and paper surveys. Res High Educ. 2003; 44(4): 409– 32.
  44. [57]Kashfi SA, Bunker JM, Yigitcanlar T. Understanding the effects of complex seasonality on suburban daily transit ridership. J Transp Geogr. 2015; 46: 67– 80.
  45. [58]Tucker P, Gilliland J. The effect of season and weather on physical activity: A systematic review. Public Health. 2007; 121(12): 909– 22. 10.1016/j.puhe.2007.04.009 17920646 · DOI
  46. [69]Arimura M, Ha TV, Okumura K, Asada T. Changes in urban mobility in Sapporo city, Japan due to the Covid-19 emergency declarations. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020; 7: 100212. PMC7834002 34173468
  47. [70]Beck MJ, Hensher DA. Insights into the impact of COVID-19 on household travel and activities in Australia–The early days under restrictions. Transp Policy. 2020; 96(May): 76– 93. 10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.07.001 32834680 PMC7330570 · DOI
  48. [71]Pucher J, Peng ZR, Mittal N, Zhu Y, Korattyswaroopam N. Urban transport trends and policies in China and India: Impacts of rapid economic growth. Transp Rev. 2007; 27(4): 379– 410.
  49. [72]Pearce B. The shape of air travel markets over the next 20 years. In: Global Airport Development Conference. Athens; 2014.
  50. [73]Cahyanto I, Wiblishauser M, Pennington-Gray L, Schroeder A. The dynamics of travel avoidance: The case of Ebola in the U.S. Tour Manag Perspect. 2016; 20: 195– 203. 10.1016/j.tmp.2016.09.004 32289007 PMC7147605 · DOI
  51. [74]Wilder-Smith A. The severe acute respiratory syndrome: Impact on travel and tourism. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2006; 4(2): 53– 60. 10.1016/j.tmaid.2005.04.004 16887725 PMC7106206 · DOI
  52. [76]Parady G, Taniguchi A, Takami K. Travel behavior changes during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: Analyzing the effects of risk perception and social in fl uence on going-out self-restriction. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020; 7: 100181. PMC9239539 35782787
  53. [77]Borkowski P, Jażdżewska-Gutta M, Szmelter-Jarosz A. Lockdowned: Everyday mobility changes in response to COVID-19. J Transp Geogr. 2021; 90(November 2020). PMC9188832 35721765
  54. [81]Sadique MZ, Edmunds WJ, Smith RD, Meerding WJ, De Zwart O, Brug J, et al Precautionary behavior in response to perceived threat of pandemic influenza. Emerg Infect Dis. 2007; 13(9): 1307– 13. 10.3201/eid1309.070372 18252100 PMC2857294 · DOI
  55. [82]Antonovsky A. Social class, life expectancy and overall mortality. Milbank Q. 1967; 45(2): 31– 73. 6034566
  56. [83]Mcisaac SJ, Wilkinson RG. Income distribution and cause-specific mortality. Eur J Public Health. 1997; 7(1): 45– 53.
  57. [84]Wilkinson RG. Income distribution and life expectancy. Br Med J. 1992; 304(6828): 165– 8. 10.1136/bmj.304.6820.165 1637372 PMC1881178 · DOI
  58. [85]Feinstein JS. The relationship between socioeconomic status and health a review of the literature. Milbank Q. 1993; 71(2): 279– 322. 8510603
  59. [86]Adler NE, Boyce T, Chesney MA, Cohen S, Folkman S, Kahn RL, et al Socioeconomic status and health: the challenge of the gradient. Am Psychol. 1994; 49(1): 15– 24. 10.1037//0003-066x.49.1.15 8122813 · DOI
  60. [87]Soobader MJ, LeClere FB. Aggregation and the measurement of income inequality: effects on morbidity. Soc Sci Med. 1999; 48(6): 733– 44. 10.1016/s0277-9536(98)00401-8 10190636 · DOI
  61. [88]Lynch JW, Smith GD, Kaplan GA, House JS. Income inequality and mortality: Importance to health of individual income, psychosocial environment, or material conditions. Br Med J. 2000; 320(7243): 1200– 4. 10.1136/bmj.320.7243.1200 10784551 PMC1127589 · DOI
  62. [89]Wilkinson RG, Pickett KE. Income inequality and population health: A review and explanation of the evidence. Soc Sci Med. 2006; 62(7): 1768– 84. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.08.036 16226363 · DOI
  63. [91]Piot P, Greener R, Russell S. Squaring the circle: AIDS, poverty, and human development. PLoS Med. 2007; 4(10): 1571– 5. 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040314 17958469 PMC2039763 · DOI
  64. [92]Peretti-Watel P, Seror V, Verger P, Guignard R, Legleye S, Beck F. Smokers’ risk perception, socioeconomic status and source of information on cancer. Addict Behav. 2014; 39(9): 1304– 10. 10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.04.016 24836161 · DOI
  65. [93]Ibuka Y, Chapman GB, Meyers LA, Li M, Galvani AP. The dynamics of risk perceptions and precautionary behavior in response to 2009 (H1N1) pandemic influenza. BMC Infect Dis. 2010; 10(1): 296 10.1186/1471-2334-10-296 20946662 PMC2964717 · DOI
  66. [94]Schmiege SJ, Bryan A, Klein WMP. Distinctions between worry and perceived risk in the context of the theory of planned behavior. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2009; 39(1): 95– 119.
