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 63
63
APPENDIX C
Tabulations for Synthesis Survey
Screener Section
Type of organization
Frequency Percent
Public transit agency 24 68.6
Consultancy 4 11.4
University 2 5.7
Metropolitan planning organization 3 8.6
Other 2 5.7
Total 35 100
Other types of organizations
Frequency Percent
Federal government 1 50
Transportation department city government 1 50
Total 2 100
General Survey Inventory Section
Frequency of conducting customer research studies
More than 4 times per year 2 to 4 times per year
Count % Count %
Origindestination surveys
3 8.60 4 11.40
Customer satisfaction surveys 4 11.40 7 20.00
Mode choice surveys 2 5.70 3 8.60
Planning surveys 5 14.30 7 20.00
Other, please specify 5 31.30 2 12.50
Frequency of conducting customer research studies (continued)
Less than once per year,
Once per year but more than every 5
years
Count % Count %
Origindestination surveys 4 11.40 6 17.10
Customer satisfaction surveys 5 14.30 11 31.40
Mode choice surveys 3 8.60 9 25.70
Planning surveys 11 31.40 4 11.40
Other, please specify 1 6.30 1 6.30
OCR for page 64
64
Frequency of conducting customer research studies (continued)
Less than every 5 years Never
Count % Count %
Origindestination surveys 11 31.40 7 20.00
Customer satisfaction surveys 7 20.00
Mode choice surveys 5 14.30 12 34.30
Planning surveys 4 11.40 4 11.40
Other, please specify 1 6.30 3 18.80
Frequency of conducting customer research studies (continued)
Don't know Total
Count % Count %
Origindestination surveys 35 100.00
Customer satisfaction surveys 1 2.90 35 100.00
Mode choice surveys 1 2.90 35 100.00
Planning surveys 35 100.00
Other, please specify 3 18.80 16 100.00
Other types of surveys
Frequency Percent
Employers, employees, product tests,
marketing, etc. 1 10.0
Household travel surveys, transit on-board
surveys 1 10.0
Interactive map studies 1 10.0
Marketing evaluation 1 10.0
New technology 1 10.0
Policy and issue analysis 1 10.0
Station evaluation, special issues, new
offers/programs related to fares, metrocard, etc.,
panel survey, safety/security issues,
communication materials copy testing, etc. 1 10.0
Tracking, market share 1 10.0
Various 1 10.0
Various transportation issues 1 10.0
Total 10 100
Organization conducts customer panel surveys repeatedly
Frequency Percent
Yes 8 22.9
No 27 77.1
Total 35 100
Organization conducts longitudinal panel surveys
Frequency Percent
Yes 4 50
No 4 50
Total 8 100
OCR for page 65
65
Organization conducts cross-sectional surveys
Frequency Percent
Yes 22 62.9
No 13 37.1
Total 35 100
OriginDestination (OD) Surveys
Recruited riders/users for OD survey
Count Column (%)
Bus 11 68.8
Subway/rapid rail 2 12.5
Commuter rail
Recruited riders/users Light rail 1 6.3
for OD survey Auto 1 6.3
No mode issues in survey 1 6.3
Recruitment not based on mode 2 12.5
Other, please specify 2 12.5
Other modes recruited
Frequency Percent
Airline 1 50
All modes 1 50
Total 2 100
Questions in OD survey about modes
Count Column (%)
Bus 13 81.3
Subway/rapid rail 2 12.5
Commuter rail 2 12.5
Questions in OD survey Light rail 1 6.3
about modes Auto 4 25
No mode issues in survey 1 6.3
Recruitment not based on mode
Other, please specify 1 6.3
Questions about other modes
Frequency Percent
All modes 1 100
OCR for page 66
66
Recruited respondents for OD survey
Count Column (%)
In person, via intercept at stations/stops 5 31.3
In person, via intercept on board transit vehicles 10 62.5
Telephone recruit 4 25
Intercept at public locations other than transit-
related
Recruited respondents E-mail recruit with clickable link 1 6.3
for OD survey
E-mail recruit with web address to paste
Web link recruit from website
Mail recruit 2 12.5
In person, via intercept at roadways/toll plazas
2 12.5
Other, please specify 1 6.3
Other recruit method
Frequency Percent
Variable message signs, press release, TMA
newsletters 1 100
Sampling method
Frequency Percent
No sampling, total population surveyed 3 18.8
Random sampling 9 56.3
Systematic sampling (every nth) 2 12.5
Convenience sampling (anyone who would
participate) 1 6.3
Other sampling method 1 6.3
Total 16 100
Other sampling method
Frequency Percent
No sampling 1 100
Type of incentives
Frequency Percent
No incentives 12 75
Incentive for each respondent 3 18.8
Other incentives 1 6.3
Total 16 100
Incentive for each respondent
Frequency Percent
$2 in advance letter and $5 per person with diary 1 33.3
Free ride 1 33.3
Promotional item 1 33.3
Total 3 100
OCR for page 67
67
Other incentives
Frequency Percent
A pen 1 100
Effectiveness of incentives
Frequency Percent
Increased response rate 125% 2 50
Dont know 2 50
Total 4 100
Administered most recent OD survey
Count Column (%)
Telephone 3 23.1
Paper 9 69.2
Administered most Computer-based, but not on Internet
recent OD survey Online web survey 1 7.7
Personal 3 23.1
Other, please specify
Response rate percentage
Frequency Percent
Dont know/not applicable 9 56.3
17 1 6.3
20 1 6.3
30 1 6.3
40 1 6.3
41 1 6.3
60 1 6.3
75 1 6.3
Total 16 100
Reason for no response rate
Frequency Percent
% returned of a 100% sample 1 20.0
205,000 riders were offered surveys, 81,100
surveys were completed and returned. Refusals
are included in base number. 1 20.0
It depends on how the survey is conducted. If it is
on-board paper OD survey, the usual response
rate is around 60%. If it is a personal/intercept
interview the response rate is around 90%. 1 20.0
Multiply recruitment rate by final completion rate
to get total response rate. See documentation at:
http://nhts.ornl.gov/2001/usersguide/chapter_4.pdf 1 20.0
Nonresponders not counted 1 20.0
Total 5 100
OCR for page 68
68
Survey data set was clean
Frequency Percent
Agree 7 43.8
Neutral 7 43.8
Disagree 2 12.5
Total 16 100
Respondents completed nearly every question of survey
Frequency Percent
Strongly agree 2 12.5
Agree 7 43.8
Neutral 6 37.5
Disagree 1 6.3
Total 16 100
Weighted data for most recent OD survey
Count Column (%)
Did not weight data 6 46.2
Weighted data for most Weighted based on ridership/traffic 6 46.2
recent OD survey Weighted based on demographics 1 7.7
Weighted based on other factors
Other factors
Frequency Percent
Ridership, by route, direction, time of day, day of
week 1 100
Total 1 100
Success of survey
Frequency Percent
Very successful 4 25
Successful 11 68.8
Neither successful nor unsuccessful 1 6.3
Total 16 100
Types of problems/issues
Frequency Percent
Technical problems: The text overlapped for some
browsers 1 1
Total 1 100
OCR for page 69
69
Reason for administering survey with more than one method
Frequency Percent
To encourage better interaction with customers 1 33.3
To improve our response rate and targets covered 1 33.3
We selected paper method in our last large OD
study since it included 24 different bus routes and
doing personal interviews required more labor
and time. When we do OD surveys in 1 or 2
routes, we usually do personal interviews that
require fewer persons. 1 33.3
