IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i4p1596-d1338725.html

Modeling Parking Choice Behavior Using Cumulative Prospect Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Yang Cao

    (College of Transportation, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China)

  • Yifan Ren

    (College of Transportation, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China)

  • Hongfei Jia

    (College of Transportation, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China)

  • Mingze Sun

    (College of Transportation, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China)

  • Zebo Dali

    (College of Transportation, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China)

Abstract

In order to capture the driver’s attitude and preference towards risk during the decision-making process, this paper establishes a parking choice model considering driver heterogeneity based on the cumulative prospect theory. This research innovatively considers the influence of the unreliability of cruise time on drivers’ parking choice behavior and adds the psychological cost of drivers’ anxiety caused by lateness into the model. At the same time, according to the driver’s parking preference for parking, the latent category model is used to divide the driver into time-sensitive and money-sensitive categories. This paper analyzes the influence of unreliable cruising time on drivers’ parking choice behavior and finds that drivers have the characteristics of overestimating high-probability events and underestimating low-probability events in the decision-making process. By comparing the parking choice results of rational and irrational drivers, it is found that the model considering the risk attitude of drivers in the decision-making process is more in line with reality.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang Cao & Yifan Ren & Hongfei Jia & Mingze Sun & Zebo Dali, 2024. "Modeling Parking Choice Behavior Using Cumulative Prospect Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:4:p:1596-:d:1338725
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/4/1596/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/4/1596/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Shoup, Donald C., 2006. "Cruising for Parking," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt55s7079f, University of California Transportation Center.
    3. 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..
    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. Hu, Yan & Feng, Tao & Li, Mengxia, 2025. "Examining the temporary use behavior of autonomous vehicles under uncertainty: A stated preference analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).

    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. Santos, Georgina & Behrendt, Hannah & Teytelboym, Alexander, 2010. "Part II: Policy instruments for sustainable road transport," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 46-91.
    2. Shoji, Isao & Kanehiro, Sumei, 2016. "Disposition effect as a behavioral trading activity elicited by investors' different risk preferences," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 104-112.
    3. Jos'e Cl'audio do Nascimento, 2019. "Behavioral Biases and Nonadditive Dynamics in Risk Taking: An Experimental Investigation," Papers 1908.01709, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    4. Francesco GUALA, 2017. "Preferences: Neither Behavioural nor Mental," Departmental Working Papers 2017-05, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    5. Bin Zou, 2017. "Optimal Investment In Hedge Funds Under Loss Aversion," International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance (IJTAF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-32, May.
    6. Nicholas Barberis, 2012. "A Model of Casino Gambling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 35-51, January.
    7. Goytom Abraha Kahsay & Daniel Osberghaus, 2018. "Storm Damage and Risk Preferences: Panel Evidence from Germany," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 301-318, September.
    8. Carolin Bock & Maximilian Schmidt, 2015. "Should I stay, or should I go? – How fund dynamics influence venture capital exit decisions," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 68-82, November.
    9. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold, 2016. "Modeling the effect of responsible research and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 126-133.
    10. Tetenov, Aleksey, 2012. "Statistical treatment choice based on asymmetric minimax regret criteria," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 157-165.
    11. Chen, Yanyan & Mandler, Timo & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2021. "Three decades of research on loyalty programs: A literature review and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 179-197.
    12. Tomas Bonavia & Josué Brox-Ponce, 2018. "Shame in decision making under risk conditions: Understanding the effect of transparency," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, February.
    13. Massimiliano Amarante & Mario Ghossoub & Edmund Phelps, 2012. "Contracting for Innovation under Knightian Uncertainty," Cahiers de recherche 18-2012, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    14. Plante, Charles & Lassoued, Rim & Phillips, Peter W.B., 2017. "The Social Determinants of Cognitive Bias: The Effects of Low Capability on Decision Making in a Framing Experiment," SocArXiv u62cx, Center for Open Science.
    15. Wang, Peiwen & Chen, Minghua & Wu, Ji & Yan, Yuanyun, 2023. "Do peer effects matter in bank risk? Some cross-country evidence," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    16. Lévesque, Moren & Schade, Christian, 2002. "Intuitive optimizing for time allocation decisions in newly formed ventures," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2002,24, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    17. Youki Kohsaka & Grzegorz Mardyla & Shinji Takenaka & Yoshiro Tsutsui, 2017. "Disposition Effect and Diminishing Sensitivity: An Analysis Based on a Simulated Experimental Stock Market," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 189-201, April.
    18. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.
    19. Schmidt, Ulrich & Friedl, Andreas & Lima de Miranda, Katharina, 2015. "Social comparison and gender differences in risk taking," Kiel Working Papers 2011, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    20. Che-Yuan Liang, 2017. "Optimal inequality behind the veil of ignorance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 431-455, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:16:y:2024:i:4:p:1596-:d:1338725. 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.