IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/toueco/v9y2003i1p5-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Travel Mode Choice: Effects of Previous Experience on Choice Behaviour and Valuation

Author

Listed:
  • Lena Nerhagen

    (Dalarna University, 781 88 Borlänge, Sweden)

Abstract

This paper investigates how past experience influences choice behaviour and valuation in a hypothetical travel mode choice situation. Using a stated choice question asked of visitors to a major ski resort in Sweden, the author explores whether an individual's choice behaviour, when he or she is offered a comfort improvement to train travel, can be explained with reference to the individual and to the circumstances of his or her previous journey. The analysis models and compares the response behaviour of travellers who used a car and travellers who used the train on their original trip. It is found that past experience influences travellers' choice behaviour. Twenty per cent of former car users choose the train, while most train users again choose the train. As reasons for choosing car travel once again, car users mention a preference for shorter travel time and/or a preference for flexibility, while environmental concerns and long travel distance favour the use of the train. Concerning comfort improvement, as expected, willingness-to-pay estimates for the former train users are lower and more precise than those for the former car users.

Suggested Citation

  • Lena Nerhagen, 2003. "Travel Mode Choice: Effects of Previous Experience on Choice Behaviour and Valuation," Tourism Economics, , vol. 9(1), pages 5-30, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:toueco:v:9:y:2003:i:1:p:5-30
    DOI: 10.5367/000000003101298240
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5367/000000003101298240
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5367/000000003101298240?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. List, John A. & Shogren, Jason F., 1998. "Calibration of the difference between actual and hypothetical valuations in a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 193-205, October.
    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. Seabra, Cláudia & Dolnicar, Sara & Abrantes, José Luís & Kastenholz, Elisabeth, 2013. "Heterogeneity in risk and safety perceptions of international tourists," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 502-510.
    2. Andrea Pellegrini & Stefano Scagnolari, 2021. "The relationship between length of stay and land transportation mode in the tourism sector: A discrete–continuous framework applied to Swiss data," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(1), pages 243-259, February.
    3. Buh, Brian & Peer, Stefanie, 2022. "Environmental Concern and the Determinants of Night Train Use: Evidence from Vienna (Austria)," SRE-Discussion Papers 02/2022, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    4. Hatzinger, Reinhold & Mazanec, Josef A., 2007. "Measuring the part worth of the mode of transport in a trip package: An extended Bradley-Terry model for paired-comparison conjoint data," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(12), pages 1290-1302, 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. Richard A. Hofler & John A. List, 2004. "Valuation on the Frontier: Calibrating Actual and Hypothetical Statements of Value," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 213-221.
    2. John A. List, 2001. "Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1498-1507, December.
    3. John List & Jason Shogren, 1998. "The Deadweight Loss from Christmas: Comment," Artefactual Field Experiments 00531, The Field Experiments Website.
    4. John A. List, 2024. "Optimally generate policy-based evidence before scaling," Nature, Nature, vol. 626(7999), pages 491-499, February.
    5. Frode Alfnes & Chengyan Yue & Helen H. Jensen, 2010. "Cognitive dissonance as a means of reducing hypothetical bias," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 37(2), pages 147-163, June.
    6. Dmitriy Volinskiy & Wiktor Adamowicz & Michele Veeman, 2011. "Predicting versus testing: a conditional cross‐forecasting accuracy measure for hypothetical bias," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(3), pages 429-450, July.
    7. Devkota, Nirmala & Paudel, Krishna P. & Fannin, James Matthew & Hall, Larry M. & Caffey, Rex H., 2007. "Calibrating Online Survey Sample for Economic Impact Analysis," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34997, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Levan Elbakidze & Rodolfo M. Nayga Jr. & Hao Li & Chris McIntosh, 2014. "Value elicitation for multiple quantities of a quasi-public good using open ended choice experiments and uniform price auctions," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 253-265, March.
    9. Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Shaw, W. Douglass & Silva, Andres, 2006. "The Effect of Risk Presentation on Product Valuation: An Experimental Analysis," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21429, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Khachatryan, Hayk & Behe, Bridget K. & Campbell, Benjamin L. & Hall, Charles R. & Dennis, Jennifer H., 2013. "Does Eye Tracking Reveal More About the Effects of Buying Impulsiveness on the Green Industry Consumer Choice Behavior?," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150333, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Lijia Shi & Lisa A. House & Zhifeng Gao, 2013. "Impact of Purchase Intentions on Full and Partial Bids in BDM Auctions: Willingness-to-pay for Organic and Local Blueberries," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 707-718, September.
    12. Laura Mørch Andersen, 2011. "Animal Welfare and Eggs – Cheap Talk or Money on the Counter?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(3), pages 565-584, September.
    13. Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29.
    14. White, Robin R. & Brady, Michael, 2014. "Can consumers’ willingness to pay incentivize adoption of environmental impact reducing technologies in meat animal production?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 41-49.
    15. Chengyan Yue & Ben Campbell & Charles Hall & Bridget Behe & Jennifer Dennis & Hayk Khachatryan, 2016. "Consumer Preference for Sustainable Attributes in Plants: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 222-235, April.
    16. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    17. Darren Hudson & Karina Gallardo & Terry Hanson, 2005. "Hypothetical (Non)Bias In Choice Experiments: Evidence From Freshwater Prawns," Experimental 0503003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Jacquemet, Nicolas & Joule, Robert-Vincent & Luchini, Stéphane & Malézieux, Antoine, 2016. "Engagement et incitations : comportements économiques sous serment," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 92(1-2), pages 315-349, Mars-Juin.
    19. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    20. Nicolas Jacquemet & Robert‐Vincent Joule & Stéphane Luchini & Jason F. Shogren, 2011. "Do People Always Pay Less Than They Say? Testbed Laboratory Experiments with IV and HG Values," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 13(5), pages 857-882, October.

    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:sae:toueco:v:9:y:2003:i:1:p:5-30. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.