Total 3 100
How research from OD survey was used
Count Column (%)
Update origindestination trip tables 5 31.3
Define traveler markets by geography 10 62.5
Determine trip purpose 9 56.3
Determine trip frequency 9 56.3
Determine distribution of station/stops used
4 25
How research from OD
survey was used Determine distribution time-of-day
facilities/system used 6 37.5
Generate demographic profile of travelers 3 18.8
Determine toll plazas/ramps used
Determine proportion through vs. external to
internal trips 1 6.3
Other, please specify 2 12.5
Other purposes
Frequency Percent
Fare analysis 1 50.0
Survey still being conducted. The results will be
used to understand primarily bus transit riders'
park and ride needs, other transit issues along the
I-78 Corridor. 1 50.0
Total 2 100
Results of OD survey presented to
Count Column (%)
General public 5 31.3
Customers 1 6.3
Constituents 3 18.8
Results of OD survey Internal clients/management 14 87.5
presented to External clients 6 37.5
Faculty/staff/students 2 12.5
Other, please specify 1 6.3
Research results were not presented
OCR for page 70
70
Customer Satisfaction (CD) Surveys
Recruited riders/users for CS survey
Count Column (%)
Bus 9 64.3
Subway/rapid rail 1 7.1
Commuter rail 3 21.4
Recruited riders/users Light rail
for CS survey Auto 1 7.1
No mode issues in survey
Recruitment not based on mode 2 14.3
Other, please specify 1 7.1
Other modes recruited
Frequency Percent
Paratransit 1 100
Questions in CS survey about modes
Count Column (%)
Bus 15 75
Subway/rapid rail 3 15
Commuter rail 2 10
Questions in CS survey Light rail 2 10
about modes Auto 4 20
No mode issues in survey 1 5
Recruitment not based on mode
Other, please specify 1 5
Questions about other modes
Frequency Percent
Paratransit vehicles 1 100
Sampling method
Frequency Percent
No sampling, total population surveyed 1 6.3
Random sampling 9 56.3
Convenience sampling (anyone who would
participate) 4 25
Other sampling method 2 12.5
Total 16 100
Other sampling method
Frequency Percent
Every rider on a stratified sample of trips 1 50
Random sample of paratransit program enrollees,
active in the 3 months prior to the survey 1 50
Total 2 100
OCR for page 71
71
Type of incentives
Frequency Percent
No incentives 11 68.8
Lottery conducted with prizes 3 18.8
Incentive for each respondent 1 6.3
Other incentives 1 6.3
Total 16 100
Lottery prizes
Frequency Percent
Digital music player 1 33.3
Free 30-day pass 1 33.3
Monthly pass 1 33.3
Total 3 100
Incentive for each respondent
Frequency Percent
Promotional item 1 100
Other incentives
Frequency Percent
A pen 1 100
Effectiveness of incentives
Frequency Percent
Do not know 5 100
Administered most recent CS survey
Count Column (%)
Telephone 8 50
Paper 9 56.3
Administered most Computer-based, but not on Internet
recent CS survey Online web survey
Personal 2 12.5
Other, please specify
Response rate percentage
Frequency Percent
Don't know/not applicable 9 56.3
14 1 6.3
30 1 6.3
40 1 6.3
50 1 6.3
55 1 6.3
75 1 6.3
90 1 6.3
Total 16 100
OCR for page 72
72
Reason for no response rate
Frequency Percent
% returned of a 100% sample 1 25.0
All surveys have a unique sequential ID number.
We know how many we hand out and we know how
many we got back. 1 25.0
Estimate based on observation. We ask riders to
only complete one survey during survey period,
which makes this estimate more difficult. This
estimate may be high, but the response rate is very
high; most riders are eager to complete a survey.
