Transit path-choice models that use revealed preference and stated preference data

被引:0
|
作者
Lam, SH [1 ]
Xie, F [1 ]
机构
[1] Nanyang Technol Univ, Sch Civil & Environm Engn, Ctr Transportat Studies, Singapore 639798, Singapore
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
A study was conducted of the trip-making behavior of transit users in a complex transit network with input of travel information in an increasingly complex and information-rich transit environment. A modeling framework to assess the preferences of commuters toward a range of factors and alternatives was produced. Path-choice models on transit services of Singapore were developed using mixed revealed preference (RP) and stated preference (SP) data. RP models were estimated using data obtained in the 1997 Household Interview Survey. An SP survey based on,44 scenarios was conducted, which yielded 307 responses at 12 different locations in Singapore. Models based on pure RP data, pure SP data, and mixed RP and SP data were estimated. For transit users, the decision of which path to take relies on the trade-offs among attributes of journey time and other factors. The significant attributes in the models indicate that the transit path choice is a multi-criteria decision-making process. This suggests that the usual way of transit path assignment in many planning models based on single criterion, such as minimum time, may not be appropriate in choice situations. Path-choice models developed and calibrated provide important fundamental knowledge of the way transit services are, to be utilized by travelers, for use in a wide range of applications, such as multimodal transit service planning models, transit demand modeling, and integration of the transit path-choice models in intelligent transportation systems applications.
引用
收藏
页码:58 / 65
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] REBATES, LOANS, AND CUSTOMERS CHOICE OF APPLIANCE EFFICIENCY LEVEL - COMBINING STATED AND REVEALED-PREFERENCE DATA
    TRAIN, KE
    ATHERTON, T
    ENERGY JOURNAL, 1995, 16 (01): : 55 - 69
  • [32] Using stated preference and revealed preference modeling to evaluate prescribing decisions
    Mark, TL
    Swait, J
    HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2004, 13 (06) : 563 - 573
  • [33] Predictive validity in stated choice studies: A before and after comparison with revealed preference
    Beaton, P
    Chen, QZ
    Meghdir, H
    INFORMATION INTELLIGENCE AND SYSTEMS, VOLS 1-4, 1996, : 205 - 209
  • [34] On the meaningfulness of testing preference axioms in stated preference discrete choice experiments
    Hougaard, Jens Leth
    Tjur, Tue
    Osterdal, Lars Peter
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2012, 13 (04): : 409 - 417
  • [35] On the meaningfulness of testing preference axioms in stated preference discrete choice experiments
    Jens Leth Hougaard
    Tue Tjur
    Lars Peter Østerdal
    The European Journal of Health Economics, 2012, 13 : 409 - 417
  • [36] Joint estimation of angler revealed preference site selection and stated preference choice experiment recreation data considering attribute non-attendance
    Hindsley, Paul
    Landry, Craig E.
    Schnier, Kurt
    Whitehead, John C.
    Zarei, Mohammadreza
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND POLICY, 2023, 12 (01) : 44 - 62
  • [37] Use of Mixed Stated and Revealed Preference Data for Crowding Valuation on Public Transport in Santiago, Chile
    Batarce, Marco
    Carlos Munoz, Juan
    de Dios Ortuzar, Juan
    Raveau, Sebastian
    Mojica, Carlos
    Rios, Ramiro Alberto
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD, 2015, (2535) : 73 - 78
  • [38] Revealed preferences for leisure time from stated preference data.
    Shaikh, S
    Larson, DM
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 1998, 80 (05) : 1180 - 1180
  • [39] Estimating suburban preferences for integrated public transit and ridesourcing services through a revealed-preference/stated-preference survey
    Terry, Jacob
    Bachmann, Chris
    JOURNAL OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, 2023, 25
  • [40] A stated preference freight mode choice model
    Norojono, O
    Young, W
    TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND TECHNOLOGY, 2003, 26 (02) : 195 - 212