IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v42y2015i1p101-122.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lost in transit? Unfamiliar public transport travel explored using a journey planner web survey

Author

Listed:
  • Lorelei Schmitt

    ()

  • Graham Currie
  • Alexa Delbosc

Abstract

Attracting and retaining public transport users is fundamental to a number of land use and transport policy objectives which seek to reduce single-occupant vehicle travel. Understanding the psychological processes underlying unfamiliar public transport use may assist in achieving this aim. This paper explores unfamiliar transit travel using a survey conducted through an online travel planning website in Melbourne, Australia. The survey obtained ‘before and after’ travel data and explored the circumstances of unfamiliar travel, travel experiences, and the impact of these experiences on attitudes and behavior. A total of 3,537 ‘before’ responses and 658 eligible ‘after’ surveys were obtained including 152 unfamiliar transit journeys. Compared with familiar travel, unfamiliar travel was more commonly associated with: life events, less time living in Melbourne, travel companionship, visiting new locations, and non-work-related trip purposes. Unfamiliar travel experiences were rated more negatively for ‘navigation’ and ‘emotional state (level of anxiety)’ and more positively for ‘expected versus actual travel time’ and ‘level of comfort’. Analysis of travel attribute ratings and intention to re-patronize services indicated that there was a significant relationship between positive trip experiences and intention to re-patronize services for all users, and particularly for unfamiliar travelers. These results suggest that unfamiliar public travel experiences are quite different to familiar travel and are important to optimize to encourage re-patronization and help grow public transport markets. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Lorelei Schmitt & Graham Currie & Alexa Delbosc, 2015. "Lost in transit? Unfamiliar public transport travel explored using a journey planner web survey," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 101-122, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:42:y:2015:i:1:p:101-122
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-014-9529-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11116-014-9529-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Engel, Christoph & Beckenkamp, Martin & Glöckner, Andreas & Irlenbusch, Bernd & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Kube, Sebastian & Kurschilgen, Michael & Morell, Alexander & Nicklisch, Andreas & Normann, Hans-, 2014. "First impressions are more important than early intervention: Qualifying broken windows theory in the lab," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 126-136.
    2. van Exel, N. Job A. & Rietveld, Piet, 2001. "Public transport strikes and traveller behaviour," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 237-246, October.
    3. Schmitt, Lorelei & Currie, Graham & Delbosc, Alexa, 2013. "Measuring the impact of unfamiliar transit travel using a university access survey," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 301-307.
    4. Van Exel, N.J.A. & Rietveld, P., 2009. "Could you also have made this trip by another mode? An investigation of perceived travel possibilities of car and train travellers on the main travel corridors to the city of Amsterdam, The Netherland," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 374-385, May.
    5. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    6. Mackett, Roger L. & Edwards, Marion, 1998. "The impact of new urban public transport systems: will the expectations be met?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 231-245, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:kap:transp:v:42:y:2015:i:1:p:101-122. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.