IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eejocm/v34y2020ics1755534519301034.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An assessment of the ecological validity of immersive videos in stated preference surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Rossetti, Tomás
  • Hurtubia, Ricardo

Abstract

Images, videos, and virtual reality have been widely used in the literature to portray complex attributes to survey respondents. It is reasonable to expect immersive videos will be increasingly used in the future due to their decreasing costs and potentially more accurate representation of reality. Nevertheless, the literature has not sufficiently tested their ecological validity, which can be defined as the extent to which the results they produce in a laboratory setting, such as in choice experiments, are close enough to the results that would have been obtained in a real-life setting. The following work presents a comparison of two representation formats, images and immersive videos, to verify if they can elicit the same perceptual responses of pedestrians as real environments. To do this, a survey was carried out using these two formats as well as on-site interviews. Using a MIMIC approach, and after controlling for all relevant sociodemographic variables, results show that perceptions elicited through immersive videos were not different from those elicited in reality in one qualitative variable (perception of safety and security) out of three relevant ones identified. Furthermore, results also show immersive videos can induce a smaller distortion than photographs.

Suggested Citation

  • Rossetti, Tomás & Hurtubia, Ricardo, 2020. "An assessment of the ecological validity of immersive videos in stated preference surveys," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 34(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:34:y:2020:i:c:s1755534519301034
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2019.100198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534519301034
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jocm.2019.100198?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Palma, David & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Rizzi, Luis Ignacio & Guevara, Cristian Angelo & Casaubon, Gerard & Ma, Huiqin, 2016. "Modelling choice when price is a cue for quality: a case study with Chinese consumers," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 24-39.
    2. Rid, Wolfgang & Haider, Wolfgang & Ryffel, Andrea & Beardmore, Ben, 2018. "Visualisations in Choice Experiments: Comparing 3D Film-sequences and Still-images to Analyse Housing Development Alternatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 203-217.
    3. Philip Salesses & Katja Schechtner & César A Hidalgo, 2013. "The Collaborative Image of The City: Mapping the Inequality of Urban Perception," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(7), pages 1-12, July.
    4. Marjanne Sevenant & Marc Antrop, 2011. "Landscape Representation Validity: A Comparison between On-site Observations and Photographs with Different Angles of View," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 363-385.
    5. Tirachini, Alejandro & Hurtubia, Ricardo & Dekker, Thijs & Daziano, Ricardo A., 2017. "Estimation of crowding discomfort in public transport: Results from Santiago de Chile," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 311-326.
    6. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Jude, Simon, 2009. "Reducing gain-loss asymmetry: A virtual reality choice experiment valuing land use change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 106-118, July.
    7. Paula Iglesias & Margarita Greene & Juan de Dios Ortúzar, 2013. "On the perception of safety in low income neighbourhoods: using digital images in a stated choice experiment," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 193-210, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Rossetti, Tomás & Guevara, C. Angelo & Galilea, Patricia & Hurtubia, Ricardo, 2018. "Modeling safety as a perceptual latent variable to assess cycling infrastructure," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 252-265.
    9. Tomás Rossetti & Verónica Saud & Ricardo Hurtubia, 2019. "I want to ride it where I like: measuring design preferences in cycling infrastructure," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 697-718, June.
    10. Mulley, Corinne & Ho, Chinh & Ho, Loan & Hensher, David & Rose, John, 2018. "Will bus travellers walk further for a more frequent service? An international study using a stated preference approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 88-97.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alvaro Rodriguez-Valencia & Jose Agustin Vallejo-Borda & German A. Barrero & Hernan Alberto Ortiz-Ramirez, 2022. "Towards an enriched framework of service evaluation for pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure: acknowledging the power of users’ perceptions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 791-814, June.
    2. Navarrete-Hernandez, Pablo & Rennert, Lindiwe & Balducci, Alessandro, 2023. "An evaluation of the impact of COVID-19 safety measures in public transit spaces on riders' Worry of virus contraction," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 1-12.
    3. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    4. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    5. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    6. Yanyan Zhang & Meng Wang & Junyi Li & Jianxia Chang & Huan Lu, 2022. "Do Greener Urban Streets Provide Better Emotional Experiences? An Experimental Study on Chinese Tourists," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-21, December.
    7. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods," Papers 2102.02945, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arellana, J. & Garzón, L. & Estrada, J. & Cantillo, V., 2020. "On the use of virtual immersive reality for discrete choice experiments to modelling pedestrian behaviour," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    2. Shr, Yau-Huo (Jimmy) & Ready, Richard & Orland, Brian & Echols, Stuart, 2019. "How Do Visual Representations Influence Survey Responses? Evidence from a Choice Experiment on Landscape Attributes of Green Infrastructure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 375-386.
    3. Tirachini, Alejandro & Proost, Stef, 2021. "Transport taxes and subsidies in developing countries: The effect of income inequality aversion," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 25(C).
    4. Broberg, Thomas & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Persson, Lars, 2021. "Household preferences for load restrictions: Is there an effect of pro-environmental framing?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Kim, Sung Hoo & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2023. "Finite mixture (or latent class) modeling in transportation: Trends, usage, potential, and future directions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 134-173.
    6. Mix, Richard & Hurtubia, Ricardo & Raveau, Sebastián, 2022. "Optimal location of bike-sharing stations: A built environment and accessibility approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 126-142.
    7. Parsons, George & Yan, Lingxiao, 2021. "Anchoring on visual cues in a stated preference survey: The case of siting offshore wind power projects," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    8. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    9. Rid, Wolfgang & Haider, Wolfgang & Ryffel, Andrea & Beardmore, Ben, 2018. "Visualisations in Choice Experiments: Comparing 3D Film-sequences and Still-images to Analyse Housing Development Alternatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 203-217.
    10. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods," Papers 2102.02945, arXiv.org.
    11. Márquez, Luis & Soto, Jose J., 2021. "Integrating perceptions of safety and bicycle theft risk in the analysis of cycling infrastructure preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 285-301.
    12. Valenzuela-Levi, N. & Echiburu, T. & Correa, J. & Hurtubia, R. & Muñoz, J.C., 2021. "Housing and accessibility after the COVID-19 pandemic: Rebuilding for resilience, equity and sustainable mobility," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 48-60.
    13. Mokas, Ilias & Lizin, Sebastien & Brijs, Tom & Witters, Nele & Malina, Robert, 2021. "Can immersive virtual reality increase respondents’ certainty in discrete choice experiments? A comparison with traditional presentation formats," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    14. Tomás Rossetti & Ricardo Daziano, 2023. "How does self-assessed health status relate to preferences for cycling infrastructure? A latent class and latent variable approach," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 913-928, June.
    15. Genius Murwirapachena & Johane Dikgang, 2022. "The effects of presentation formats in choice experiments," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 24(3), pages 421-445, July.
    16. Han-Shen Chen, 2020. "The Construction and Validation of a Sustainable Tourism Development Evaluation Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-20, October.
    17. Bond, Craig A. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bond, Jennifer Keeling, 2008. "What to Choose? The Value of Label Claims to Fresh Produce Consumers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-26.
    18. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.
    19. Bouscasse, Hélène & de Lapparent, Matthieu, 2019. "Perceived comfort and values of travel time savings in the Rhône-Alpes Region," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 370-387.
    20. Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy & Bredahl Jacobsen, Jette & Poudyal, Mahesh & Rasoamanana, Alexandra & Hockley, Neal, 2018. "Estimating welfare impacts where property rights are contested: methodological and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 71-83.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:34:y:2020:i:c:s1755534519301034. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.