IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jotrge/v66y2018icp300-308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The limitations of using activity space measurements for representing the mobilities of individuals with visual impairment: A mixed methods case study in the San Francisco Bay Area

Author

Listed:
  • Wong, Sandy

Abstract

Activity space measures are often utilized to quantify the physical spaces that individuals travel through and have access to over the course of their daily activities. To date, these measures have rarely been used to investigate the mobility of people with disabilities, who often experience difficulties accessing transportation and navigating the built environment. Additionally, researchers have yet to compare results from activity space measures to people's perceived accessibility as a means of method validation. This paper contributes to the existing literature by (1) evaluating the activity spaces of individuals with visual impairment (VI) in the San Francisco Bay Area and (2) comparing the activity space results to qualitative information about individuals' travel behaviors and their perceptions about the accessibility of their environments. This mixed quantitative and qualitative methods project models individuals' activity spaces from travel diaries and analyzes participants' travel behaviors and perceptions from interviews. Three activity space measures are considered: standard deviational ellipse, network buffer, and potential path area. The results demonstrate significant shortcomings in activity space measures for representing the experiences of people with visual impairment and identify how existing methods can be improved for future research on environmental accessibility.

Suggested Citation

  • Wong, Sandy, 2018. "The limitations of using activity space measurements for representing the mobilities of individuals with visual impairment: A mixed methods case study in the San Francisco Bay Area," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 300-308.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:66:y:2018:i:c:p:300-308
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.12.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692317304684
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.12.004?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zachary Patterson & Steven Farber, 2015. "Potential Path Areas and Activity Spaces in Application: A Review," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(6), pages 679-700, November.
    2. Valerie Preston & Sara McLafferty, 2016. "Revisiting Gender, Race, and Commuting in New York," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 106(2), pages 300-310, March.
    3. Marston, James R. & Golledge, Reginald G. & Costanzo, C. Michael, 1997. "Investigating travel behavior of nondriving blind and vision impaired people: The role of public transit," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt9gb6d4b4, University of California Transportation Center.
    4. Rob Imrie, 2013. "Shared Space and the Post-politics of Environmental Change," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(16), pages 3446-3462, December.
    5. J A Black & C Kuranami & P J Rimmer, 1982. "Macroaccessibility and Mesoaccessibility: A Case Study of Sapporo, Japan," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 14(10), pages 1355-1376, October.
    6. S Hanson & M Schwab, 1987. "Accessibility and Intraurban Travel," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 19(6), pages 735-748, June.
    7. Oviedo Hernandez, Daniel & Titheridge, Helena, 2016. "Mobilities of the periphery: Informality, access and social exclusion in the urban fringe in Colombia," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 152-164.
    8. van Wee, Bert, 2016. "Accessible accessibility research challenges," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-16.
    9. Tijs Neutens & Tim Schwanen & Frank Witlox & Philippe De Maeyer, 2010. "Equity of Urban Service Delivery: A Comparison of Different Accessibility Measures," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(7), pages 1613-1635, July.
    10. Pyrialakou, V. Dimitra & Gkritza, Konstantina & Fricker, Jon D., 2016. "Accessibility, mobility, and realized travel behavior: Assessing transport disadvantage from a policy perspective," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 252-269.
    11. B J Linneker & N A Spence, 1992. "Accessibility Measures Compared in an Analysis of the Impact of the M25 London Orbital Motorway on Britain," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 24(8), pages 1137-1154, August.
    12. Nancy Worth, 2013. "Visual Impairment in the City: Young People’s Social Strategies for Independent Mobility," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(3), pages 574-586, February.
    13. Maia, Maria Leonor & Lucas, Karen & Marinho, Geraldo & Santos, Enilson & de Lima, Jessica Helena, 2016. "Access to the Brazilian City—From the perspectives of low-income residents in Recife," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 132-141.
    14. Kamruzzaman, Md. & Hine, Julian & Gunay, Banihan & Blair, Neale, 2011. "Using GIS to visualise and evaluate student travel behaviour," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 13-32.
    15. C M Guy, 1983. "The Assessment of Access to Local Shopping Opportunities: A Comparison of Accessibility Measures," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 10(2), pages 219-237, June.
    16. Li, Ran & Tong, Daoqin, 2016. "Constructing human activity spaces: A new approach incorporating complex urban activity-travel," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 23-35.
    17. S L Handy & D A Niemeier, 1997. "Measuring Accessibility: An Exploration of Issues and Alternatives," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 29(7), pages 1175-1194, July.
    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. Xinwei Ma & Yanjie Ji & Yuchuan Jin & Jianbiao Wang & Mingjia He, 2018. "Modeling the Factors Influencing the Activity Spaces of Bikeshare around Metro Stations: A Spatial Regression Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, October.
    2. Lättman, Katrin & Olsson, Lars E. & Friman, Margareta, 2018. "A new approach to accessibility – Examining perceived accessibility in contrast to objectively measured accessibility in daily travel," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 501-511.
    3. Wong, Sandy & McLafferty, Sara L. & Planey, Arrianna M. & Preston, Valerie A., 2020. "Disability, wages, and commuting in New York," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    4. Margareta Friman & Katrin Lättman & Lars E. Olsson, 2020. "Public Transport Quality, Safety, and Perceived Accessibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-14, April.
    5. Renata Żochowska & Marcin Jacek Kłos & Piotr Soczówka & Marcin Pilch, 2022. "Assessment of Accessibility of Public Transport by Using Temporal and Spatial Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-29, December.

