IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v177y2023ics0191261523001571.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review of the traffic paradoxes (1968–2022)

Author

Listed:
  • Yao, Jia
  • Cheng, Ziyi
  • Chen, Anthony

Abstract

Braess proposed one of the classical traffic paradoxes in 1968, which states that adding a link in a transportation network may increase the travel cost for all travelers in the network. The paradox attracted substantial scholarly attention and research. However, there are many other paradoxical phenomena in the transportation field, which we call the traffic paradoxes. The purpose of this paper is to review studies on the traffic paradoxes that were published during 1968–2022. A bibliometric analysis approach is used to identify the distribution of all journal publications, influential papers, top contributing authors, and leading topics. The literature is classified on the basis of recurring themes, including the static traffic paradox, the dynamic traffic paradox, the multimodal traffic paradox, other paradoxes in the field of transportation, and observations and applications related to transportation networks. Finally, some future research directions are discussed. Our work should help the researchers, planners and engineers in the transportation field to understand the theme of traffic paradoxes systematically and comprehensively.

Suggested Citation

  • Yao, Jia & Cheng, Ziyi & Chen, Anthony, 2023. "Bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review of the traffic paradoxes (1968–2022)," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:177:y:2023:i:c:s0191261523001571
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2023.102832
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261523001571
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.trb.2023.102832?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.

    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:transb:v:177:y:2023:i:c:s0191261523001571. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/548/description#description .

    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.