Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 56
56 Standardized Procedures for Personal Travel Surveys see much innovation in the future. There is a diversity of opinion about some specific aspects of instrument design, which are very difficult to resolve without extensive research. In the planning stages of this project, it was suggested that standardized procedures be devel- oped around three main areas. First, it was considered necessary to address some basics of design such as typefaces and sizes, use of color, arrows, boxes, and other devices to direct respondents; the use of clip art; and the survey instrument length, etc. It was intended that a primer document would be developed to provide some basic guidelines in survey instrument design, which would be sup- ported by an example survey instrument developed in accordance with such guidelines. In our opinion, this idea has considerable merit and is worth pursuing in the future. It is important to note that any such work should incorporate the results of other tasks performed as part of this proj- ect such as minimum questions, consistent categories for answers, and consistent question word- ings. Guidelines on ordering of questions, although not developed as part of this project, should be observed even if only in the form of the basic principles outlined in the previous section. The second major issue that needs to be examined is whether printed surveys used in CATI or CAPI surveys should contain all questions that will be asked in the interview or if it is necessary only to ask a sub-set of questions with the remaining questions being asked at the time of the inter- view. To test this, it would appear to be necessary to conduct some focus-group testing, together with a series of pilot tests of the two options, to see both what respondents prefer and whether there is any noticeable difference in the responses obtained. Evidence from focus groups conducted for surveys in Dallas and Southern California suggests that respondents prefer not to have all questions in travel diaries and that this might increase response rates. Further research is required to exam- ine trade-offs in completeness of responses and response rates. Finally, there is a need for some consistency to be developed in the design of instructions for respondents. Many past transportation surveys have included extensive written instructions, which a review of the survey results shows either were not read or at least were not understood and applied by respondents. It appears to be clear that people simply will not bother to read extensive instruc- tions, and intuitively this suggests there is a need to move toward more graphic instructions, requir- ing fewer specific instructions to be read. It is recommended that a specific survey be developed to evaluate the impact of different types of instructions on responses. 4.2.9 I-7: Multitasking of Activities All survey instruments in transportation continue to ask questions as though people only undertake a single activity at a time. It is very apparent that people perform various multi- tasked activities throughout the day. These include such activities as driving and talking on a cellular phone; eating and watching TV; traveling on public transit and performing work activ- ities such as reading, reviewing, using a laptop, etc. By asking questions on a single activity only, much information is missing from typical surveys, and purposes are probably misstated by this simplification. This item was not considered in any detail in this project and it is suggested that recent and cur- rent travel surveys and the literature on time use (Robinson, 1977 and 1991; Robinson and God- bey, 1997) be consulted to determine whether it is possible and reasonable to define a standard question format for obtaining information on multitasking of activities. If such standards are approached, it will be necessary to undertake field testing and possible focus-group testing of the question structure and wording and to investigate its overall effect on instrument design and com- plexity. From the viewpoint of the blurring of work and other activities, the increasing ability of people to multitask as a result of technological advances, and the potential impacts of these on daily travel and activity patterns, this would appear to be an important area for further research and the development of standardized procedures.