Travel Mode Choice and Transit Route Choice Behavior in Montreal: Insights from McGill University Members Commute Patterns Naveen Eluru

Download 144.7 Kb.

Page	3/3
Date	17.05.2017
Size	144.7 Kb.
	#18421

1 2 3

Attribute Car Transit

Table 3: Mixed Multinomial logit model results for transit route choice

Attribute	Parameter	t-stats
Transit alternative has bus	-0.2375	-1.066
Transit alternative has metro	0.6378	2.145
Transit alternative has train	-1.5665	-2.142
The alternative with the earliest arrival time	0.2361	2.209
Travel time in bus	-0.2690	-5.997
Travel time in metro	-0.1616	-3.238
Travel time in train	-0.1737	-3.420
Standard Deviation	0.0496	2.000
Total Walking time	-0.3550	-7.806
Total Walking time squared	0.0013	1.441
Standard Deviation	0.1297	4.191
Number of transfers	-2.4985	-8.101
Standard Deviation	0.9752	2.293
Waiting Time per transfer	-0.0766	-2.341
Total travel time interactions with Socio-demographics
Female	0.0688	2.955
Age	0.0012	1.584
Faculty	-0.0395	-1.465
Log-likelihood at Convergence	-681.7
Log-likelihood at Equal shares	-1207.4
McFadden rho-square	0.42

Table 4: Policy sensitivity analysis of the travel mode choice model

Attribute	Car	Transit
Travel time by Transit reduced by 5 minutes	-11.51	5.15
Travel time by Transit reduced by 10 minutes	-21.68	9.71
Travel time by Car increased by 5 minutes	-11.60	5.20
Travel time by Car increased by 10 minutes	-22.49	10.07
Walking time to transit reduced by 5 minutes	-2.88	1.29
Walking time to transit reduced by 10 minutes	-5.53	2.48
Initial Waiting Time reduced by 5 minutes	-3.66	1.64
Initial Waiting Time reduced by 10 minutes	-5.74	2.57
No. of transfers (for transit) reduced by 1	-18.75	8.39
Household vehicle ownership reduced by 1	-35.39	15.85

Table 5: Policy sensitivity analysis of the transit route choice model

	Bus		Metro		Train
Reduction in Attribute by	5 minutes	10 minutes	5 minutes	10 minutes	5 minutes	10 minutes
Travel Time	19.41	31.13	9.33	18.27	7.51	20.08
Walking Time	27.37	42.09	20.04	38.74	9.80	20.59

1 The response rate from our survey is ~26%. The rate falls within the acceptable response rates observed from earlier literature (see Kaplowitz et al., 2004; Manfreda et al., 2008)

Directory: neluru -> Papers
Papers -> Evaluating alternate discrete outcome frameworks for modeling crash injury severity
Papers -> A latent class modelling approach for identifying vehicle driver injury severity factors at highway-railway crossings
Papers -> Impact of ict access on personal activity space and greenhouse gas production: evidence from Quebec City, Canada
Papers -> Alternative Modeling Approaches Used for Examining Automobile Ownership: a comprehensive Review
Papers -> An Analysis of Bicycle Route Choice Preferences in Texas, U. S
Papers -> Analysis of vehicle ownership evolution in montreal, canada using pseudo panel analysis

Download 144.7 Kb.

Share with your friends:

1 2 3