Analysis of Transit Users’ Response Behavior in Case of Unplanned Service Disruptions

Abstract

Public transit disruption is becoming more common across different transit services, and can have a destructive influence on the resiliency of the transportation system. Even though transit agencies have various strategies to mitigate the probability of failure in the transit system by conducting preventative actions, some disruptions cannot be avoided because of their either unpredictable or uncontrollable nature. Utilizing recently collected data of transit users in the Chicago Metropolitan Area, the current study aims to analyze how transit users respond to an unplanned service disruption and disclose the factors that affect their behavior. In this study, a random parameter multinomial logit model is employed to consider heterogeneity across observations as well as panel effects. The results of the analysis reveal that a wide range of factors including socio-demographic attributes, personal attitudes, trip-related information, and built environment are significant in passengers’ behavior in case of unplanned transit disruptions. Moreover, the effect of service recovery time on passengers is not the same among all types of disrupted services; rail users are more sensitive to the recovery time as compared with bus users. The findings of this study provide insights for transportation authorities to improve the transit service quality in relation to user satisfaction and transportation resilience. These insights help transit agencies to implement effective recovery strategies.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Shaheen

Chan

Mobility and the Sharing Economy: Potential to Facilitate the First-and Last-Mile Public Transit Connections. Built Environment, Vol. 42, No. 4, 2016, pp. 573–588. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.42.4.573.

Shamshiripour

Golshani

Shabanpour

(Kouros) Mohammadian

Week-Long Mode Choice Behavior: Dynamic Random Effects Logit Model. Transportation Research Record:

Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2019. 2673: 736–744.

Chakrabarti

How Can Public Transit Get People out of Their Cars? An Analysis of Transit Mode Choice for Commute Trips in Los Angeles. Transport Policy, Vol. 54, 2017, pp. 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.11.005.

Shamshiripour

Rahimi

Shabanpour

(Kouros) Mohammadian

Dynamics of Travelers’ Modality Style in the Presence of Mobility-on-Demand Services. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 2020. (Under review)

Census Reporter. Chicago Census Information. https://censusreporter.org/profiles/16000US1714000-chicago-il/.

Chicago Transit Authority. CTA Facts at a Glance. https://www.transitchicago.com/facts/. Accessed January 28, 2019.

Abedin

Mehrabi

A. B.

Novel Approaches for Fracture Detection in Steel Girder Bridges. Infrastructures, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2019, p. 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures4030042.

van Exel

N. J. A.

Rietveld

When Strike Comes to Town… Anticipated and Actual Behavioural Reactions to a One-Day, Pre-Announced, Complete Rail Strike in the Netherlands. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 43, No. 5, 2009, pp. 526–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2009.01.003.

Pnevmatikou

A. M.

Karlaftis

M. G.

Kepaptsoglou

Metro Service Disruptions: How Do People Choose to Travel?

Transportation, Vol. 42, No. 6, 2015, pp. 933–949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-015-9656-4.

10.

Yap

M. D.

Nijënstein

van Oort

Improving Predictions of Public Transport Usage during Disturbances Based on Smart Card Data. Transport Policy, Vol. 61, 2018, pp. 84–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRANPOL.2017.10.010.

11.

Zhu

Masud

Xiong

Yang

Pan

Zhang

Travel Behavior Reactions to Transit Service Disruptions. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2017. 2649: 79–88. https://doi.org/10.3141/2649-09.

12.

Papangelis

Velaga

N. R.

Ashmore

Sripada

Nelson

J. D.

Beecroft

Exploring the Rural Passenger Experience, Information Needs and Decision Making during Public Transport Disruption. Research in Transportation Business & Management, Vol. 18, 2016, pp. 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RTBM.2016.01.002.

13.

Auld

Ley

Verbas

Golshani

Fontes

A Stated-Preference Intercept Survey of Transit-Rider Response to Service Disruptions. Presented at 98th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2018.

14.

Baylis

Grayson

Lau

Gerstell

Scott

Nicholson

Transportation Sector Resilience. National Infrastructure Advisory Council, Arlington, Va., 2015.

15.

Lin

Transit User Mode Choice Behaviour in Response to TTC Rapid Transit Service Disruption. University of Toronto, 2017.

16.

Golshani

Shabanpour

Mohammadian

Auld

Ley

Evacuation Decision Behavior for No-Notice Emergency Events. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 77, 2019, pp. 364–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2019.01.025.

17.

Murray-Tuite

Wernstedt

Yin

Behavioral Shifts after a Fatal Rapid Transit Accident: A Multinomial Logit Model. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 24, 2014, pp. 218–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRF.2014.04.014.

18.

Kroes

E. P.

Sheldon

R. J.

Stated Preference Methods: An Introduction. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, Vol. 22, No. 1, 1988, pp. 11–25. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20052832. Accessed April 7, 2019.

19.

