Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Formative and reflective measurement models for analysing transit service quality

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Public Transport Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Transit service quality is a complex concept depending on different service aspects, such as service frequency and punctuality, comfort, cleanliness, information and so on. Transit service quality is generally measured through the satisfaction of the users with the service. There are relationships between the overall service quality and the different transit service aspects, and between each aspect and the characteristics describing it. Structural equation models represent a useful tool for exploring this kind of relationship and determining the influence of the different service characteristics on service quality. An investigated issue concerning structural equation models is the contrast between the formative and the reflective approach. The structural models proposed for measuring transit service quality have followed a reflective approach, according to which the latent variable (or the service aspect) is the cause of the observed measures (or the service factors describing the service aspect); but in this paper we investigate on the fact that formative variables could be considered to model the relationship among the service quality characteristics, supposing that the observed measures, which represent the service characteristics, form the latent construct. The findings from the comparison between the results obtained by applying the two different approaches suggest that the reflective model is surely more suitable for describing the phenomenon of passenger satisfaction with transit service quality. However, we retain that if some service aspects can be more conveniently investigated through a reflective approach, other service aspects could follow a formative approach in a better way.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson JC, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended twostep approach. Psychol Bull 103(3):411–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andreassen TW (1995) (Dis)satisfaction with public services: the case of public transportation. J Serv Mark 9:30–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle JL, Wothke W (1995) AMOS 4.0 user’s guide. SmallWaters Corporation, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamberg S, Schmidt P (1998) Changing travel-mode choice as rational choice: results from a longitudinal intervention study. Ration Soc 10(2):223–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bearden WO, Netmeyer RG (1999) Handbook of marketing scales. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blalock HM (1964) Causal inferences in nonexperimental research. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Boari G (2000) Uno sguardo ai modelli per la costruzione di indicatori nazionali di customer satisfaction. In: Valutazione della qualità e customer satisfaction: il ruolo della statistica. Vita e Pensiero, Milano, pp 317–336

  • Bollen K (1989) Structural equations with latent variables. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen K, Lennox R (1991) Conventional wisdom on measurement: a structural equation perspective. Psychol Bull 100:305–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom D, Mellenbergh GJ, Heerden JV (2003) The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychol Rev 110(2):203–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom D, Mellenbergh GJ, Heerden JV (2004) The concept of validity. Psychol Rev 111(4):1061–1071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne MW, Cudeck R (1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS (eds) Testing structural equation models. Sage, Newbury Park, pp 136–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner GCB II, James KE, Hensel PJ (2001) Marketing scales handbook. American Marketing Association, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne BM (1994) Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/WINDOWS: basic concepts, applications and programming, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Carreira R, Patrício L Natal, Jorge R, Magee C (2014) Understanding the travel experience and its impact on attitudes, emotions and loyalty towards the transportation provider—a quantitative study with mid-distance bus trips. Transp Policy 31:35–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coltman T, Devinney TM, Midgley DF, Venaik S (2008) Formative versus reflective measurement models: two applications of formative measurement. J Bus Res 61(12):1250–1262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN) (2002) European Standard EN 13816. Transportation - logistics and services - public passenger transport - service quality definition, targeting and measurement

  • de Abreu e Silva J, Goulias KG (2009) A structural equations model of land use patterns, location choice, and travel behavior in Seattle and comparison with Lisbon. In: Proceedings of the 88th annual transportation research board meeting, 11–15 Jan 2009, Washington DC

  • de Abreu e Silva J, Morency C, Goulias KG (2012) Using structural equations modeling to unravel the influence of land use patterns on travel behavior of workers in Montreal. Transp Res Part A 46:1252–1264

    Google Scholar 

  • de Oña J, de Oña R, Eboli L, Mazzulla G (2013) Perceived service quality in bus transit service. A structural equation approach. Transp Policy 29:219–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Oña J, de Oña R, Eboli L, Mazzulla G (2016a) Index numbers for monitoring transit service quality. Transp Res Part A 84:18–30

    Google Scholar 

  • de Oña J, de Oña R, Eboli L, Forciniti C, Mazzulla G (2016b) Transit passengers’ behavioural intentions: the influence of service quality and customer satisfaction. Transportmetrica A 12(5):385–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos A, Siguaw JA (2006) Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: a comparison and empirical illustration. Br J Manag 17:263–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos A, Winklhofer HM (2001) Index construction with formative indicators: an alternative to scale development. J Mark Res 38(5):269–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eboli L, Mazzulla G (2007) Service quality attributes affecting customer satisfaction for bus transit. J Public Transp 10:21–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eboli L, Mazzulla G (2012) Structural equation modelling for analysing passengers’ perceptions about railway services. Proc-Soc Behav Sci 54:96–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eboli L, Mazzulla G (2015) Relationships between rail passengers’ satisfaction and service quality: a framework for identifying the key service factors. Public Transp Plan Oper 7(2):185–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eboli L, Forciniti C, Mazzulla G (2012) Exploring land use and transport interaction through structural equation modelling. Proc-Soc Behav Sci 54:107–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards JR, Bagozzi RP (2000) On the nature and direction of the relationship between constructs and measures. Psychol Methods 5:155–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eskildsen JK, Dahlgaard JJ (2000) A causal model for employee satisfaction. Total Qual Manag 11(8):1081–1094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fillone AM, Montalbo CM, Tiglao NC (2005) Assessing urban travel: a structural equations modeling (SEM) approach. Proc East Asia Soc Transp Stud 5:1050–1064

