Recent work in travel demand modeling has sought to address decision making under risk and uncertainty by bringing together elements of expected utility theory (EUT) and random utility theory (RUT). The aims are to identify and discuss the key theoretical issues associated with the merging of EUT and RUT in a transport context and then to explore the many empirical issues associated with the specification of attitudes to risk. Specifically, the performance of the alternative specification of attitudes to risk is investigated with the use of data from a large stated-preference exercise in which respondents were faced with a series of choices between alternative unreliable train services.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AvineriE. and PrashkerJ. N.. Sensitivity to Uncertainty: Need for a Paradigm Shift. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1854, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 90–98.
2.
AvineriE. and PrashkerJ. N.. Violations of Expected Utility Theory in Route-Choice Stated Preferences: Certainty Effect and Inflation of Small Probabilities. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1894, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. 222–229.
3.
BatesJ.PolakJ. W.JonesP. and CookA.. The Valuation of Reliability for Personal Travel. Transportation Research E, Vol. 37, No. 22001, pp. 191–229.
4.
BatleyR. and DalyA.. Departure Time Choice under Uncertainty: A Model of Random Utility Maximisation for Wagers. Presented at European Transport Conference, Strasbourg, France, Oct. 2004.
5.
de PalmaA. and PicardN.. Route Choice Decision under Travel Time Uncertainty. Transportation Research A, Vol. 39, No. 42005, pp. 295–324.
6.
EttemaD.TammingaG.TimmermansH. and ArentzeT.. A MicroSimulation Model System of Departure Time Using a Perception Updating Model Under Travel Time Uncertainty. Transportation Research A, Vol. 39, No. 42005, pp. 325–344.
7.
NolandR. B. and SmallK. A.. Travel-Time Uncertainty, Departure Time Choice, and the Cost of Morning Commutes. In Transportation Research Record 1493, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 150–158.
8.
NolandR. B.SmallK. A.KoskenojaP. M. and ChuX.. Simulating Travel Reliability. Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol. 28, No. 51998, pp. 535–564.
9.
ReckerW.ChungY. S.ParkJ. Y.WangL.ChenA.JiZ.LiuH.HorrocksM. and OhJ. S.. Considering Risk-Taking Behaviour in Travel Time Reliability.California Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways (PATH) Research Report. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 2005.
10.
von NeumannJ. and MorgensternO.. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior.Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1944.
11.
SenbilM. and KitamuraR.. Reference Points in Commuter Departure Time Choice: A Prospect Theoretic Test of Alternative Decision Frames. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 8, No. 12004, pp. 19–31.
12.
MachinaM.Choice Under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 1, No. 11987, pp. 121–154.
13.
Ben-AkivaM. and LermanS. R.. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand.MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1985.
14.
TrainK.Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2003.
15.
TverskyA. and KahnemanD.. Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 5, 1992, pp. 297–323.
16.
MachinaM. and SchmeidlerD.. A More Robust Definition of Subjective Probability. Econometrica, Vol. 60, No. 41992, pp. 745–780.
17.
StarmerC.Development in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice Under Risk. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 38, 2000, pp. 332–382.
18.
KeeneyR. L. and RaiffaH.. Decisions with Multiple Objectives.John Wiley, London, 1976.
19.
PrattJ. W.Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large. Econometrica, Vol. 32, No. 21964, pp. 122–136.
20.
TatineniM.BoyceD. E. and MirchandaniP.. Comparisons of Deterministic and Stochastic Traffic Loading Models. In Transportation Research Record 1607, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 16–23.
21.
ChenA. and ReckerW.. Considering Risk-Taking Behavior in Travel Time Reliability. Presented at 80th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2001.
22.
SmallK. A.The Scheduling of Consumer Activities: Work Trips. American Economic Review, Vol. 72, 1982, pp. 467–479.
23.
VickreyW. S.Congestion Theory and Transport Investment. American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings), Vol. 59, 1969, pp. 251–261.
24.
BierlaireM.BIOGEME: A Free Package for the Estimation of Discrete Choice Models. Proc., 3rd Swiss Transport Research Conference, Ascona, Switzerland, 2003. www.strc.ch/Paper/bierlaire.pdf.
