Advertisement

Public Transport

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 217–240 | Cite as

Trade-offs between headway, fare, and real-time bus information under different weather conditions

  • Md Matiur Rahman
  • Lina Kattan
  • S. C. Wirasinghe
Original Paper
  • 84 Downloads

Abstract

Given the increasing interest in real-time bus information, quantifying the value of such information from a user’s perspective is useful for transport modelers and service planners. Although a number of studies have investigated several other aspects of real-time bus information systems, there is a lack of studies that compare the disutility associated with the bus headway of a scheduled arrival information system and that of a real-time information system from a user’s perspective. In addition, no analyses in the literature examined the value of real-time information as affected by trip purpose and weather, which is important especially for the cities in which the weather remains below zero degrees during winter. The primary objectives of this research are to elucidate these issues. A stated preference survey describing the choice between scheduled and real-time information systems was conducted in Calgary, Canada. A total of 426 people participated in the survey, and each person was presented with three randomly selected choice situations. This data set was utilized to estimate the coefficients in different utility functions using a mixed logit model, which avoided several major limitations of a standard multinomial logit model. It was found that the disutility of the headway of a real-time information system was about half of the disutility of a scheduled information system. The analysis also showed that there was a nonlinear trend for the real-time information system, in which people found a higher disutility rate for a longer headway. Further, the value of real-time information availability was normally distributed in the population, with a mean of $0.50 and a standard deviation of $0.40. The results also revealed that the value of real-time information was significantly different when the weather was below and above 0 °C, those values were $0.59 and $0.41, respectively. Many of the findings obtained here are novel and have implications for both theory and practice. Particularly, they are important for transport modelers and service planners to design or adjust the headway for a desired level of service for a given (or a change in) bus arrival information type.

Keywords

Real-time information Headway disutility The value of information Stated preference Mixed logit 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported in part by Calgary Transit, AMA, AITF, Urban Alliance, NSERC, and the Eyes High Doctoral Scholarship.