1 25.0
We required a minimum sample size from the
consultant. 1 25.0
Total 4 100
Survey data set was clean
Frequency Percent
Strongly agree 3 18.8
Agree 9 56.3
Neutral 3 18.8
Disagree 1 6.3
Total 16 100
Respondents completed nearly every question of survey
Frequency Percent
Strongly agree 6 37.5
Agree 9 56.3
Neutral 1 6.3
Total 16 100
Weighted data for most recent CS survey
Count Column (%)
Did not weight data 10 62.5
Weighted data for most Weighted based on ridership/traffic 6 37.5
recent CS survey Weighted based on demographics
Weighted based on other factors
Success of survey
Frequency Percent
Very successful 8 50
Successful 6 37.5
Somewhat unsuccessful 2 12.5
Total 16 100
OCR for page 73
73
Types of problems/issues
Frequency Percent
I do not respect the methodology used and I think
that the analysis is mediocre at best. The supplier
is paid by our service provider. 1 50.0
We did not state, one per person 1 50.0
Total 2 100
Reason for administering survey with more than one method
Frequency Percent
Annually a paper self-administered survey is
conducted which is more detailed. Later in the
year a telephone survey is done with a smaller
sample and fewer questions. 1 33.3
Intercepts via paper; actual survey via telephone
because of length 1 33.3
To cover all target audiences 1 33.3
Total 3 100
How research from CS survey was used
Count Column (%)
Update origindestination trip tables 14 87.5
Define traveler markets by geography 2 12.5
Determine trip purpose 11 68.8
Determine trip frequency 9 56.3
Determine distribution of station/stops used 5 31.3
How research from CS
survey was used Determine distribution time-of-day
facilities/system used 12 75
Generate demographic profile of travelers 10 62.5
Determine toll plazas/ramps used 5 31.3
Determine proportion through vs. external to
internal trips
Results of CS survey presented to
Count Column (%)
General public 8 50
Customers 4 25
Constituents 3 18.8
Results of CS survey Internal clients/management 15 93.8
presented to External clients 2 12.5
Faculty/staff/students 2 12.5
Other, please specify
Research results were not presented
OCR for page 94
94
Primary advice offered to transit organizations considering web-based surveys
Frequency Percent
Always give them an out if it does not apply 1 9.1
Be aware of the survey population vis-à-vis your
target population. 1 9.1
Combine it with other data collection techniques
that are a good fit with the audience.
1 9.1
Consider the target market segment and assess
Internet availability among these people. 1 9.1
Do not consider web-based surveys as a cost-
saving strategy to substitute existing random
sampling surveys. Use it better to complement
your existing research tools. 1 9.1
Excellent way to go 1 9.1
However long you think it will take to implement the
survey, double it! 1 9.1
It is good for many purposes, but not all. 1 9.1
Make certain to incorporate with other methods,
complementary methods to get greater response.
1 9.1
None 1 9.1
None to offer 1 9.1
Total 11 100
Other advice offered to transit organizations considering web-based surveys
Frequency Percent
Check out the latest web survey services. They are
becoming less expensive and more user friendly--
especially if you are doing the survey yourself.
1 16.6
Know the population you are surveying and be
extra alert if respondents differ from what you know
to be true for your population. 1 16.6
Make sure the data format is what you are looking
for. Many packages are very hard to use with
software such as SPSS for additional analysis. 1 16.6
Need supplementary surveys, on board, etc., to
establish web responder share of population. 1 16.6
Provide incentives for participants 1 16.6
Web-based surveys will not reach less literate
people, or people without computers. If that is your
primary ridership, then web-based surveys may not
capture the attitudes or behavior of these
customers. Also, be creative with outreach. For
example, we sent postcards to the libraries in our
region, asking them to post the card in their
Internet access area. We have also used variable
message signs with the simple website address to
capture motorists. 1 16.6
Total 6 100
OCR for page 95
95
Primary objective of web survey
Frequency Percent
Collect data from those who would not respond in
other ways 1 9.1
Determine attitude toward proposed new service
1 9.1
Evaluate features of a cross-agency regional fare
card 1 9.1
Learn about attitudes; test a model 1 9.1
Not sure 1 9.1
Obtain comments in the customers' own words.
Conduct low-cost, automated program evaluation.
1 9.1
Solicit customer feedback on their experiences with
the interactive map. Determine if there are any fatal
design flaws that need immediate attention.