  67. [95]Quintal VA, Lee JA, Soutar GN. Risk, uncertainty and the theory of planned behavior: A tourism example. Tour Manag. 2010; 31(6): 797– 805.
  68. [96]Weill JA, Stigler M, Deschenes O, Springborn MR. Social distancing responses to COVID-19 emergency declarations strongly differentiated by income. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020; 117(33): 19658– 60. 10.1073/pnas.2009412117 32727905 PMC7443940 · DOI
  69. [97]Verlinghieri E, Schwanen T. Transport and mobility justice: Evolving discussions. J Transp Geogr. 2020; 87(June). 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102798 32834675 PMC7359804 · DOI
  70. [98]Nordgren LF, van Der Pligt J, van Harreveld F. Unpacking perceived control in risk perception: The mediating role of anticipated regret. J Behav Decis Mak. 2007; 20: 533– 44.
  71. [99]Gustafson PE. Gender differences in risk perception: Theoretical and methodological perspectives. Risk Anal. 1998; 18(6): 805– 11. 10.1023/b:rian.0000005926.03250.c0 9972583 · DOI
  72. [100]Hotle S, Murray-Tuite P, Singh K. Influenza risk perception and travel-related health protection behavior in the US: Insights for the aftermath of the COVID-19 outbreak. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020; 5: 100127. PMC7211591 34171017
  73. [101]Budd L, Ison S. Responsible Transport: A post-COVID agenda for transport policy and practice. Transp Res Interdiscip Perspect. 2020; 6: 100151. PMC7311912 34173454
  74. [102]Kuzemko C, Bradshaw M, Bridge G, Goldthau A, Jewell J, Overland I, et al Covid-19 and the politics of sustainable energy transitions. Energy Res Soc Sci. 2020; 68(July): 101685 10.1016/j.erss.2020.101685 32839704 PMC7330551 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barbieri, D. M., Lou, B., Passavanti, M., Hui, C., Hoff, I., Lessa, D. A., Sikka, G., Chang, K., Gupta, A., Fang, K., Banerjee, A., Maharaj, B., Lam, L., Ghasemi, N., Naik, B., Wang, F., Foroutan Mirhosseini, A., Naseri, S., Liu, Z., Qiao, Y., Tucker, A., Wijayaratna, K., Peprah, P., Adomako, S., Yu, L., Goswami, S., Chen, H., Shu, B., Hessami, A., Abbas, M., Agarwal, N., & Rashidi, T. H.
Affiliations
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
  • Chang'an University (CN)
  • African Institute for Mathematical Sciences (ZA)
  • Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (BR)
  • Lalit Narayan Mithila University (IN)
  • University of Idaho (US)
  • Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee (IN)
  • Sonoma State University (US)
  • Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati (IN)
  • University of KwaZulu-Natal (ZA)
  • Federation University (AU)
  • University of Bologna (IT)
  • Ohio University (US)
  • Wuhan University of Technology (CN)
  • Bam University of Medical Sciences (IR)
  • China University of Mining and Technology (CN)
  • University of Connecticut (US)
  • University of Technology Sydney (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • University of Agder (NO)
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
  • Indian Institute of Science Bangalore (IN)
  • Texas A&M University – Kingsville (US)
  • Virginia Tech (US)
  • University of Florida (US)
Corresponding author
  • Barbieri, Diego Maria
  • Lou, Baowen
ORCID
Venue
PLOS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2021-02-01
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
e0245886
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0245886
PMC
PMC7850470
OpenAlex
W3127800895
Cited by
246
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 39
FWCI
38.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • NOT FOUND REPOSITORY (Indian Institute of Science Bangalore) (acceptedVersion)
  • UNSWorks (UNSW Sydney) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • FedUni ResearchOnline (Federation University Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • SUNScholar (Stellenbosch University) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Information System of Ardabil University of Medical Sciences (Ardabil University of Medical Sciences) (submittedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion)
  • SUNScholar (Stellenbosch University) (submittedVersion)
  • VTechWorks (Virginia Tech) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • University of Southern California
  • Shijiazhuang Tiedao University
  • Queensland University of Technology
  • Indian Institute of Technology Madras
  • Guangdong University of Technology
  • Universidade Estadual Paulista
  • Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati
  • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Transportation Planning and Optimization
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Transportation and Mobility Innovations
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Urban Transport and Accessibility
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, travel behavior, movement patterns, transport modes, risk perception, protective behavior, commuting, air travel, bus travel, protection motivation theory, income inequality, Gini coefficient, COVID-19 mortality, restrictive measures, cross-national comparison
MeSH terms
COVID-19, Humans, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Risk Factors, Transportation, Travel, Pandemics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review