Is Light Rail More Attractive to users than bus Transit?: Arguments Based on Cognition and Rational Choice

Decision making for a new light rail system is based on a demand forecast and the additional benefits expected to come along with rail transit. Recent light rail implementations have shown that the demand forecast was often inaccurate. The supposition is that the attraction of light rail, compared with bus systems, has been misjudged. This paper presents arguments on this bias based on a literature review of cognitive approaches and rational choices, with a focus on Europe and North America. The higher attraction of light rail for users is most likely because of four impact groups. The first of these is the attention-capturing factors, such as new and modern vehicles, special design, visibility of route (e.g., tracks, bus lanes), and media presence during the evaluation and construction process; these factors contribute to the memory representation and perception of transit systems. The second is the perceived attributes of transit systems, especially qualitative factors of reliability and ride comfort, which are highly associated with light rail systems. The third, neighborhood characteristics of areas served with a specific transit mode, were found to contribute to the perception and valuation of this transit mode. And last, following the theory of induced demand, the higher capacity provided by light rail vehicles compared with buses can affect ridership. It was found that cognitive approaches contributed to the explanation of the potential preference for light rail. These approaches help to clarify why demand is expected to differ, especially in situations in which light rail and buses provide similar service characteristics in regard to availability.

[1]  Katrin Dziekan,et al.  What do people know about their public transport options? , 2008 .

[2]  Eric Sundstrom,et al.  Social psychology, 5th ed. , 1988 .

[3]  C Hass-Klau,et al.  BUS OR LIGHT RAIL: MAKING THE RIGHT CHOICE - A FINANCIAL, OPERATIONAL AND DEMAND COMPARISON OF LIGHT RAIL, GUIDED BUSES, BUSWAYS AND BUS LANES , 2004 .

[4]  Taylor Reyes,et al.  Quantifying the Importance of Image and Perception to Bus Rapid Transit , 2009 .

[5]  Michael Duncan,et al.  Transit’s Value-Added Effects: Light and Commuter Rail Services and Commercial Land Values , 2002 .

[6]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Social cognition, 2nd ed. , 1991 .

[7]  J. Urry,et al.  Travel time use in the information age , 2005 .

[8]  Hans de Bruijn,et al.  Decision-making for light rail , 2009 .

[9]  W Huesler STRASSENBAHNPROJEKTE IN DER STANDARDISIERTEN BEWERTUNG , 1996 .

[10]  Ela Babalik-Sutcliffe,et al.  Urban rail systems: Analysis of the factors behind success , 2002 .

[11]  P. Bonsall,et al.  Marketing in the bus industry: A psychological interpretation of some attitudinal and behavioural outcomes , 2007 .

[12]  Kay W. Axhausen,et al.  Searching for the rail bonus: results from a panel SP/RP study , 2001 .

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

[14]  R. Gifford,et al.  Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior : Predicting the Use of Public Transportation ' , 2002 .

[15]  John M. Rose,et al.  Applied Choice Analysis: List of tables , 2005 .

[16]  J. Gibson The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

[17]  Katrin Dziekan,et al.  Ease-of-Use in Public Transportation : A User Perspective on Information and Orientation Aspects , 2008 .

[18]  Karl Kottenhoff Evaluation of passenger train concepts : Methods and results of measuring travellers' preferences in relation to cost , 1999 .

[19]  John Glen,et al.  THE IMPACT OF A LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM ON THE STRUCTURE OF HOUSE PRICES: A HEDONIC LONGITUDINAL STUDY. , 1996 .

[20]  Dongmin Lee,et al.  Incorporation of Transportation User Perception into Evaluation of Service Quality of Signalized Intersections , 2007 .

[21]  J. Preston,et al.  The demand for public transport: a practical guide , 2004 .

[22]  W. Batchelder,et al.  Culture as Consensus: A Theory of Culture and Informant Accuracy , 1986 .

[23]  R. Mackett,et al.  The impact of new urban public transport systems: will the expectations be met? , 1998 .

[24]  John M. Rose,et al.  Applied Choice Analysis: List of tables , 2005 .

[25]  Jane Lappin,et al.  Automobile Drivers' Perceptions of Service Quality on Urban Streets , 2004 .

[26]  Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority , 2022 .

[27]  C. Groneck Französische Planungsleitbilder für Straßenbahnsysteme im Vergleich zu Deutschland , 2007 .

[28]  T. Litman Evaluating Transportation Land Use Impacts , 2004 .

[29]  Theodore Anton Petritsch,et al.  Video simulation of pedestrian crossings at signalized intersections , 2005 .

[30]  Bradley W. Lane Significant characteristics of the urban rail renaissance in the United States: A discriminant analysis , 2008 .

[31]  Graham Currie,et al.  The demand performance of bus rapid transit , 2005 .

[32]  Joan L. Walker,et al.  Extended Framework for Modeling Choice Behavior , 1999 .

[33]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Comparing ridership attraction of rail and bus , 2002 .

[34]  Nagui M. Rouphail,et al.  Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets , 2008 .