Bachok

Estimating, Calibrating and Validating Demand For Feeder Services During Incident Detections. Proc., 30th Conference of Australian Institutes of Transport Research, Perth, 2008.

20.

Fukasawa

Yamauchi

Murakoshi

Fujinami

Tatsui

Provision of Forecast Train Information and Consequential Impact on Decision Making for Train-Choice. Quarterly Report of RTRI, Vol. 53, No. 3, 2012, pp. 141–147.

21.

Bai

Kattan

Modeling Riders’ Behavioral Responses to Real-Time Information at Light Rail Transit Stations. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2014. 2412: 82–92.

22.

Sudman

Bradburn

N. M.

Effects of Time and Memory Factors on Response in Surveys. Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 68, No. 344, 1973, pp. 805–815. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1973.10481428.

23.

Golshani

Rahimi

Shabanpour

Mohammadian

Auld

Ley

Passengers’ Travel Behavior in Response to Unplanned Transit Disruptions. arXiv Preprint arXiv:2001.01718, 2020.

24.

CMAP. Travel Tracker Survey. https://www.cmap.illinois.gov/data/transportation/travel-tracker-survey.

25.

Ramsey

Bell

Smart Location Database:Version 2.0 User Guide. U.S. Environment Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 2014.

26.

Greene

W. H.

Econometric Analysis. Pearson, Boston; London, 2012.

27.

Train

Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge University Press, 2009.

28.

Boggs

Arvin

M. R.

Khattak

A. J.

Exploring the Who, What, When, Where, and Why of Automated Vehicle Disengagements. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 136, 2020, p. 105406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2019.105406.

29.

Rahimi

Shamshiripour

Samimi

(Kouros) Mohammadian

Investigating the Injury Severity of Single-Vehicle Truck Crashes in a Developing Country. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 137, 2020, p. 105444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105444.

30.

Mansourkhaki

Karimpour

Yazdi

H. S.

Introducing Prior Knowledge for a Hybrid Accident Prediction Model. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 21, No. 5, 2017, pp. 1912–1918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-016-0495-4.

31.

Mansourkhaki

Karimpour

Sadoghi Yazdi

Non-Stationary Concept of Accident Prediction. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Transport, Vol. 170, No. 3, 2017, pp. 140–151. https://doi.org/10.1680/jtran.15.00053.

32.

Karimpour

Kluger

Y. J.

Traffic Sensor Data-Based Assessment of Speed Feedback Signs. Journal of Transportation Safety & Security, 2020.

33.

Mousavi

S. M.

Marzoughi

Parr

S. A.

Wolshon

Pande

A Mixed Crash Frequency Estimation Model for Interrupted Flow Segments. Proc., International Conference on Transportation and Development, Alexandria, Va., 2019.

34.

Nazari

Rahimi

(Kouros) Mohammadian

Simultaneous Estimation of Battery Electric Vehicle Adoption with Endogenous Willingness to Pay. eTransportation, Vol. 1, 2019, p. 100008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etran.2019.100008.

35.

Bhat

C. R.

Simulation Estimation of Mixed Discrete Choice Models Using Randomized and Scrambled Halton Sequences. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 37, No. 9, 2003, pp. 837–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-2615(02)00090-5.

36.

Limtanakool

Dijst

Schwanen

The Influence of Socioeconomic Characteristics, Land Use and Travel Time Considerations on Mode Choice for Medium- and Longer-Distance Trips. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 14, No. 5, 2006, pp. 327–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTRANGEO.2005.06.004.

37.

Miller

E. J.

Roorda

M. J.

Carrasco

J. A.

A Tour-Based Model of Travel Mode Choice. Transportation, Vol. 32, No. 4, 2005, pp. 399–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-004-7962-3.

38.

Chen

Gong

Paaswell

Role of the Built Environment on Mode Choice Decisions: Additional Evidence on the Impact of Density. Transportation, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2008, pp. 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-007-9153-5.

39.

Saxena

Hossein Rashidi

Auld

Studying the Tastes Effecting Mode Choice Behavior of Travelers under Transit Service Disruptions. Travel Behaviour and Society, Vol. 17, 2019, pp. 86–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2019.07.004.

40.

Currie

Muir

Understanding Passenger Perceptions and Behaviors During Unplanned Rail Disruptions. Transportation Research Procedia, Vol. 25, 2017, pp. 4392–4402. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRPRO.2017.05.322.

41.

Pawlak

Circella

Polak

Mokhtarian

Sivakumar

Is There Anything Exceptional about ICT Use While Travelling? A Time Allocation Framework for and Empirical Insights into Multitasking Patterns and Well-Being Implications from the Canadian General Social Survey. Presented at 95th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2016.

42.

Mokhtarian

P. L.

Subjective Well-Being and Travel: Retrospect and Prospect. Transportation, Vol. 46, No. 2, 2019, pp. 493–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9935-y.

43.