    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. Cascetta, Ennio & Cartenì, Armando & Montanino, Marcello, 2016. "A behavioral model of accessibility based on the number of available opportunities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 45-58.
    2. Lättman, Katrin & Olsson, Lars E. & Friman, Margareta, 2018. "A new approach to accessibility – Examining perceived accessibility in contrast to objectively measured accessibility in daily travel," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 501-511.
    3. van Wee, Bert, 2016. "Accessible accessibility research challenges," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-16.
    4. Boisjoly, Geneviève & Serra, Bernardo & Oliveira, Gabriel T. & El-Geneidy, Ahmed, 2020. "Accessibility measurements in São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Curitiba and Recife, Brazil," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    5. Kiril Stanilov, 2003. "Accessibility and Land Use: The Case of Suburban Seattle, 1960-1990," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(8), pages 783-794.
    6. Bocarejo S., Juan Pablo & Oviedo H., Daniel Ricardo, 2012. "Transport accessibility and social inequities: a tool for identification of mobility needs and evaluation of transport investments," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 142-154.
    7. Kanuganti, Shalini & Sarkar, Ashoke Kumar & Singh, Ajit Pratap, 2016. "Evaluation of access to health care in rural areas using enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 45-52.
    8. Tijs Neutens, 2012. "Accessibility to public service delivery: a combination of diff erent indicators," Chapters, in: Karst T. Geurs & Kevin J. Krizek & Aura Reggiani (ed.), Accessibility Analysis and Transport Planning, chapter 7, pages 118-132, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Hasnine, Md Sami & Graovac, Ana & Camargo, Felipe & Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2019. "A random utility maximization (RUM) based measure of accessibility to transit: Accurate capturing of the first-mile issue in urban transit," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 313-320.
    10. Massingue, Suzanna Allen & Oviedo, Daniel, 2021. "Walkability and the Right to the city: A snapshot critique of pedestrian space in Maputo, Mozambique," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    11. Zhao, Yun & Yu, Hongbo, 2018. "A door-to-door travel time approach for evaluating modal competition of intercity travel: A focus on the proposed Dallas-Houston HSR route," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 13-22.
    12. Yang, Shu & Liu, Xuan & Wu, Yao-Jan & Woolschlager, John & Coffin, Sarah L., 2015. "Can freeway traffic volume information facilitate urban accessibility assessment?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 65-75.
    13. Ribeiro, Anabela & Antunes, António Pais & Páez, Antonio, 2010. "Road accessibility and cohesion in lagging regions: Empirical evidence from Portugal based on spatial econometric models," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 125-132.
    14. Chikaraishi, Makoto & Jana, Arnab & Bardhan, Ronita & Varghese, Varun & Fujiwara, Akimasa, 2017. "A framework to analyze capability and travel in formal and informal urban settings: A case from Mumbai," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 101-110.
    15. Gonzalo Suazo-Vecino & Juan Carlos Muñoz & Luis Fuentes Arce, 2019. "The Displacement of Santiago de Chile’s Downtown during 1990–2015: Travel Time Effects on Eradicated Population," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, December.
    16. Reilly, Michael & Landis, John, 2003. "The Influence of Built-Form and Land Use on Mode Choice," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt46r3k871, University of California Transportation Center.
    17. Mark Burkey, 2012. "Decomposing geographic accessibility into component parts: methods and an application to hospitals," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 48(3), pages 783-800, June.
    18. van Dülmen, Christoph & Šimon, Martin & Klärner, Andreas, 2022. "Transport poverty meets car dependency: A GPS tracking study of socially disadvantaged groups in European rural peripheries," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    19. Ryan, Jean & Pereira, Rafael H.M., 2021. "What are we missing when we measure accessibility? Comparing calculated and self-reported accounts among older people," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    20. Li, Ran & Tong, Daoqin, 2017. "Incorporating activity space and trip chaining into facility siting for accessibility maximization," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-14.

    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:jotrge:v:66:y:2018:i:c:p:300-308. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-transport-geography .

    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.