IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i7p3901-d528120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Travelers’ Bi-Attribute Decision Making on the Risky Mode Choice with Flow-Dependent Salience Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Xiangfeng Ji

    (Department of Management Science and Engineering, School of Business, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China)

  • Xiaoyu Ao

    (Department of Management Science and Engineering, School of Business, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to provide new insights into travelers’ bi-attribute (travel time and travel cost) risky mode choice behavior with one risky option (i.e., the highway) and one non-risky option (i.e., the transit) from the long-term planning perspective. In the classical Wardropian User Equilibrium principle, travelers make their choice decisions only based on the mean travel times, which might be an unrealistic behavioral assumption. In this paper, an alternative approach is proposed to partially remedy this unrealistic behavioral assumption with flow-dependent salience theory, based on which we study travelers’ context-dependent bi-attribute mode choice behavior, focusing on the effect of travelers’ salience characteristic. Travelers’ attention is drawn to the bi-attribute salient travel utility, and then the objective probability of each state for the risky world is distorted in favor of this bi-attribute salient travel utility. A long-term bi-attribute salient user equilibrium will be achieved when no traveler can improve their bi-attribute salient travel utility by unilaterally changing the choice decisions. Conditions for the existence and uniqueness of the bi-attribute salient user equilibrium are presented, and based on the equilibrium results, we analyze travelers’ risk attitudes in this bi-attribute risky choice problem. Finally, numerical examples are conducted to examine the sensitivity of equilibrium solutions to the input parameters, which are cost difference and salience bias.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiangfeng Ji & Xiaoyu Ao, 2021. "Travelers’ Bi-Attribute Decision Making on the Risky Mode Choice with Flow-Dependent Salience Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-24, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:7:p:3901-:d:528120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/7/3901/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/7/3901/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adrian Bruhin & Maha Manai & Luis Santos-Pinto, 2019. "Risk and Rationality:The Relative Importance of Probability Weighting and Choice Set Dependence," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 19.01new, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    2. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    3. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2012. "Salience Theory of Choice Under Risk," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(3), pages 1243-1285.
    4. Booth, Alison & Nolen, Patrick, 2012. "Salience, risky choices and gender," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 517-520.
    5. Amy Finkelstein, 2009. "E-ztax: Tax Salience and Tax Rates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(3), pages 969-1010.
    6. (Jeff) Ban, Xuegang & Ferris, Michael C. & Tang, Lisa & Lu, Shu, 2013. "Risk-neutral second best toll pricing," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 67-87.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Kemel, Emmanuel & Paraschiv, Corina, 2013. "Prospect Theory for joint time and money consequences in risk and ambiguity," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 81-95.
    9. Guiso, Luigi & Sapienza, Paola & Zingales, Luigi, 2018. "Time varying risk aversion," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(3), pages 403-421.
    10. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Mats Köster, 2020. "Salience and Skewness Preferences [Risk-neutral Firms can Extract Unbounded Profits from Consumers with Prospect Theory Preferences]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(5), pages 2057-2107.
    11. Xu, Shu-Xian & Liu, Tian-Liang & Huang, Hai-Jun & Liu, Ronghui, 2018. "Mode choice and railway subsidy in a congested monocentric city with endogenous population distribution," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 413-433.
    12. Wu, Xing & (Marco) Nie, Yu, 2011. "Modeling heterogeneous risk-taking behavior in route choice: A stochastic dominance approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 896-915, November.
    13. Ampountolas, Konstantinos & Zheng, Nan & Geroliminis, Nikolas, 2017. "Macroscopic modelling and robust control of bi-modal multi-region urban road networks," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 616-637.
    14. Adrian Bruhin & Maha Manai & Luis Santos-Pinto, 2018. "Risk and Rationality:The Relative Importance of Probability Weighting and Choice Set Dependence," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 18.04, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    15. Xu, Hongli & Lou, Yingyan & Yin, Yafeng & Zhou, Jing, 2011. "A prospect-based user equilibrium model with endogenous reference points and its application in congestion pricing," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 311-328, February.
    16. Xiangfeng Ji & Xuegang (Jeff) Ban & Mengtian Li & Jian Zhang & Bin Ran, 2017. "Non-expected Route Choice Model under Risk on Stochastic Traffic Networks," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 777-807, September.
    17. Neil Thakral & Linh T. Tô, 2021. "Daily Labor Supply and Adaptive Reference Points," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(8), pages 2417-2443, August.
    18. Cosemans, Mathijs & Frehen, Rik, 2021. "Salience theory and stock prices: Empirical evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 460-483.
    19. Kontek, Krzysztof, 2016. "A critical note on Salience Theory of choice under risk," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 168-171.
    20. Adrian Bruhin & Maha Manai & Luís Santos-Pinto, 2022. "Risk and rationality: The relative importance of probability weighting and choice set dependence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(2), pages 139-184, October.
    21. Pitu Mirchandani & Hossein Soroush, 1987. "Generalized Traffic Equilibrium with Probabilistic Travel Times and Perceptions," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 133-152, August.
    22. Lo, Hong K. & Luo, X.W. & Siu, Barbara W.Y., 2006. "Degradable transport network: Travel time budget of travelers with heterogeneous risk aversion," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 792-806, November.
    23. Ji, Xiangfeng & Chu, Yanyu, 2020. "A target-oriented bi-attribute user equilibrium model with travelers’ perception errors on the tolled traffic network," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    24. Qinghui Xu & Xiangfeng Ji, 2020. "User Equilibrium Analysis Considering Travelers’ Context-Dependent Route Choice Behavior on the Risky Traffic Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, August.
    25. Connors, Richard D. & Sumalee, Agachai, 2009. "A network equilibrium model with travellers' perception of stochastic travel times," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 614-624, July.
    26. Yang, Hai & Huang, Hai-Jun, 2004. "The multi-class, multi-criteria traffic network equilibrium and systems optimum problem," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 1-15, January.
    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. Xinming Zang & Zhenqi Guo & Jingai Ma & Yongguang Zhong & Xiangfeng Ji, 2021. "Target-Oriented User Equilibrium Considering Travel Time, Late Arrival Penalty, and Travel Cost on the Stochastic Tolled Traffic Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, September.

