Existing activity-based models are typically concerned with predicting observed activity travel patterns. The study of the dynamics of the activity-scheduling process has received far less attention. To some extent, this situation can be explained by a lack of relevant data, but there is also a lack of conceptualization and simulation work. To fill this gap, the process of how individuals adjust their activity program as a function of anticipated time pressure during the execution of the program is conceptualized and specified.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BhatC. R., and KoppelmanF. S.. Activity-Based Modeling of Travel Demand. In Handbook of Transportation Science (HallR., ed.), Kluwer, Boston, 1999.
2.
TimmermansH. J. P., ArentzeT., and JohC.-H.. Analyzing Space-Time Behavior: New Approaches to Old Problems. Progress in Human Geography (in press).
3.
GärlingT., BrännäsK., GarvillJ., GolledgeR. G., GopalS., HolmE., and LindbergE.. Household Activity Scheduling. In Transport Policy, Management and Technology Towards 2001: Selected Proceedings of the Fifth World Conference on Transport Research, Western Periodicals, Ventura, Calif., 1989, Vol. 4.
4.
EttemaD. F., BorgersA. W. J., and TimmermansH. J. P.. A Simulation Model of Activity Scheduling Heuristics: An Empirical Test. Geographical and Environmental Modelling, Vol. 4, 2000, pp. 175–187.
5.
KitamuraR., PendyalaR. M., PasE. I., and ReddyD. V.. Application of AMOS: An Activity-Based TCM Evaluation Tool Applied to Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Area. In Proc., 23rd Summer Annual Meeting, PTRC, London, 1995.
6.
ArentzeT., HofmanF., van MourikH., and TimmermansH. J. P.. ALBATROSS: Multiagent Rule-Based Model of Activity Pattern Decisions. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1706, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 136–144.
7.
TimmermansH. J. P., ArentzeT., and JohC.-H.. Modeling Learning and Evolutionary Adaptation Processes in Activity Settings: Theory and Numerical Simulations. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1718, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 27–33.
8.
GärlingT., GillholmR., and MontgomeryW.. The Role of Anticipated Time Pressure in Activity Scheduling. Transportation, Vol. 26, 1999, pp. 173–192.
9.
BhatC. R., and KoppelmanF. S.. A Conceptual Framework of Individual Activity Program Generation. Transportation Research, Vol. 27A, 1993, pp. 433–446.
10.
KitamuraR.Model of Daily Time Allocation to Discretionary Out-of-Home Activities and Trips. Transportation Research B, Vol. 18, 1984, pp. 255–266.
11.
KraanM.In Search for Limits to Mobility Growth with a Model for the Allocation of Time and Money. In Activity-Based Approaches to Travel Analysis (EttemaD. F. and TimmermansH. J. P., eds.), Pergamon, Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford, England, 1997.
12.
SupernakJ.Temporal Utility Profiles of Activities and Travel: Uncertainty and Decision Making. Transportation Research B, Vol. 26, 1992, pp. 61–76.
13.
WinstonG. C.Time-Specific Analysis of Household Activities. In The Timing of Economic Activities: Firms, Households, and Markets in Time-Specific Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 1982.
