Design of stated adaptation experiments: discussion of some issues and experiences

Stated preference experiments have become commonly used methods of data collection in transportation research and the increasing importance of individual choice processes in travel behaviour research instigates the use of stated adaptation experiments. Two complementary stated adaptation approaches can be distinguished. The first approach follows the traditional stated preference methods and focuses on the statistical analysis of the variables that affect the individual choice processes; the second approach is not based on strict rules of experimental design and is mainly descriptive in nature. Based on a detailed description of two experiments of the first type, the design and implementation of such experiments are discussed. The most important lesson from our experiences with these stated adaptation experiments is the design of the hypothetical situations: the situations should be realistic for the respondents as well as useful for statistical analyses. Although this is not an easy task, the implementation of the experiments by means of an interactive Internet-based survey is found to be very helpful: such surveys are able to dynamically collect and process personalized data that can be used to design realistic and statistically sound hypothetical situations.

[1]  D. Hensher,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications , 2000 .

[2]  "Stated responses": Überblick, Grenzen, Möglichkeiten , 2001 .

[3]  Geert Wets,et al.  Fitting S-Shaped Activity Utility Functions Based on Stated-Preference Data , 2006 .

[4]  HYPOTHETICAL SITUATIONS: THE ATTEMPT TO FIND NEW BEHAVIORAL HYPOTHESES , 2000 .

[5]  D. Hensher Stated preference analysis of travel choices: the state of practice , 1994 .

[6]  H. Timmermans,et al.  Measuring Stated Bifurcation Points in Traveler Adaptation Processes: The Example of Long Distance Transport Mode Choice , 2003 .

[7]  Ta Theo Arentze,et al.  Activity-Travel Rescheduling Decisions: Estimating Parameters of Response Patterns , 2007 .

[8]  Charles Raux,et al.  Stated adaptation surveys and choice process: Some methodological issues , 1998 .

[9]  D. Hensher,et al.  Assessing the influence of design dimensions on stated choice experiment estimates , 2005 .

[10]  Kay W. Axhausen,et al.  Distributional Assumptions in Mixed Logit Models , 2006 .

[11]  K. Train,et al.  Estimation on stated-preference experiments constructed from revealed-preference choices , 2008 .

[12]  Sean T. Doherty,et al.  Toward Sustainable Transportation: Exploring Transportation Decision Making in Teleworking Households in a Mid-Sized Canadian City , 2004 .

[13]  Harry Timmermans,et al.  Modelling Complex Activity‐Travel Scheduling Decisions: Procedure for the Simultaneous Estimation of Activity Generation and Duration Functions , 2011 .

[14]  T. Arentze,et al.  PREDICTING MULTI-FACETED ACTIVITY-TRAVEL ADJUSTMENT STRATEGIES IN RESPONSE TO POSSIBLE CONGESTION PRICING SCENARIOS USING AN INTERNET- BASED STATED ADAPTATION EXPERIMENT , 2003 .

[15]  Harry Timmermans,et al.  MEASURING AND PREDICTING ADAPTATION BEHAVIOR IN MULTIDIMENSIONAL ACTIVITY-TRAVEL PATTERNS , 2006 .

[16]  Harry Timmermans,et al.  Estimating non-linear utility functions of time use in the context of an activity schedule adaptation model , 2003 .

[17]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1985 .

[18]  Ta Theo Arentze,et al.  Modeling Effects of Anticipated Time Pressure on Execution of Activity Programs , 2001 .

[19]  Matthew J. Roorda,et al.  Stated Adaptation Survey of Activity Rescheduling , 2007 .