IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Weighting Waiting: Evaluating the Perception of In-Vehicle Travel Time Under Moving and Stopped Conditions

  • David Levinson

    ()

    (Nexus (Networks, Economics, and Urban Systems) Research Group, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota)

  • Kathleen Harder
  • John Bloomfield

    (College of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, University of Minnesota)

  • Kasia Winiarczyk

This paper describes experiments comparing traditional computer administered stated preference with virtual experience stated preference to ascertain how people value stopped delay compared with stop-and- go or freeflow traffic. The virtual experience stated preference experiments were conducted using a wrap around driving simulator. The two methods produced two different results, with the traditional computer assisted stated preference suggesting that ramp delay is 1.6 Ð 1.7 times more onerous than freeway time, while the driving simulator based virtual experience stated preference suggested that freeway delay is more onerous than ramp delay. Several reasons are hypothesized to explain the differences, including recency, simultaneous versus sequential comparison, awareness of public opinion, the intensity of the stop-and-go traffic, and the fact that driving in the real-world is a goal directed activity. However without further research, which, if any, of these will eventually prove to be the reason is unclear. What is clear is that a comparison of the computer administered stated preference with virtual experience stated preference produces different results, even though both procedures strive to find the same answers in nominally identical sets of conditions. Because people experience the world subjectively, and make decisions based on those subjective experiences, future research should be aimed at better understanding the differences between these subjective methodologies.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://nexus.umn.edu/Papers/WeightingWaiting.pdf
File Function: First version, 2007
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group in its series Working Papers with number 200401.

as
in new window

Length: 16 pages
Date of creation: Jan 2004
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board #1898 pages 61-68
Handle: RePEc:nex:wpaper:weightingwaiting
Contact details of provider: Postal: Dept. of Civil Engineering, 500 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455
Phone: +01 (612) 625-6354
Fax: +01 (612) 626-7750
Web page: http://nexus.umn.edu
More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Redmond, Lothlorien S. & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2001. "The Positive Utility of the Commute: Modeling Ideal Commute Time and Relative Desired Commute Amount," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt4mc291p2, University of California Transportation Center.
  2. Bhat, Chandra R., 1995. "A heteroscedastic extreme value model of intercity travel mode choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 471-483, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nex:wpaper:weightingwaiting. 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: (David Levinson)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.