1 9.1
To gain a greater understanding of what it takes to
get people to ride the express buses from
Pennsylvania and western New Jersey to Newark
and NYC 1 9.1
To gather a large sample 1 9.1
To give options; for example, if someone was not
on bus when survey was administered, they can
still contribute. 1 9.1
To provide an easy tool for the end user and our
staff to gather data on work trips for employees at
large employers in the county. 1 9.1
Total 11 100
Other objective of web survey
Frequency Percent
Stated preference sensitivity factors 1 50.0
Test messaging 1 50.0
Total 2 100
How web survey was designed
Frequency Percent
Designed in-house using web page layout software
2 18.2
Designed with an online survey development tool
3 27.3
Contracted out to a consulting or web development
firm 6 54.5
Total 11 100
How and where web survey was hosted
Frequency Percent
Hosted on your own organization's computers 3 27.3
Hosted by a consulting or web development firm
5 45.5
Hosted by a survey provider 3 27.3
Total 11 100
OCR for page 96
96
Technologies used to create/conduct web questionnaire
Count Column (%)
ASP 1 9.1
ASP.net
PHP
Perl
MS SQL
MySQL
Technologies used to Oracle
create/conduct web
questionnaire MS Access
Java 1 9.1
JSP
ColdFusion
Third-party website 1 9.1
Other, please specify 1 9.1
Do not know 9 81.8
Other means used to create survey
Frequency Percent
SurveyTracker software 1 100
How survey questionnaire differs from other web versions
Very similar Similar
Count Percent Count Percent
Question ordering 6 54.50 2 18.20
Question wording 7 63.60 1 9.10
Page format 3 27.30 3 27.30
Use of skip patterns 5 45.50 2 18.20
Other comparison of web questionnaire to other versions 1 25.00
How survey questionnaire differs from other web versions (continued)
Neither similar nor different Different
Count Percent Count Percent
Question ordering 3 27.30
Question wording 3 27.30
Page format 3 27.30 2 18.20
Use of skip patterns 3 27.30 1 9.10
Other comparison of web questionnaire to other versions 2 50.00
How survey questionnaire differs from other web versions (continued)
Very different Total
Count Percent Count Percent
Question ordering 11 100.00
Question wording 11 100.00
Page format 11 100.00
Use of skip patterns 11 100.00
Other comparison of web questionnaire to other versions 1 25.00 4 100.00
OCR for page 97
97
Other comparison of web questionnaire to other versions
Frequency Percent
Internal error checking 1 25.0
Not applicable; the survey was only web-based 1 25.0
There were no other questionnaires 1 25.0
Void 1 25.0
Total 4 100
Days in field
Frequency Percent
Do not know 3 27.3
7 1 9.1
21 1 9.1
30 1 9.1
35 1 9.1
45 1 9.1
60 1 9.1
90 2 18.2
Total 11 100
Number of recruits
Frequency Percent
Do not know 9 81.8
1,000 1 9.1
No sample 1 9.1
Total 11 100
Number of completes
Frequency Percent
Don't know 3 27.3
20 1 9.1
210 1 9.1
250 1 9.1
501 1 9.1
1,000 1 9.1
2,809 1 9.1
4,000 1 9.1
10,460 1 9.1
Total 11 100
Number of incompletes
Frequency Percent
Do not know 8 72.7
0 2 18.2
5 1 9.1
Total 11 100
OCR for page 98
98
Web-based percentage of completes
Frequency Percent
Don't know 2 18.2
5 1 9.1
10 1 9.1
80 1 9.1
90 1 9.1
100 5 45.5
Total 11 100
Support provided to web respondents
Count Column (%)
Toll-free telephone number 2 20
E-mail support 3 30
Link with FAQs
Links with context-specific help on web page 1 10
Other, please specify
None of above 5 50
Survey design plan followed to conduct research
Frequency Percent
In-house expertise 5 45.5
Survey design software instructions 1 9.1
Other, please specify 1 9.1
Did not follow a survey design plan 1 9.1
Do not know 3 27.3
Total 11 100
Other survey design plan
Frequency Percent
E-mails sent by individual agencies to their own
lists of customers 1 100
Collect geographical information in web survey