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell C (1982) A second generation of multivariate analysis. Praeger, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Grace JB, Pugesek BH (1997) A structural equation model of plant species richness and its application to a coastal wetland. Am Nat 149(3):436–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (2009) Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model: Multidiscip J 6(1):1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irfan SM, Mui HKD, Shahbaz S (2011) Service quality in rail transport of Pakistan: a passenger perspective. In: Proceedings of 3rd SAICON: international conference on management, business ethics and economics (ICMBEE), 28–29 Dec 2011, Lahore, Pakistan

  • Joreskog KG (1973) Analysis of covariance structures. In: Krishnaiah PR (ed) Multivariate analysis-III. Academic Press, New York, pp 263–285

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Karlaftis MG, Golias J, Papadimitriou E (2001) Transit quality as an integrated traffic management strategy: measuring perceived service. J Public Transp 4(1):27–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline RB (1998) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum RC, Austin JT (2000) Applications of structural equation modelling in psychological research. Annu Rev Psychol 51:201–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum RC, Browne MW, Sugawara HM (1996) Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychol Methods 1(2):130–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacLean S, Gray K (1998) Structural equation modelling in market research. J Aust Mark Res Soc 6(1):17–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Manaresi A, Marzocchi G, Tassinari G (2000) La soddisfazione del cliente dei servizi di segreteria universitaria: un modello a equazioni strutturali. In: Valutazione della qualità e customer satisfaction: il ruolo della statistica. Vita e Pensiero, Milano, pp 291–316

  • Mitchell RJ (1992) Testing evolutionary and ecological hypotheses using path analysis and structural equation modelling. Funct Ecol 6:123–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén B, Kaplan D, Hollis M (2006) On structural equation modelling with data that are not missing completely at random. Psychometrika 52(3):431–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Netmeyer RG, Bearden WO, Sharma S (2003) Scaling procedures: issues and applications. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ngatia GJ, Okamura T, Nakamura F (2010) The structure of users’ satisfaction on urban public transport service in developing country: the case of Nairobi. J East Asia Soc Transp Stud 8:1288–1300

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter JR (2002) The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. Int J Res Mark 19(4):1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumacker RE, Lomax RG (2004) A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonetto A (2012) Formative and reflective models: state of the art. Electron J Appl Stat Anal 5(3):452–457

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector PE (1992) Summated rating scale construction. Sage, Newbury Park

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steiger JH (1990) Structural model evaluation and modification: an interval estimation approach. Multivar Behav Res 25:173–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart KR, Mednick M, Bockman J (2000) Structural equation model of customer satisfaction for the New York City subway system. Transp Res Rec 1735:133–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tam Mei Ling, Tam Mei Lang, Lam WHK (2005) Analysis of airport access mode choice: a case study in Hong Kong. J East Asia Soc Transp Stud 6:708–723

    Google Scholar 

  • Transportation Research Board (2003) Transit capacity and quality of service manual. TCRP report 100. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Tschopp M, Axhausen KW (2007) Transport infrastructure and spatial development in Switzerland between 1950 and 2000. In: Proceedings of 86th annual meeting of the transportation research board, Jan 2007, Washington, DC

  • Ullman JB (2001) Structural equation modeling. In: Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (eds) Using multivariate statistics, 4th edn. Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, pp 653–771

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Acker V, Witlox F, Van Wee B (2007) The effects of the land use system on travel behavior: a structural equation modeling approach. Transp Plan Technol 30:331–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley DE (1973) The identification problem for structural equation models with unmeasured variables. In: Goldberger AS, Ducan OD (eds) Structural equation models in the social science. Seminar Press, New York, pp 69–83

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Calabria, Rende, Italy

    Laura Eboli, Carmen Forciniti & Gabriella Mazzulla

Authors
  1. Laura Eboli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carmen Forciniti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gabriella Mazzulla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura Eboli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eboli, L., Forciniti, C. & Mazzulla, G. Formative and reflective measurement models for analysing transit service quality. Public Transp 10, 107–127 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-017-0168-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-017-0168-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation