Characteristics of Premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode (2014) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 229-254
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 229... ...
E-1 A p p e n d i x e Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice Contents E-1 Model Formulation E-1 Model Specification E-3 Summary of Variables E-4 Model Results Model Formulation The mode choice model is the second step in the decision process and models the choice of the mode given the alternatives that are present in the choice set. We use both the RP and SP data and estimate a joint model.
|
From page 230... ...
E-2 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode entire survey data collection effort in this project resulted in the compilation of both RP and SP survey components that together provide a realistic depiction of travel choices made by individuals as well as key insights into the types of trade-offs that drive traveler mode choice behavior. In order to maximize the utilization of data collected in this project, the project team developed joint RP-SP model systems for Chicago and Charlotte in which the RP choice and SP choice were estimated in a joint simultaneous equations model system that included a RP-SP scaling coefficient that accounted for the differing variance of the error term in the respective equations of the simultaneous equations model system.
|
From page 231... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-3 question. The composition of the choice set therefore varies across individuals in the RP portion of the model.
|
From page 232... ...
E-4 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode case, the best-fit model specification was adopted with a view to examining whether the inclusion of an awareness and consideration component added significant value in terms of goodness-of-fit and predictive power. It was found that mode choice models with awareness and consideration choice sets produced significantly better log-likelihoods than those without constraints on the choice sets.
|
From page 233... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-5 Chicago compared to Charlotte and Salt Lake City are counterintuitive, but the inconsistency in travel time estimates among the three cities may make these types of comparisons more difficult. Salt Lake City Models Separate multinomial logit (MNL)
|
From page 234... ...
E-6 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode TABLE E-1. Final model estimation results for work trips.
|
From page 235... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-7 population and should be explored further. Females were found to be more inclined to use auto than males.
|
From page 236... ...
E-8 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode Two out of the three premium transit attributes were significant. Modern stop design was not statistically significant in influencing the mode choice probabilities.
|
From page 237... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-9 A couple of sociodemographic variables were entered into the model specification. Individuals aged over 35 years and less than 64 years had a higher tendency to use the auto than the transit modes, presumably due to lifecycle-stage effects that demand more trip chaining and serve-passenger/serve-child type trips.
|
From page 238... ...
E-10 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode TABLE E-3. Chicago multinomial mode choice model.
|
From page 239... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-11 TABLE E-3. (Continued)
|
From page 240... ...
E-12 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode expectations. Similarly, wait time also presents significant negative coefficients, and the coefficient on wait time is twice that of IVTT for commute mode choice and about 50 percent higher than that of IVTT for non-commute mode choice.
|
From page 241... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-13 Females are less inclined to select transit modes for their commute travel, perhaps because of the need to link non-commute stops to the commute journey making the use of transit modes rather difficult. A review of National Household Travel Survey (NHTS)
|
From page 242... ...
E-14 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode commute travel. In combining the findings from the awareness and consideration model with the choice model, it appears that a person needs to be very informed about transit to be aware of, consider, and choose the bus mode.
|
From page 243... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-15 TABLE E-4. Charlotte multinomial mode choice model.
|
From page 244... ...
E-16 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode TABLE E-4. (Continued)
|
From page 245... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-17 With respect to level-of-service attributes, access time is found to negatively impact transit mode choice as evidenced by the negative coefficients on this variable for all transit mode alternatives. This variable only appears in the SP choice utility equation, but the negative sign is consistent with descriptive statistics presented earlier in this appendix for Chicago and Salt Lake City, where it was found that 90 percent of respondents would not walk more than 20 minutes to access transit.
|
From page 246... ...
E-18 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode not serve multi-stop trip chaining needs well. Females are less likely to choose transit for their commute travel, a finding that is consistent with that of the Chicago context -- once again demonstrating that shorter commutes and the need to link non-work stops with the commute journey contribute to lowering the utility of choosing transit alternatives for females.
|
From page 247... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-19 Those willing to walk no more than 2 minutes are less likely to use transit for the commute trip, a finding that is consistent with that found in Chicago. In the Chicago case study, this variable also had a negative impact on transit utility for non-commute travel, but such a finding is not obtained in the Charlotte case study.
|
From page 248... ...
E-20 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode TABLE E-5 presents the results of computing equivalent minutes of IVTT for the Chicago sample. It is found that access time is generally considered two to four times more onerous than IVTT, while waiting time is considered about 1.5 to two times more onerous.
|
From page 249... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-21 TABLE E-5. (Continued)
|
From page 250... ...
E-22 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode Equivalent values of travel time are provided for all other variables as well, including individual and household demographic variables and individual attitudinal factors. Essentially, the value for each variable represents the amount by which IVTT would have to be increased or decreased to keep the utility value of the mode unchanged when the demographic or attitudinal factor of interest were to shift by unity.
|
From page 251... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-23 TABLE E-6. Equivalent IVTT (in minutes)
|
From page 252... ...
E-24 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode TABLE E-6. (Continued)
|
From page 253... ...
Multinomial Logit Models for Mode Choice E-25 people are already riding transit regardless of the presence of those premium service attributes. For commute trips, the value of the premium amenities is about 5 IVTT minutes, which is quite similar to the values obtained in the Salt Lake City case study as well.
|
From page 254... ...
E-26 Characteristics of premium Transit Services that Affect Choice of Mode not the case in Salt Lake City, where the auto cost coefficient is quite low, or for the rail mode in Chicago, where both commute and non-commute travel appear to have similar values of travel time. In Charlotte, the low values of time are due to unreasonably low IVTT coefficients.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.