IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pubtra/v8y2016i2d10.1007_s12469-016-0124-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bus service quality prediction and attribute ranking: a neural network approach

Author

Listed:
  • Md Rokibul Islam

    (Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET))

  • Md Hadiuzzaman

    (Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET))

  • Rajib Banik

    (European University of Bangladesh (EUB))

  • Md Mehedi Hasnat

    (Ahsanullah University of Science and Technology (AUST))

  • Sarder Rafee Musabbir

    (Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET))

  • Sanjana Hossain

    (Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET))

Abstract

Evaluation of service quality (SQ) based on user preferences has become a primary concern for the transportation authorities. The most significant attributes of public transportation systems are revealed through service quality analysis. This information serves as valuable input in constantly updating the quality of public transportation services. An appropriate tool is therefore mandatory in this regard. This paper represents a comparative study on the bus SQ prediction capabilities of three effective Artificial Neural Network (ANN) approaches, namely: Generalized Regression Neural Network (GRNN), Probabilistic Neural Network (PNN) and Pattern Recognition Neural Network (PRNN). To calibrate the parameters of the developed ANN models, data on users’ perception toward bus services of Dhaka city, Bangladesh, have been used. Taking the public opinion as baseline, GRNN and PNN have proven to be better prediction models since both have achieved higher accuracy compared to PRNN. Among 22 selected SQ attributes, the most significant attributes have been ranked according to their influence on the users’ decision making process. According to the GRNN and PNN models, punctuality and reliability, service frequency, seat availability and commuting experience are found to be the most significant attributes, which support the user-stated preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pubtra:v:8:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s12469-016-0124-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s12469-016-0124-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12469-016-0124-0
    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/s12469-016-0124-0?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. dell'Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Angel & Cecín, Patricia, 2010. "Modelling user perception of bus transit quality," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 388-397, November.
    2. 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.
    3. Laura Eboli & Gabriella Mazzulla, 2008. "A Stated Preference Experiment for Measuring Service Quality in Public Transport," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(5), pages 509-523, February.
    4. Lai, Wen-Tai & Chen, Ching-Fu, 2011. "Behavioral intentions of public transit passengers--The roles of service quality, perceived value, satisfaction and involvement," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 318-325, March.
    5. Olsson, Lars E. & Friman, Margareta & Pareigis, Jörg & Edvardsson, Bo, 2012. "Measuring service experience: Applying the satisfaction with travel scale in public transport," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 413-418.
    6. 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.
    7. Aksoy, Safak & Atilgan, Eda & Akinci, Serkan, 2003. "Airline services marketing by domestic and foreign firms: differences from the customers’ viewpoint," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 9(6), pages 343-351.
    8. Andrey Sergeevich Mikhaylov & Ivan Sergeevich Gumenuk & Anna Alekseevna Mikhaylova, 2016. "Russian public transport system: the customers’ feedback on the service provision," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 125-141, March.
    9. Tyrinopoulos, Yannis & Antoniou, Constantinos, 2008. "Public transit user satisfaction: Variability and policy implications," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 260-272, July.
    10. 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.
    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. Stylianos Kolidakis & Kornilia Maria Kotoula & George Botzoris & Petros Fotios Kamberi & Dimitrios Skoutas, 2024. "Assessing Impact Factors That Affect School Mobility Utilizing a Machine Learning Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-31, January.
    2. Sewmini Jayatilake & Jonathan M. Bunker & Ashish Bhaskar & Marc Miska, 2021. "Time–space analysis to evaluate cell-based quality of service in bus rapid transit station platforms through passenger-specific area," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 395-427, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Nur Sabahiah Abdul Sukor & Surachai Airak & Sitti Asmah Hassan, 2021. "“More Than a Free Bus Ride”—Exploring Young Adults’ Perceptions of Free Bus Services Using a Qualitative Approach: A Case Study of Penang, Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.
    5. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Andrey Sergeevich Mikhaylov & Ivan Sergeevich Gumenuk & Anna Alekseevna Mikhaylova, 2016. "Russian public transport system: the customers’ feedback on the service provision," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 125-141, March.
    3. Juan de Oña & Rocio de Oña, 2015. "Quality of Service in Public Transport Based on Customer Satisfaction Surveys: A Review and Assessment of Methodological Approaches," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 605-622, August.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Echaniz, Eneko & dell’Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Ángel, 2018. "Modelling perceived quality for urban public transport systems using weighted variables and random parameters," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 31-39.
    11. 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.
    12. Shreya Das & Debapratim Pandit, 2013. "Importance of user perception in evaluating level of service for bus transit for a developing country like India: a review," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 402-420, July.
    13. 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.
    14. Rubén Cordera & Soledad Nogués & Esther González-González & Luigi dell’Olio, 2019. "Intra-Urban Spatial Disparities in User Satisfaction with Public Transport Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-22, October.
    15. Epstein, Bryan & Givoni, Moshe, 2016. "Analyzing the gap between the QOS demanded by PT users and QOS supplied by service operators," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 622-637.
    16. Zhang, Chunqin & Juan, Zhicai & Lu, Weite & Xiao, Guangnian, 2016. "Do the organizational forms affect passenger satisfaction? Evidence from Chinese public transport service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 129-148.
    17. Mandhani, Jyoti & Nayak, Jogendra Kumar & Parida, Manoranjan, 2020. "Interrelationships among service quality factors of Metro Rail Transit System: An integrated Bayesian networks and PLS-SEM approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 320-336.
    18. Chunqin Zhang & Daoyou Wang & Anning Ni & Xunyou Ni & Guangnian Xiao, 2019. "Different Effects of Contractual Form on Public Transport Satisfaction: Evidence from Large- and Medium-Sized Cities in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-21, October.
    19. Alonso, Borja & Barreda, Rosa & dell’Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Angel, 2018. "Modelling user perception of taxi service quality," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 157-164.
    20. Park, Keunhyun & Farb, Anna & Chen, Shuolei, 2021. "First-/last-mile experience matters: The influence of the built environment on satisfaction and loyalty among public transit riders," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 32-42.

    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:2:d:10.1007_s12469-016-0124-0. 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.