IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pubtra/v8y2016i3d10.1007_s12469-016-0135-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Customer satisfaction with bus rapid transit: a study of New York City select bus service applying structural equation modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Dan Wan

    (City University of New York)

  • Camille Kamga

    (City University of New York)

  • Wei Hao

    (City University of New York)

  • Aaron Sugiura

    (New York City Department of Transportation)

  • Eric B. Beaton

    (New York City Department of Transportation)

Abstract

Like any other transit mode, bus rapid transit (BRT) has a number of service quality and performance attributes that can affect rider satisfaction. However, there is little understanding about BRT rider satisfaction. This study investigates the relationship between riders’ overall satisfaction and underlying driving factors of the BRT service in New York City (NYC), known as select bus service (SBS). Two conceptual structures are developed for three groups of SBS riders based on theoretical review and pilot survey. Hypotheses about relationships between latent variables and observed variables are developed. Survey data obtained from interviewing riders on buses and at bus stops are used to test the hypotheses by applying structural equation modeling (SEM). For each group of riders, one model was built. Acceptable fits were obtained for all three models. In addition, some of the proposed causal relationships were supported in these models. Accepted hypotheses suggest that service quality was the most important factor influencing overall satisfaction for all three kinds of riders, namely, frequency, on-time performance, and speed. The other significant attributes are bus-only lanes, buses with three doors, bus comfort and cleanliness, proximity of bus stops, real-time information, limited stops, and ticket system attributes. Their effects vary among riders on routes with different locations and between rider groups with and without awareness of travel information. The implications of the findings for future planning and system improvement are discussed. In this study, SEM is found to be an appropriate methodology for measuring rider satisfaction levels. The findings are useful for the agencies in NYC and other cities in a similar situation to justify and plan transit service with limited resources.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Wan & Camille Kamga & Wei Hao & Aaron Sugiura & Eric B. Beaton, 2016. "Customer satisfaction with bus rapid transit: a study of New York City select bus service applying structural equation modeling," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 497-520, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pubtra:v:8:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s12469-016-0135-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s12469-016-0135-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12469-016-0135-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12469-016-0135-x?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. McDonnell, Simon & Zellner, Moira, 2011. "Exploring the effectiveness of bus rapid transit a prototype agent-based model of commuting behavior," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 825-835, November.
    2. Redman, Lauren & Friman, Margareta & Gärling, Tommy & Hartig, Terry, 2013. "Quality attributes of public transport that attract car users: A research review," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 119-127.
    3. Golob, Thomas F., 2003. "Structural equation modeling for travel behavior research," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 1-25, January.
    4. dell'Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Angel & Cecin, Patricia, 2011. "The quality of service desired by public transport users," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 217-227, January.
    5. Wang, Bobin & Shao, Chunfu & Li, Juan & Weng, Jinxian & Ji, Xun, 2015. "Holiday travel behavior analysis and empirical study under integrated multimodal travel information service," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 21-36.
    6. Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2011. "A methodology for evaluating transit service quality based on subjective and objective measures from the passenger's point of view," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 172-181, January.
    7. Soriguera, Francesc, 2014. "On the value of highway travel time information systems," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 294-310.
    8. Currie, Graham & Wallis, Ian, 2008. "Effective ways to grow urban bus markets – a synthesis of evidence," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 419-429.
    9. Jiang, Yang & Christopher Zegras, P. & Mehndiratta, Shomik, 2012. "Walk the line: station context, corridor type and bus rapid transit walk access in Jinan, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14.
    10. Brakewood, Candace & Barbeau, Sean & Watkins, Kari, 2014. "An experiment evaluating the impacts of real-time transit information on bus riders in Tampa, Florida," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 409-422.
    11. Currie, Graham & Delbosc, Alexa, 2011. "Understanding bus rapid transit route ridership drivers: An empirical study of Australian BRT systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 755-764, September.
    12. Mouwen, Arnoud & Rietveld, Piet, 2013. "Does competitive tendering improve customer satisfaction with public transport? A case study for the Netherlands," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 29-45.
    13. Tyrinopoulos, Yannis & Antoniou, Constantinos, 2008. "Public transit user satisfaction: Variability and policy implications," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 260-272, July.
    14. de Oña, Juan & de Oña, Rocío & Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2013. "Perceived service quality in bus transit service: A structural equation approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 219-226.
    15. Kain, John F. & Liu, Zvi, 1999. "Secrets of success: assessing the large increases in transit ridership achieved by Houston and San Diego transit providers," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 601-624.
    16. David Hensher & Thomas Golob, 2008. "Bus rapid transit systems: a comparative assessment," Transportation, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 501-518, 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. Amirali Soltanpour & Mahmoud Mesbah & Meeghat Habibian, 2020. "Customer satisfaction in urban rail: a study on transferability of structural equation models," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 123-146, March.
