Abstract
Estimation of ridership on a new transit system in an area where no comparable service existed before is a difficult task of transit planning. Traditional modal split models cannot be used in these cases, because no data or basis for developing a new model or adjusting a “borrowed” model are available. One of the techniques which can be used in this type of situation, is to perform a “concept test” based on public opinion. This approach, however, is plagued with the phenomenon of non-commitment bias of interviewees, and tends to overestimate the ridership.
A new fixed route and fixed schedule transit service in Johnson City in Tennessee provided a rare opportunity to perform an investigation on the non-commitment bias through “before” and “after” surveys. The analysis of the non-commitment and actual responses of a sample of residents revealed substantial bias. Overall, the non-commitment ridership estimate was about twice (100% greater than) the actual ridership.:It was also observed that the bias was higher for persons owning automobiles, and for work and shopping trips.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Britt, S. H. (1966). Consumer Behavior and the Behavioral Sciences. New York: John Wiley.
Burkhardt, J. E. and Lago, A. M. (1978). “Predicting demand for rural transit systems”, Traffic Quarterly 32: 105–129.
Chatterjee, A. and Shinha, K. C. (1975). “Mode choice estimation for small urban areas”, Transportation Engineering Journal, American Society of Civil Engineers, 101: 265–278.
Constantino, D. P., Golob, T. F. and Stopher, P. R. (1974). “Consumer preferences for automated public transportation systems”, Transportation Research Record 527: 81–93.
Couture, M. R. and Dooley, T. (1981). “Analyzing Traveler Attitudes to Resolve Intent and Actual Use of a New Transit Service”, Washington, DC: Transportation Research Record 794, Transportation Research Board, pp. 27–33.
Dobson, R. (1973). Documentation for the Metro Guideway Home-Interview and Leave-Behind Questionnaires. Warren, MI: Transportation and Urban Analysis Department, General Motors Research Laboratories.
Hartgen, D. T. (1972). “Forecasting Remote Park-and-Ride Transit Usage”, Preliminary Research Report 39, New York State Department of Transportation.
Hartgen, D. T. (1973). “Forecasting Demand for Improved-Quality Transit Service with Small-Sample Surveys”, Preliminary Research Report 51, New York State Department of Transportation.
Hartgen, D. T. and Keck, C. A. (1976). “Forecasting Dial-a-Bus Ridership in Small Urban Areas”, Washington, DC: Transportation Research Record 563, Transportation Research Board, pp. 53–62.
Iuso, B. (1975). “Concept Testing: An Appropriate Approach”, Journal of Marketing Research 12: 228–231.
Knighton, R. G. (1976). “Forecasting Fare-Sensitive Dial-a-Bus Demand without Surveys”, Preliminary Research Report 104, New York State Department of Transportation.
Liou, P. S. (1975). “A Technical Review of a Ridership Forecasting Method: Dial-a-Bus in Small Urban Areas”, Preliminary Research Report 73, New York State Department of Transportation.
Woodruff, R. B., Barnaby, D. J., Mundy, R. A. and Hills, G. E. (1981). Market Opportunity Analysis for Short-Range Public Transportation Planning: Method and Demonstration. National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 212, Transportation Research Board, September.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chatterjee, A., Wegmann, F.J. & McAdams, M.A. Non-commitment bias in public opinion on transit usage. Transportation 11, 347–360 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00150723
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00150723