Malokin

Circella

Mokhtarian

P. L.

How Do Activities Conducted While Commuting Influence Mode Choice? Using Revealed Preference Models to Inform Public Transportation Advantage and Autonomous Vehicle Scenarios. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 124, 2019, pp. 82–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2018.12.015.

44.

Circella

Mokhtarian

P. L.

Poff

L. K.

A Conceptual Typology of Multitasking Behavior and Polychronicity Preferences. Electronic International Journal of Time Use Research, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2012, pp. 59–107.

45.

Ebnali

Kian

Ebnali-Heidari

Mazloumi

User Experience in Immersive VR-Based Serious Game: An Application in Highly Automated Driving Training. In Advances in Human Factors of Transportation. AHFE 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ( Stanton

, ed.), Vol. 964, Springer, Cham, 2020, pp. 133–144.

46.

Ebnali

Hulme

Ebnali-Heidari

Mazloumi

How Does Training Effect Users’ Attitudes and Skills Needed for Highly Automated Driving?

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 66, 2019, pp. 184–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.09.001.

47.

Ebnali

Lamb

R. L.

Fathi

Familiarization Tours for First-Time Users of Highly Automated Cars: Comparing the Effects of Virtual Environments with Different Levels of Interaction Fidelity. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338825910_Familiarization_tours_for_first-time_users_of_highly_automated_cars_Comparing_the_effects_of_virtual_environments_with_different_levels_of_interaction_fidelity. Accessed February 11, 2020.

48.

Pace Bus. Pace Suburban Bus. http://www.pacebus.com/sub/paratransit/default.asp

49.

Rodríguez

D. A.

Joo

The Relationship between Non-Motorized Mode Choice and the Local Physical Environment. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2004, pp. 151–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2003.11.001.

50.

Shamshiripour

Shabanpour

Golshani

(Kouros) Mohammadian

Shamshiripour

Analyzing the Impact of Neighborhood Safety on Active School Travels. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 2019, pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2019.1628327.

51.

Rahimi

Shamshiripour

Shabanpour

Mohammadian

Auld

Analysis of Transit Users’ Waiting Tolerance in Response to Unplanned Service Disruptions. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 77, 2019, pp. 639–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2019.10.011.

52.

Samimi

Rahimi

Amini

Jamshidi

Freight Modal Policies Toward a Sustainable Society. Scientia Iranica, 2019. https://doi.org/10.24200/sci.2019.21386.

53.

Samimi

Rahimi

Amini

H. R.

A Disaggregate Analysis of Rail-Truck Mode Choice Behaviors for Freight Shipments in Iran and their Environment Effects. Amirkabir Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 50, No. 3, 2018, pp. 519–528. https://doi.org/10.22060/ceej.2017.11880.5092.

54.

Bargegol

Ghorbanzadeh

Ghasedi

Rastbod

Evaluation of Effective Factors on Travel Time in Optimization of Bus Stops Placement Using Genetic Algorithm. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 245, No. 4, 2017, pp. 042002.

55.

Lee

Y. J.

Nickkar

Optimal Automated Demand Responsive Feeder Transit Operation and its Impact. Final Report. Morgan State University, 2018.

56.

Mahmoudzadeh

Firoozi Yeganeh

Ochoa

Wang

X. B.

Tippy

A Practical Approach for Evaluating and Scheduling a Campus Bus System Based on Clustering. Presented at 98th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2019.

57.

Mahmoudzadeh

Wang

X. B.

Cluster Based Methodology for Scheduling a University Shuttle System. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2020, p. 036119811990063. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119900636.

58.

Rayle

Dai

Chan

Cervero

Shaheen

Just a Better Taxi? A Survey-Based Comparison of Taxis, Transit, and Ridesourcing Services in San Francisco. Transport Policy, Vol. 45, 2016, pp. 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRANPOL.2015.10.004.

59.

Vivoda

J. M.

Harmon

A. C.

Babulal

G. M.

Zikmund-Fisher

B. J.

E-Hail (Rideshare) Knowledge, Use, Reliance, and Future Expectations among Older Adults. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 55, 2018, pp. 426–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRF.2018.03.020.

60.

Wang

Wei

Wang

An Empirical Study of Consumers’ Intention to Use Ride-Sharing Services: Using an Extended Technology Acceptance Model. Transportation, 2018, pp. 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9893-4.

61.

Yang

Lau

Y. W.

Wong

S. C.

H. K.

A Macroscopic Taxi Model for Passenger Demand, Taxi Utilization and Level of Services. Transportation, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2000, pp. 317–340. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005289504549.

62.

Burris

M. W.

Pendyala

R. M.

Discrete Choice Models of Traveler Participation in Differential Time of Day Pricing Programs. Transport Policy, Vol. 9, No. 3, 2002, pp. 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(02)00002-1.

63.

Frei

Hyland

Mahmassani

H. S.

Flexing Service Schedules: Assessing the Potential for Demand-Adaptive Hybrid Transit via a Stated Preference Approach. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 76, 2017, pp. 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRC.2016.12.017.