    2. Gao, Yanan & Rasouli, Soora & Timmermans, Harry & Wang, Yuanqing, 2018. "Trip stage satisfaction of public transport users: A reference-based model incorporating trip attributes, perceived service quality, psychological disposition and difference tolerance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 759-775.
    3. Panuwat Wisutwattanasak & Thanapong Champahom & Sajjakaj Jomnonkwao & Manlika Seefong & Kestsirin Theerathitichaipa & Rattanaporn Kasemsri & Vatanavongs Ratanavaraha, 2023. "Modeling Extended Service Quality for Public Transportation in the Post-Pandemic Period: Differentiating between Urban and Rural Areas: A Case Study of Intercity Railway, Thailand," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-24, December.
    4. Md. Nazmul Huda Naim & Mohammed Sarfaraz Gani Adnan & Ashraf Dewan & Khatun E. Zannat, 2022. "Assessing the performance of public transport services in a developing country: A case study using data envelopment analysis," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 377-409, March.
    5. Malik, Bilal Zia & Rehman, Zia ur & Khan, Ammad Hassan & Akram, Waseem, 2021. "Investigating users' travel behaviours and perceptions of single-corridor BRT: Lessons from Lahore," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    6. Sun, Fan & Jin, Minjie & Zhang, Tao & Huang, Wencheng, 2022. "Satisfaction differences in bus traveling among low-income individuals before and after COVID-19," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 311-332.
    7. Ahmad H. Alomari & Taisir S. Khedaywi & Asalah A. Jadah & Abdel Rahman O. Marian, 2022. "Evaluation of Public Transport among University Commuters in Rural Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-32, December.
    8. Hanumantha Rao Sama & Long-Sheng Chen & Venkateswarlu Nalluri & Madhavaiah Chendragiri, 2023. "Enhancing service quality of rural public transport during the COVID-19 pandemic: a novel fuzzy approach," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 479-501, June.
    9. Catherine Y. P. Chan & Kwai-Sang Chin & Candace Chan & Kwok L. Tsui, 2019. "An analysis of passengers’ ride needs of urban rail transit services: application of quality function deployment," International Journal of Quality Innovation, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-21, 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. Wan, Dan & Kamga, Camille & Liu, Jun & Sugiura, Aaron & Beaton, Eric B., 2016. "Rider perception of a “light” Bus Rapid Transit system - The New York City Select Bus Service," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 41-55.
    2. Celik, Erkan & Aydin, Nezir & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2014. "A multiattribute customer satisfaction evaluation approach for rail transit network: A real case study for Istanbul, Turkey," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 283-293.
    3. Aydin, Nezir & Celik, Erkan & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2015. "A hierarchical customer satisfaction framework for evaluating rail transit systems of Istanbul," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 61-81.
    4. Aydin, Nezir, 2017. "A fuzzy-based multi-dimensional and multi-period service quality evaluation outline for rail transit systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 87-98.
    5. Nkurunziza, Alphonse & Zuidgeest, Mark & Brussel, Mark & Van den Bosch, Frans, 2012. "Spatial variation of transit service quality preferences in Dar-es-Salaam," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 12-21.
    6. Rong, Rui & Liu, Lishan & Jia, Ning & Ma, Shoufeng, 2022. "Impact analysis of actual traveling performance on bus passenger’s perception and satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 80-100.
    7. Sun, Fan & Jin, Minjie & Zhang, Tao & Huang, Wencheng, 2022. "Satisfaction differences in bus traveling among low-income individuals before and after COVID-19," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 311-332.
    8. Shaaban, Khaled & Kim, Inhi, 2016. "Assessment of the taxi service in Doha," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 223-235.
    9. Ingvardson, Jesper Bláfoss & Nielsen, Otto Anker, 2019. "The relationship between norms, satisfaction and public transport use: A comparison across six European cities using structural equation modelling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 37-57.
    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.
    11. Jomnonkwao, Sajjakaj & Ratanavaraha, Vatanavongs, 2016. "Measurement modelling of the perceived service quality of a sightseeing bus service: An application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 240-252.
    12. Echaniz, Eneko & Ho, Chinh Q. & Rodriguez, Andres & dell'Olio, Luigi, 2019. "Comparing best-worst and ordered logit approaches for user satisfaction in transit services," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 752-769.
    13. Díez-Mesa, Francisco & de Oña, Rocio & de Oña, Juan, 2018. "Bayesian networks and structural equation modelling to develop service quality models: Metro of Seville case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 1-13.
    14. Efthymiou, Dimitrios & Antoniou, Constantinos, 2017. "Understanding the effects of economic crisis on public transport users’ satisfaction and demand," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 89-97.
    15. Hernandez, Sara & Monzon, Andres & de Oña, Rocío, 2016. "Urban transport interchanges: A methodology for evaluating perceived quality," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 31-43.
    16. Ganji, S.S. & Ahangar, A.N. & Awasthi, Anjali & Jamshidi Bandari, Smaneh, 2021. "Psychological analysis of intercity bus passenger satisfaction using Q methodology," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 345-363.
    17. Chee, Pei Nen Esther & Susilo, Yusak O. & Wong, Yiik Diew, 2020. "Determinants of intention-to-use first-/last-mile automated bus service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 350-375.
    18. Md Rokibul Islam & Md Hadiuzzaman & Rajib Banik & Md Mehedi Hasnat & Sarder Rafee Musabbir & Sanjana Hossain, 2016. "Bus service quality prediction and attribute ranking: a neural network approach," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 295-313, September.
    19. Ratanavaraha, Vatanavongs & Jomnonkwao, Sajjakaj & Khampirat, Buratin & Watthanaklang, Duangdao & Iamtrakul, Pawinee, 2016. "The complex relationship between school policy, service quality, satisfaction, and loyalty for educational tour bus services: A multilevel modeling approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 116-126.
    20. Laura Eboli & Gabriella Mazzulla, 2014. "Investigating the heterogeneity of bus users' preferences through discrete choice modelling," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(8), pages 695-710, December.

    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:spr:pubtra:v:8:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s12469-016-0135-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.