References

  1. Abdelfattah A, Khan A (1998) Models for predicting bus delays. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 1623:8–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. APTA (American Public Transportation Association) (2014) Facts at a glance. American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkins S (1994) Passenger information at bus stops (PIBS): report on monitoring studies of route 18 demonstration. London Transport ReportGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates JJ (1988) Stated preference techniques and the analysis of consumer choice. Store choice, store location and market analysis. Routledge Chapman and Hall, New York, pp 187–202Google Scholar
  5. Ben-Akiva ME, Lerman SR (1985) Discrete choice analysis: theory and application to travel demand. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Besser LM, Dannenberg AL (2005) Walking to public transit: steps to help meet physical activity recommendations. Am J Prev Med 29(4):273–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brakewood C, Barbeau S, Watkins K (2014) An experiment evaluating the impacts of real-time transit information on bus riders in Tampa, Florida. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 69:409–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brakewood C, Macfarlane GS, Watkins K (2015) The impact of real-time information on bus ridership in New York City. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 53:59–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cats O, Loutos G (2016) Evaluating the added-value of online bus arrival prediction schemes. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 86:35–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caulfield B, O’Mahony M (2009) A stated preference analysis of real-time public transit stop information. J Public Transp 12(3):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Daduna JR, Voß S (1996) Efficient technologies for passenger information systems in public mass transit. In: Proceedings of the first INFORMS conference on information systems and technology, Washington DC, pp 386–391Google Scholar
  12. Dziekan K (2004) Customer perceptions and behavioural responses to IT-based public transport information—literature review and what the experts say. Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, TRITA-INFRA 04-012, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  13. Dziekan K, Kottenhoff K (2007) Dynamic at-stop real-time information displays for public transport: effects on customers. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 41(6):489–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dziekan K, Vermeulen A (2006) Psychological effects of and design preferences for real-time information displays. J Public Transp 9(1):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. El-Geneidy AM, Horning J, Krizek KJ (2011) Analyzing transit service reliability using detailed data from automatic vehicular locator systems. J Adv Transp 45(1):66–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ferris B, Watkins K, Borning A (2010) OneBusAway: results from providing real-time arrival information for public transit. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, New York, USA, April 10–15Google Scholar
  17. Fries RN, Dunning AE, Chowdhury MA (2011) University traveler value of potential real-time transit information. J Public Transp 14(2):29–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gooze A, Watkins K, Borning A (2013) Benefits of real-time transit information and impacts of data accuracy on rider experience. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2351:95–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Habib KMN, Kattan L, Islam M (2011) Model of personal attitudes towards transit service quality. J Adv Transp 45(4):271–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harris P, Konheim CS (1995) Public interest in, and willingness to pay for, enhanced traveler information as provided by IVHS in the New York Metropolitan Area. In: Proceedings of the 1995 annual meeting of ITS America, Washington, DC, March 15–17Google Scholar
  21. Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH (2005) Applied choice analysis: a primer. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hobeika A, Sivanandan R, Jehanian K, Ameen M (1996) Advanced traveler information system users’ needs in I-95 Northeast corridor. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 1537:55–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hossain MS, Hunt JD, Wirasinghe SC (2015) Nature of influence of out-of-vehicle time-related attributes on transit attractiveness: a random parameters logit model analysis. J Adv Transp 49(5):648–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Huber J, Hansen D (1987) Testing the impact of dimensional complexity and affective differences of paired concepts in adaptive conjoint analysis. Adv Consum Res 14(1):159–163Google Scholar
  25. Ilieva J, Baron S, Healey NM (2002) Online surveys in marketing research: pros and cons. Int J Mark Res 44(3):361–376Google Scholar
  26. Johnson EJ, Meyer RJ (1984) Compensatory choice models of noncompensatory processes: the effect of varying context. J Consum Res 11(1):528–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johnson R, Orme B (2003) Getting the most from CBC. Sawtooth Software Research Paper Series. http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/download/techpap/cbcmost.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2018
  28. Jou R, Chen K (2015) How much will I pay for freeway real-time traffic information? Sustainability 7(10):13142–13153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kattan L, de Barros AG, Saleemi H (2013) Travel behavior changes and responses to advanced traveler information in prolonged and large-scale network disruptions: a case study of west LRT line construction in the City of Calgary. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 21:90–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kenyon S, Lyons G (2003) The value of integrated multimodal traveller information and its potential contribution to modal change. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 6(1):1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Khattak AJ, Yim Y, Prokopy LS (2003) Willingness to pay for travel information. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 11(2):137–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Levin IP, Louviere JJ, Schepanski AA, Norman KL (1983) External validity tests of laboratory studies of information integration. Organ Behav Hum Perform 31(2):173–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Litman T (2008) Valuing transit service quality improvements. J Public Transp 11(2):43–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Litman T (2014) Evaluating public transportation health benefits. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. http://www.vtpi.org/tran_health.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2018
  35. Louviere JJ (1988) Conjoint analysis modelling of stated preferences: a review of theory, methods, recent developments and external validity. J Transp Econ Policy 22(1):93–119Google Scholar
  36. McFadden D, Train K (2000) Mixed MNL models for discrete response. J Appl Econom 15(5):447–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mishalani RG, McCord MM, Wirtz J (2006) Passenger wait time perceptions at bus stops: empirical results and impact on evaluating real-time bus arrival information. J Public Transport 9(2):5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Orme B (1998) Sample size issues for conjoint analysis studies. Sawthooth Software Research Paper Series. Sawthooth Software Inc, SquimGoogle Scholar
  39. Park SH, Jeong YJ, Kim TJ (2007) Transit travel time forecasts for location-based queries: implementation and evaluation. J East Asia Soc Transp Stud 7:1859–1869Google Scholar
  40. Polydoropoulou A, Gopinath D, Ben-Akiva M (1997) Willingness to pay for advanced traveler information systems: SmarTraveler case study. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 1588:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rahman MM, Kattan L, Wirasinghe SC (2011) Factors affecting bus travel time in moderate frequency transit bus routes—a case study of Calgary transit. In: Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management (CUPUM) Conference, Lake Louise, Canada, July 5–8Google Scholar
  42. Rahman MM, Wirasinghe SC, Kattan L (2013) Users’ views on current and future real-time bus information systems. J Adv Transp 47(3):336–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rahman MM, Wirasinghe S, Kattan L (2016) The effect of time interval of bus location data on real-time bus arrival estimations. Transp A Transp Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1080/23249935.2016.1166159 Google Scholar
  44. Revelt D, Train K (1998) Mixed logit with repeated choices: households’ choices of appliance efficiency level. Rev Econ Stat 80(4):647–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schweiger C (2011) TCRP synthesis 91: use and deployment of mobile device technology for real-time transit information. Transit Cooperative Research Program of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  46. Shalaby A, Farhan A (2004) Prediction model of bus arrival and departure times using AVL and APC data. J Public Transp 7(1):41–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Soriguera F (2014) On the value of highway travel time information systems. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 70:294–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Statistics Canada (2010) Commuting to Work. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/110824/dq110824b-eng.htm. Accessed 25 Sept 2012
  49. Sun D, Luo H, Fu L, Liu W, Liao X, Zhao M (2007) Predicting Bus arrival time on the basis of global positioning system data. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2034:62–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tang L, Thakuriah PV (2012) Ridership effects of real-time bus information system: a case study in the City of Chicago. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 22:146–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Train KE (2003) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. US DOT (2009) National household travel survey 2009. http://nhts.ornl.gov/2009/pub/stt.pdf. Accessed 25 Sept 2012
  53. Wardman JH, Stradling SG (2001) Interchange and travel choice, vol 1. Scottish Executive Central Research Unit, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  54. Watkins KE, Ferris B, Borning A, Rutherford GS, Layton D (2011) Where is my bus? Impact of mobile real-time information on the perceived and actual wait time of transit riders. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 45(8):839–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wirasinghe SC (1993) Cost based approach to scheduling travel time on a public transportation route. In: 12th International symposium on the theory of traffic flow and transportation, Berkeley, CA, USA, July 21–23, pp 204–216Google Scholar
  56. Zhang L, Levinson D (2008) Determinants of route choice and value of traveler information: a field experiment. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2086:81–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zhang F, Shen Q, Clifton K (2008) Examination of traveler responses to real-time information about bus arrivals using panel data. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2082:107–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Md Matiur Rahman
    • 1
  • Lina Kattan
    • 1
  • S. C. Wirasinghe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, Schulich School of EngineeringUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations