Making time count: Traveler activity engagement on urban transit

Frei, Charlotte; Mahmassani, Hani S.; Frei, Andreas

doi:10.1016/j.tra.2014.12.007

Cited by 44 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, the majority of the longest commuter journeys are carried out by train (OFS, 2018, Ravalet et al, 2015. This is explained by the fact that workers are increasingly using commuting time to work (Frei et al, 2015;Lyons et al, 2016) and that the alternative use of travel time is facilitated on public transport (Keseru and Macharis, 2018) as opposed to trips made by car during which the traveller must concentrate on driving. Researching teleworking in third places is crucial in a context where co-working spaces are increasingly prevalent.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teleworking: Decreasing Mobility or Increasing Tolerance of Commuting Distances?

Ravalet¹,

Rérat²

2019

built environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teleworking is widely considered to be a way of solving mobility issues by decreasing the number of commuting trips. However, little is known about teleworking and, more specifically, its links with spatial mobilities and the potential rebound effects. Statistical analysis of data from the Swiss Mobility and Transport Microcensus shows some limits to the ability of teleworking to regulate mobility in Switzerland. Firstly, commuting to a conventional workplace is replaced by (albeit shorter) journeys for other purposes. Secondly, and more importantly, teleworkers live further away from the workplace than their colleagues (24.6 km vs. 16.1 km). Our analysis shows that, although teleworking may reduce the number of commuting trips, it is likely to increase the distance travelled over a working week. Being able to work at home for part of the week may consequently decrease the propensity for residential relocation and increase tolerance for long distance commuting.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teleworking: Decreasing Mobility or Increasing Tolerance of Commuting Distances?

Ravalet¹,

Rérat²

2019

built environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The largest category of evidence covers the activities individuals engage in while travelling and whether they consider their travel time to be useful, pleasant or wasted (Berliner Kenyon and Lyons 2007;Lyons et al 2007Lyons et al , 2013Lyons et al , 2016Russell et al 2011;Tang et al 2018;Van de Waerden et al 2009;Yosritzal et al 2017). There have also been many studies that investigate how worthwhile activities while travelling affect attitudes and journey satisfaction (Ettema et al 2012;Frei et al 2015;Mokhtarian et al 2015;Rasouli and Timmermans 2014;van Hagen et al 2017) and others that explore mode choice effects (Van der Waerden et al 2010;Etezady et al 2019;Malokin et al 2017Malokin et al , 2019. Whilst such studies tend to recognise that multitasking would be expected to reduce the VTTS, they do not seek to estimate how the worthwhile use of travel time impacts on VTTS.…”

Section: Behavioural Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The valuation and demand impacts of the worthwhile use of travel time with specific reference to the digital revolution and endogeneity

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research reported here is concerned with how the worthwhile use of travel time might impact on the value of travel time savings (VTTS) and on demand set in the context of the rail travel market in Great Britain. It has long been recognised, in a variety of literature, that improvements in worthwhile activities which will have been delivered by the digital revolution will impact VTTS and demand yet there is surprisingly little reliable evidence and official appraisal practice does not accommodate any such effects. In a large survey of rail travellers, we have explored how activities while travelling impact on VTTS and demand. An important feature of the study was to account for endogeneity whereby variations in VTTS estimates according to the worthwhile use of time are biased if drawn from comparisons across individuals of what they do while travelling rather from comparing within individual variations in activities. Indeed, we clearly demonstrate the impact of not allowing for endogeneity and indicate its presence in other studies. We find that the VTTS does vary according to activities undertaken while travelling in a largely credible manner and is broadly consistent with behavioural responses to different available activities. The evidence supports the VTTS falling over time due to the digital revolution and rail demand increasing. These are modest rather than considerable changes but nonetheless contribute a better understanding of evidence relating to VTTS and rail demand variations over time. Keywords Value of travel time savings • Worthwhile use of travel time • Rail demand forecasting • Digital impact on value of time • Multi-tasking and travel time • Intertemporal variations in value of time Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (

