Eliciting citizens' priorities for active travel infrastructure investments: A qualitative analysis of best-worst scaling experiments

被引:1
|
作者
Albahlal, Fahad [1 ]
Haggar, Paul [2 ]
Potoglou, Dimitris [1 ]
机构
[1] Cardiff Univ, Sch Geog & Planning, Cardiff CF10 3WA, Wales
[2] Univ Bath, Dept Psychol, Bath BA2 7AY, England
关键词
Walking infrastructure investment; Cycling infrastructure investment; Cognitive interviewing; Best-worst scaling; Walking; Cycling; BUILT ENVIRONMENT; QUESTIONS; HEALTH; AUDIT; TIMES; WALKABILITY; RELIABILITY; INSTRUMENT; COMPLEXITY; CONCRETE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jth.2024.101795
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Introduction: The built environment plays an important role in individuals' propensity to walk and cycle and local authorities increasingly invest financial resources towards its development. Organisations responsible for the built environment have developed auditing tools as guidelines to inspect routes and identify improvements to support active travel. Methods: Using these auditing tools as a starting point, this study developed 21 walking and 25 cycling investment -relevant factors that were embedded into two choice-based survey instruments, respectively. The study used cognitive interview pre -testing to internally validate a preference-based elicitation approach known as Best-Worst Scaling (BWS), which aimed to capture pedestrian and cyclist preferences. We report findings from cognitive interviews (data analysed thematically) with 20 participants (10 pedestrians and 10 cyclists). Results: In both sets of interviews, four themes emerged regarding how the participants approached the BWS task and five themes related to the understanding of the factors. The BWS choice tasks required refinement regarding the 'frame of reference', 'travel context', the 'decisionmaking strategy', and the 'concrete thinking' (finding some factors easier to interpret). Additionally, issues with understanding the factors, the wording, 'overlapping', negatively phrased factors, and technical jargon all pointed towards the need to refine auditing tools if these were to be introduced in a preference elicitation context. Conclusions: This study helps to empirically uncover how citizens interpret infrastructure related aspects of walking and cycling by pointing to nuanced aspects that auditing tools may miss. The findings also helped develop an internally consistent preference elicitation survey-instrument that any local authority can implement to determine which walking and cycling infrastructure investments are a priority in their area.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Eliciting preferences for 'gamified' travel surveys: a best-worst approach
    Verzosa, Nina
    Greaves, Stephen
    Ellison, Richard
    Ellison, Adrian
    Davis, Mark
    TRANSPORT SURVEY METHODS IN THE ERA OF BIG DATA: FACING THE CHALLENGES, 2018, 32 : 211 - 223
  • [2] Feasibility of a best-worst scaling exercise to set priorities for autism research
    Davis, Scott A.
    Howard, Kirsten
    Ellis, Alan R.
    Jonas, Daniel E.
    Carey, Timothy S.
    Morrissey, Joseph P.
    Thomas, Kathleen C.
    HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2022, 25 (04) : 1643 - 1651
  • [3] ELICITING THE PRIORITIES OF PATIENTS, CAREGIVERS AND HEALTH PROFESSIONALS FOR IMPORTANT OUTCOMES IN NEPHROLOGY USING INTERNATIONAL BEST-WORST SCALING SURVEYS
    Howell, M.
    Sautenet, B.
    Ju, A.
    Viecelli, A.
    Wong, G.
    Howard, K.
    Craig, J. C.
    Tong, A.
    NEPHROLOGY, 2017, 22 : 46 - 46
  • [4] Evaluating the Inclusion of Words and/or Pictures in Best-Worst Scaling Experiments
    Bir, Courtney
    Lai, John
    Thompson, Nathanael M.
    Widmar, Nicole Olynk
    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL FOOD & AGRIBUSINESS MARKETING, 2022, 34 (04) : 343 - 367
  • [5] Eliciting patient preferences, priorities and trade-offs for outcomes following kidney transplantation: a pilot best-worst scaling survey
    Howell, Martin
    Wong, Germaine
    Rose, John
    Tong, Allison
    Craig, Jonathan C.
    Howard, Kirsten
    BMJ OPEN, 2016, 6 (01):
  • [6] Parent clinical trial priorities for fragile X syndrome: a best-worst scaling
    Turbitt, Erin
    D'Amanda, Celeste
    Hyman, Sarah
    Weber, Jayne Dixon
    Bridges, John F. P.
    Peay, Holly L.
    Biesecker, Barbara B.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2021, 29 (08) : 1245 - 1251
  • [7] Servicing in Sponsorship: A Best-Worst Scaling Empirical Analysis
    O'Reilly, Norm
    Huybers, Twan
    JOURNAL OF SPORT MANAGEMENT, 2015, 29 (02) : 155 - 169
  • [8] A Systematic Review Comparing the Acceptability, Validity and Concordance of Discrete Choice Experiments and Best-Worst Scaling for Eliciting Preferences in Healthcare
    Whitty, Jennifer A.
    Goncalves, Ana Sofia Oliveira
    PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2018, 11 (03): : 301 - 317
  • [10] Most and least important attributes for domestic travel: A best-worst scaling approach
    Lee, Soyeun Olivia
    Kim, JooHyang
    Han, Heesup
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2022, 13