Frequency Percent
Yes, data coded by latitude and longitude 7 63.6
Yes, data coded by zip code 4 36.4
Total 11 100
Have used online geocoding in any web surveys conducted
Frequency Percent
No 11 100
OCR for page 99
99
Ways to ensure e-mail invitations not considered spam
Count Column (%)
Third party or hosted e-mail solution
E-mail sender reputation monitor 1 9.1
Sender policy framework (SPF) or sender
Ways to ensure e-mail authentication
invitations not considered
Tools to identify common phrases used in spam 1 9.1
spam
Other, please specify 3 27.3
Don't know 3 27.3
Nothing 3 27.3
Other methods used to ensure e-mail not considered spam
Frequency Percent
Did not solicit via e-mail, and if I checked this off
earlier, I was wrong. 1 33.3
Did not use e-mail invitations 1 33.3
Use e-mail from transit agencies to existing
customers 1 33.3
Total 3 100
Reminded respondents to take survey
Frequency Percent
Yes 4 36.4
No 7 63.6
Total 11 100
Number of times reminded respondents
Frequency Percent
1 2 50
2 1 25
3 1 25
Total 4 100
Types of reminders used for web survey
Column
Count
(%)
E-mail 3 75
Types of reminders used Telephone 1 25
for web survey Mailed pieces 1 25
Other, please specify
Increased response rate after first reminder
Frequency Percent
No 4 100
Increased response rate after second reminder
Frequency Percent
No 2 100
Total 2 100
OCR for page 100
100
Increased response rate after third reminder
Frequency Percent
No 1 100
Total 1 100
Total cost of web survey (dollars)
Frequency Percent
Do not know 9 81.8
100 1 9.1
3,000 1 9.1
Total 11 100
In-house costs for web survey (dollars)
Frequency Percent
Do not know 10 90.9
0 1 9.1
Total 11 100
Third-party costs for web survey (dollars)
Frequency Percent
Do not know 7 63.6
0 1 9.1
100 1 9.1
500 1 9.1
3,000 1 9.1
Total 11 100
Types of costs associated with web survey
Column
Count
(%)
Hosting costs 8 72.7
Types of costs associated Recruitment costs 4 36.4
with web survey Incentive costs 3 27.3
Other, please specify 3 27.3
Other costs associated with web survey
Frequency Percent
Programming 1 33.3
Staff costs 1 33.3
Survey was part of overall study 1 33.3
Total 3 100
OCR for page 101
101
Most important Best Practice for conducting web-based research
Frequency Percent
Careful selection of representative sample for
population/market being surveyed 1 9.1
Clearly identify sender and purpose of the e-mail
invitations 1 9.1
Develop a willing database of respondents with
interest in transit 1 9.1
Do not use e-mail or the web to recruit 1 9.1
Keep it simple; if it is too long and too detailed,
you'll lose your respondents. 1 9.1
Make sure sources are reliable, reputable 1 9.1
Make survey consistent with other methods 1 9.1
None 1 9.1
Sample size large enough to support inferences 1 9.1
Thorough testing of the survey tool 1 9.1
Understanding and accounting for all of the
sampling biases 1 9.1
Total 11 100
Second most important Best Practice for conducting web-based research
Frequency Percent
Budget enough time and resources. It will take
more than you initially think. 1 9.1
Clear, concise wording of questions 1 9.1
Ease of use (intuitive tool) 1 9.1
Easily accessible on website 1 9.1
Ensuring that the respondent can go "back"
without erasing data 1 9.1
Get a contact in case all the information is not
there. 1 9.1
Make sure that respondents can leave the survey
and rejoin later at the point they left off. 1 9.1
None 1 9.1
Provide an incentive 1 9.1
Provide feedback options to respondents 1 9.1
Yes 1 9.1
Total 11 100
OCR for page 102
Third most important Best Practice for conducting web-based research
Frequency Percent
Allowing a respondent to save a long survey and
return to it later, or print it out to be filled out
ahead of time 1 9.1
Approach it with creativity and a sense of humor
