IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v49y2013icp123-131.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An application of cumulative prospect theory to freeway drivers’ route choice behaviours

Author

Listed:
  • Jou, Rong-Chang
  • Chen, Ke-Hong

Abstract

A distinguishing feature of this study is that drivers’ attitudes and preference towards risk were considered and their perceptions of gains and losses were modelled using cumulative prospect theory (CPT). The parameters of the value function and the weighting function were estimated to reflect the risk attitudes of freeway drivers in Taiwan. The resulting estimates showed that the behaviour of most Taiwanese freeway drivers can be captured by the features of CPT if real-time traffic information is used.

Suggested Citation

  • Jou, Rong-Chang & Chen, Ke-Hong, 2013. "An application of cumulative prospect theory to freeway drivers’ route choice behaviours," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 123-131.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:49:y:2013:i:c:p:123-131
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2013.01.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856413000189
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2013.01.011?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. Jou, Rong-Chang & Lam, Soi-Hoi & Liu, Yu-Hsin & Chen, Ke-Hong, 2005. "Route switching behavior on freeways with the provision of different types of real-time traffic information," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 445-461, June.
    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. Ben-Elia, Eran & Shiftan, Yoram, 2010. "Which road do I take? A learning-based model of route-choice behavior with real-time information," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 249-264, May.
    4. Camerer, Colin F & Ho, Teck-Hua, 1994. "Violations of the Betweenness Axiom and Nonlinearity in Probability," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 167-196, March.
    5. Fennema, Hein & van Assen, Marcel, 1998. "Measuring the Utility of Losses by Means of the Tradeoff Method," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 277-295, December.
    6. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    7. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1449-1475, December.
    8. Erel Avineri, 2006. "The Effect of Reference Point on Stochastic Network Equilibrium," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 409-420, November.
    9. Schwanen, Tim & Ettema, Dick, 2009. "Coping with unreliable transportation when collecting children: Examining parents' behavior with cumulative prospect theory," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 511-525, June.
    10. de Palma, André & Picard, Nathalie, 2005. "Route choice decision under travel time uncertainty," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 295-324, May.
    11. 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..
    12. George Wu & Richard Gonzalez, 1996. "Curvature of the Probability Weighting Function," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(12), pages 1676-1690, December.
    13. Zheng Li & David Hensher, 2010. "Prospect Theoretic Contributions in Understanding Traveller Behaviour: A Review and Some Comments," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 97-115, May.
    14. 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.
    15. Mahmassani, Hani S. & Chang, Gang-Len, 1986. "Experiments with departure time choice dynamics of urban commuters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 297-320, August.
    16. Jou, Rong-Chang & Kitamura, Ryuichi & Weng, Mei-Chuan & Chen, Chih-Cheng, 2008. "Dynamic commuter departure time choice under uncertainty," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 774-783, June.
    17. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    18. Mohammed Abdellaoui, 2000. "Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(11), pages 1497-1512, November.
    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. Gao, Kun & Sun, Lijun & Yang, Ying & Meng, Fanyu & Qu, Xiaobo, 2021. "Cumulative prospect theory coupled with multi-attribute decision making for modeling travel behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 1-21.
    2. Mengru Shao & Chao Chen & Qingchang Lu & Xinyu Zuo & Xueling Liu & Xiaoning Gu, 2023. "The Impacts of Low-Carbon Incentives and Carbon-Reduction Awareness on Airport Ground Access Mode Choice under Travel Time Uncertainty: A Hybrid CPT-MNL Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Lissy Paix & Abu Toasin Oakil & Frank Hofman & Karst Geurs, 2022. "The influence of panel effects and inertia on travel cost elasticities for car use and public transport," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 989-1016, June.
    4. Zhang, Ning & Wu, Yiping & Rong, Jian & Shao, Juan & Chen, Jiayuan & Zhou, Chenjing, 2023. "Analysis of truckers’ intentions in choosing freeways or parallel national and provincial roads," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    5. Jin Qin & Wenxuan Qu & Xuanke Wu & Yijia Zeng, 2019. "Differential Pricing Strategies of High Speed Railway Based on Prospect Theory: An Empirical Study from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-17, July.
    6. Geng, Kexin & Wang, Yacan & Cherchi, Elisabetta & Guarda, Pablo, 2023. "Commuter departure time choice behavior under congestion charge: Analysis based on cumulative prospect theory," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    7. Ciyun Lin & Kang Wang & Dayong Wu & Bowen Gong, 2020. "Research on Residents’ Travel Behavior under Sudden Fire Disaster Based on Prospect Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, January.
    8. Prateek Bansal & Daniel Horcher & Daniel J. Graham, 2020. "A Dynamic Choice Model with Heterogeneous Decision Rules: Application in Estimating the User Cost of Rail Crowding," Papers 2007.03682, arXiv.org.
    9. Tianpei Tang & Yuntao Guo & Guohui Zhang & Hua Wang & Quan Shi, 2020. "Understanding the Interaction between Cyclists’ Traffic Violations and Enforcement Strategies: An Evolutionary Game-Theoretic Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-29, November.
    10. Prateek Bansal & Daniel Hörcher & Daniel J. Graham, 2022. "A dynamic choice model to estimate the user cost of crowding with large‐scale transit data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(2), pages 615-639, April.