show abstract

“…& van der Waerden, 2008;van der Waerden, Timmermans, & van Neerven, 2009), questionnaire surveys and activity diaries (Berliner, Malokin, Circella, & Mokhtarian, 2015;Diana, 2008;Ettema, Friman, Gärling, Olsson, & Fujii, 2012;Ettema & Verschuren 2007;Frei, Mahmassani, & Frei, 2015;Guo et al, 2015;Kenyon, 2008;Kenyon & Lyons, 2007;Keseru et al, 2015;Lyons, Jain, & Holley, 2007;Lyons et al, 2013;Lyons, Jain, & Weir, 2016;Malokin et al, 2015;Mokhtarian, Papon, Goulard, & Diana, 2015;Ohmori & Harata, 2008;Yosritzal, 2014;Zhang & Timmermans, 2010), and interviews or focus groups (Handy et al, 2005;Jain & Lyons, 2008). While observations can reduce response bias and more accurately capture activity durations, self-reported survey data may be more useful for studying PUT because activities may be more closely related to underlying motivations (recall the activities vs. items discussion).…”

Section: Travel-based Multitaskingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A few multitasking studies also ask travelers to assess the value, worth, or usefulness of a trip (Circella et al, 2015;Frei et al, 2015;Lyons et al, 2007;Lyons et al, 2013;Susilo, Lyons, Jain, & Atkins, 2012). Approximately 20-25% of travelers report travel time to be very worthwhile or mostly useful; only 15-20% say travel time is mostly wasted time.…”

Section: Usefulness Of Travelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the positive utility of travel and mode choice

Singleton

2020

Mapping the Travel Behavior Genome

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do people travel? Underlying most travel behavior research is the deriveddemand paradigm of travel analysis, which assumes that travel demand is derived from the demand for spatially separated activities, traveling is a means to an end (reaching destinations), and travel time is a disutility to be minimized. In contrast, the "positive utility of travel" (PUT) concept suggests that travel may not be inherently disliked and could instead provide benefits or be motivated by desires for travel-based multitasking, positive emotions, or fulfillment. The PUT idea assembles several concepts relevant to travel behavior: utility maximization, motivation theory, multitasking, and subjective well-being. Despite these varied influences, empirical analyses of the PUT concept remain limited in both quantity and scope. There is a need for more fundamental development and classification of the PUT idea and its multifaceted nature. The wide variety and quality of ways to measure PUT attributes are further research challenges. Additionally, few studies investigate both major aspects of the PUT concept-travel activities and travel experiences-simultaneously. Finally, research is only beginning to examine empirical associations between PUT measures and travel behaviors such as mode choice. This dissertation addresses many of these gaps in conceptualizing, measuring, and modeling the PUT concept. First, a literature review strengthens the definition, classification, and empirical support for a PUT, defined as "any benefit(s) accruing to a traveler through the act of traveling." The two primary PUT categories are travel activities (travel-based multitasking) and travel experiences (travel subjective well-being), and the most useful PUT measures involve gathering self-reported assessments of these topics. Based on this ii review, an online questionnaire is designed and administered to nearly 700 commuters in the Portland, OR, region. The survey includes detailed questions about commute mode choice, activity participation, travel usefulness, positive emotions and fulfillment, and travel liking for a recent home-to-work trip. Next, these PUT measures are empirically examined using factor analyses, finding groupings of activities and common unobserved constructs of hedonic ("Distress," "Fear," "Attentiveness," "Enjoyment") and eudaimonic ("Security," "Autonomy," "Confidence", "Health") subjective well-being. Many of these factors exhibit large variations among travel modes-walking and bicycling commuters are the most satisfied and appear to value time spent exercising-and are predicted (somewhat less strongly) by other trip and traveler characteristics in ordered logit regression and structural equation models. Finally, integrated choice and latent variable models are estimated to examine relationships between measures of the PUT concept and commute mode choice. This is made possible by the unique dataset that collects PUT measures for not only the chosen mode but also modal alternatives. Measures of travel-based multitasking are signi...

show abstract

Making time count: Traveler activity engagement on urban transit

Cited by 44 publications

References 30 publications

Teleworking: Decreasing Mobility or Increasing Tolerance of Commuting Distances?

Teleworking: Decreasing Mobility or Increasing Tolerance of Commuting Distances?

The valuation and demand impacts of the worthwhile use of travel time with specific reference to the digital revolution and endogeneity

Exploring the positive utility of travel and mode choice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About