    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. Qinghui Xu & Xiangfeng Ji, 2020. "User Equilibrium Analysis Considering Travelers’ Context-Dependent Route Choice Behavior on the Risky Traffic Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, August.
    2. Xinming Zang & Zhenqi Guo & Jingai Ma & Yongguang Zhong & Xiangfeng Ji, 2021. "Target-Oriented User Equilibrium Considering Travel Time, Late Arrival Penalty, and Travel Cost on the Stochastic Tolled Traffic Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Ji, Xiangfeng & Chu, Yanyu, 2020. "A target-oriented bi-attribute user equilibrium model with travelers’ perception errors on the tolled traffic network," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    4. Xiangfeng Ji & Xuegang (Jeff) Ban & Mengtian Li & Jian Zhang & Bin Ran, 2017. "Non-expected Route Choice Model under Risk on Stochastic Traffic Networks," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 777-807, September.
    5. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Mats Köster, 2020. "Salience and Skewness Preferences [Risk-neutral Firms can Extract Unbounded Profits from Consumers with Prospect Theory Preferences]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(5), pages 2057-2107.
    6. Zhaoqi Zang & Xiangdong Xu & Kai Qu & Ruiya Chen & Anthony Chen, 2022. "Travel time reliability in transportation networks: A review of methodological developments," Papers 2206.12696, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2022.
    7. Xie, Chi & Liu, Zugang, 2014. "On the stochastic network equilibrium with heterogeneous choice inertia," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 90-109.
    8. Adrian Bruhin & Maha Manai & Luís Santos-Pinto, 2022. "Risk and rationality: The relative importance of probability weighting and choice set dependence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(2), pages 139-184, October.
    9. Königsheim, C. & Lukas, M. & Nöth, M., 2019. "Salience theory: Calibration and heterogeneity in probability distortion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 477-495.
    10. Xu, Xiangdong & Chen, Anthony & Cheng, Lin & Yang, Chao, 2017. "A link-based mean-excess traffic equilibrium model under uncertainty," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 53-75.
    11. Xu, Hongli & Lou, Yingyan & Yin, Yafeng & Zhou, Jing, 2011. "A prospect-based user equilibrium model with endogenous reference points and its application in congestion pricing," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 311-328, February.
    12. Li, Xue-yan & Li, Xue-mei & Li, Xue-wei & Qiu, He-ting, 2017. "Multi-agent fare optimization model of two modes problem and its analysis based on edge of chaos," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 469(C), pages 405-419.
    13. Tan, Zhijia & Yang, Hai & Guo, Renyong, 2014. "Pareto efficiency of reliability-based traffic equilibria and risk-taking behavior of travelers," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 16-31.
    14. Giselle Moraes Ramos & Winnie Daamen & Serge Hoogendoorn, 2014. "A State-of-the-Art Review: Developments in Utility Theory, Prospect Theory and Regret Theory to Investigate Travellers' Behaviour in Situations Involving Travel Time Uncertainty," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 46-67, January.
    15. Tian, Ye & Li, Yudi & Sun, Jian, 2022. "Stick or carrot for traffic demand management? Evidence from experimental economics," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 235-254.
    16. Wang, Di, 2021. "Attention-driven probability weighting," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    17. Jin, Xiaoye, 2022. "Testing technical trading strategies on China's equity ETFs: A skewness perspective," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(PA).
    18. Hu, Shiyang & Xiang, Cheng & Quan, Xiaofeng, 2023. "Salience theory and mutual fund flows: Empirical evidence from China," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    19. Li, Xue-yan & Li, Xue-mei & Yang, Lingrun & Li, Jing, 2018. "Dynamic route and departure time choice model based on self-adaptive reference point and reinforcement learning," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 502(C), pages 77-92.
    20. Wang, Chen & Xiong, Xiong & Shen, Dehua, 2022. "Tail risks, firm characteristics, and stock returns," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:7:p:3901-:d:528120. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.