1 9.1
Convenient access for target audience 1 9.1
Do not force responses 1 9.1
Do not know 1 9.1
Don't spend 90% gathering 1 9.1
Logical progression of screens/questions 1 9.1
Make sure survey is not too long or repetitive as
this will reduce data quality. 1 9.1
None 1 9.1
Remind people 1 9.1
Yes 1 9.1
Total 11 100
Information about current web-based research
Frequency Percent
It was not a panel survey so much as it was a
longitudinal telephone survey 1 33.3
The Metrolink rider panel is in existence since
2001. We are periodically replenishing the sample
with new riders (< one year tenure) to maintain
proportional representation and to be able to
survey new-rider sub-populations. There are
different ways to calculate attrition rates (i.e., non-
respondents or non-opts). The most recent panel
update had the following results:
Final count of panel members who did not
respond--of the 3,520 members with e-mail
addresses as of 11/02/05, 1,458 responded, 386
e-mails were undeliverable, and 1,676 did not
respond. 1 33.3
We didn't do a panel study, and if I indicated this
earlier, I was wrong. 1 33.3
Total 3 100
Percent of customers with Internet access at home and work
Frequency Percent
60 2 5.7
75 2 5.7
85 1 2.9
90 1 2.9
Total 6 17.1
Not reported 29 82.9
Total 35 100
Percent of customers with Internet access only at home
Frequency Percent
40 1 2.9
50 1 2.9
90 1 2.9
Total 3 8.6
Not reported 32 91.4
Total 35 100
OCR for page 103
103
Percent of customers with Internet access only at work
Frequency Percent
20 1 2.9
30 1 2.9
63 1 2.9
75 1 2.9
Total 4 11.4
Not reported 31 88.6
Total 35 100
Do not know percentages of Internet access
Frequency Percent
Selected 26 74.3
Not reported 9 25.7
Total 35 100
Other ways organization uses web
Column
Count
(%)
Intranet 29 82.9
Website 33 94.3
Other ways organization Trip planner 17 48.6
uses web E-commerce 11 31.4
Internal research 10 28.6
Other, please specify 2 5.7
Other ways organization uses the web
Frequency Percent
Real-time vehicle arrivals at the stop level 1 50
Varies 1 50
Total 2 100
Rating organization on research and presentation of research
Very good Good
Count Percent Count Percent
Rate organization: Promotes web-based customer research 1 2.90 12 34.30
Rate organization: Promotes web/Internet initiatives (other than
web-based customer research) 11 31.40 13 37.10
Rate organization: Promotes customer research
9 26.50 16 47.10
Rate organization: Promotes communication of research results
to customers 5 14.30 8 22.90
OCR for page 104
104
Rating organization on research and presentation of research (continued)
Neutral Poor
Count Percent Count Percent
Rate organization: Promotes web-based customer research
13 37.10 6 17.10
Rate organization: Promotes web/Internet initiatives (other than
web-based customer research) 7 20.00 3 8.60
Rate organization: Promotes customer research 5 14.70 3 8.80
Rate organization: Promotes communication of research results
to customers 14 40.00 5 14.30
Rate organization: Promotes web-based customer research 3 8.60 35 100.00
Rate organization: Promotes web/Internet initiatives (other than
web-based customer research) 1 2.90 35 100.00
Rate organization: Promotes customer research 1 2.90 34 100.00
Rate organization: Promotes communication of research results
to customers 3 8.60 35 100.00
Involved with web-based surveys that affected transit research
Frequency Percent
Yes 10 28.6
No 25 71.4
Total 35 100
Description of research
Frequency Percent
No answer 8 80
Research to determine community attitudes
about a local referendum 1 10
Research using web-based survey combining
geographic information systems (GIS) for
household travel/activity survey. Small
Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
project/U.S.DOT. 1 10
Total 10 100