    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. Schwanen, Tim & Ettema, Dick, 2009. "Coping with unreliable transportation when collecting children: Examining parents' behavior with cumulative prospect theory," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 511-525, June.
    2. de Moraes Ramos, Giselle & Daamen, Winnie & Hoogendoorn, Serge, 2013. "Modelling travellers' heterogeneous route choice behaviour as prospect maximizers," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 17-33.
    3. 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.
    4. Oliver, Adam, 2003. "The internal consistency of the standard gamble: tests after adjusting for prospect theory," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 159, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Avineri, Erel, 2012. "On the use and potential of behavioural economics from the perspective of transport and climate change," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 512-521.
    6. Mark Schneider, 2016. "Dual Process Utility Theory: A Model of Decisions Under Risk and Over Time," Working Papers 16-23, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    7. 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.
    8. Davies, G.B. & Satchell, S.E., 2004. "Continuous Cumulative Prospect Theory and Individual Asset Allocation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0467, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    9. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Post-Print halshs-00681607, HAL.
    10. Ariane Charpin, 2018. "Tests des modèles de décision en situation de risque. Le cas des parieurs hippiques en France," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 69(5), pages 779-803.
    11. Gul, Faruk & Pesendorfer, Wolfgang, 2015. "Hurwicz expected utility and subjective sources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 465-488.
    12. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    13. Jan B Engelmann & C Monica Capra & Charles Noussair & Gregory S Berns, 2009. "Expert Financial Advice Neurobiologically “Offloads” Financial Decision-Making under Risk," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(3), pages 1-14, March.
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:2:p:118-127 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Corina Paraschiv, 2007. "Loss Aversion Under Prospect Theory: A Parameter-Free Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1659-1674, October.
    16. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(3), pages 200-227, August.
    17. Eyal Baharad & Doron Kliger, 2013. "Market failure in light of non-expected utility," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 599-619, October.
    18. Oliver, Adam, 2003. "The internal consistency of the standard gamble: tests after adjusting for prospect theory," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 659-674, July.
    19. Adam Booij & Bernard Praag & Gijs Kuilen, 2010. "A parametric analysis of prospect theory’s functionals for the general population," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 115-148, February.
    20. Özalp Özer & Yanchong Zheng, 2016. "Markdown or Everyday Low Price? The Role of Behavioral Motives," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(2), pages 326-346, February.
    21. L'Haridon, Olivier, 2009. "Behavior in the loss domain: An experiment using the probability trade-off consistency condition," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 540-551, August.

    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:transa:v:49:y:2013:i:c:p:123-131. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/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.