IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v165y2022icp172-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mobility-impaired people’s preferences for a specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder: The role of autonomy, relatedness, and competence

Author

Listed:
  • Márquez, Luis
  • Pineda, Laura X.
  • Poveda, Juan C.

Abstract

Transportation is a very important element in the well-being of mobility-impaired people. However, people with disabilities often struggle to access transportation services at all, especially if they live in mountain areas. This study is aimed at better understanding the main factors that affect the preferences for a new specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder to serve the portion of the trip that mobility-impaired people cannot manage. We hypothesized that in addition to some observable attributes of the transportation services, such as time and travel cost, mobility-impaired people’s preferences for a specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder could be better explained by using a hybrid discrete choice model based on the Self-Determination Theory (SDT). We gathered responses through a stated-preference survey (N = 350), in which respondents faced a series of choice situations among three BRT feeder alternatives: bus, cable car and a new specialized service. We also obtained indicator ratings through a basic psychological needs satisfaction scale to identify the latent variables in relation to the SDT. Modeling results supported our hypothesis that the preferences of mobility-impaired people are better explained by considering the three innate psychological needs. We found empirical evidence linking the components of the SDT, i.e. Autonomy, Relatedness, and Competence, with preferences for the specialized transportation service as BRT’s feeder in the study context. The multipliers of values of time savings derived from the model showed that mobility-impaired people place access time four times more important than travel time. We accounted for the heterogeneity in value of travel time savings and found that the greater the autonomy in mobility-impaired people the greater their sensitivity to the specialized transportation service’s fare. We concluded that Autonomy, Relatedness, and Competence play an important role in the preferences of mobility-impaired people. Autonomy is a determining factor in perception of alternative fares. Competence motivates mobility-impaired people to use the specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder, while Relatedness motivates mobility-impaired people to use the same transportation alternatives used by others.

Suggested Citation

  • Márquez, Luis & Pineda, Laura X. & Poveda, Juan C., 2022. "Mobility-impaired people’s preferences for a specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder: The role of autonomy, relatedness, and competence," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 172-185.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:165:y:2022:i:c:p:172-185
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2022.09.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856422002361
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2022.09.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Márquez, Luis & Alfonso A, Julieth V. & Poveda, Juan C., 2019. "In-vehicle crowding: Integrating tangible attributes, attitudes, and perceptions in a choice context between BRT and metro," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 452-465.
    2. Soto, Jose J. & Márquez, Luis & Macea, Luis F., 2018. "Accounting for attitudes on parking choice: An integrated choice and latent variable approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 65-77.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Patricia Yañez-Pagans & Daniel Martinez & Oscar A. Mitnik & Lynn Scholl & Antonia Vazquez, 2019. "Urban transport systems in Latin America and the Caribbean: lessons and challenges," Latin American Economic Review, Springer;Centro de Investigaciòn y Docencia Económica (CIDE), vol. 28(1), pages 1-25, December.
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    6. Hess, Stephane & Train, Kenneth E. & Polak, John W., 2006. "On the use of a Modified Latin Hypercube Sampling (MLHS) method in the estimation of a Mixed Logit Model for vehicle choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 147-163, February.
    7. Nguyen-Hoang, Phuong & Yeung, Ryan, 2010. "What is paratransit worth?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 841-853, December.
    8. Grisé, Emily & Boisjoly, Geneviève & Maguire, Meadhbh & El-Geneidy, Ahmed, 2019. "Elevating access: Comparing accessibility to jobs by public transport for individuals with and without a physical disability," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 280-293.
    9. Verbich, David & El-Geneidy, Ahmed, 2016. "The pursuit of satisfaction: Variation in satisfaction with bus transit service among riders with encumbrances and riders with disabilities using a large-scale survey from London, UK," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 64-71.
    10. Katrin Lättman & Lars E. Olsson & Margareta Friman & Satoshi Fujii, 2019. "Perceived Accessibility, Satisfaction with Daily Travel, and Life Satisfaction among the Elderly," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-15, November.
    11. Deka, Devajyoti & Gonzales, Eric J., 2014. "The generators of paratransit trips by persons with disabilities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 181-193.
    12. Andrew Daly & Stephane Hess & Bhanu Patruni & Dimitris Potoglou & Charlene Rohr, 2012. "Using ordered attitudinal indicators in a latent variable choice model: a study of the impact of security on rail travel behaviour," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 267-297, March.
    13. Peña Cepeda, Elizabeth & Galilea, Patricia & Raveau, Sebastián, 2018. "How much do we value improvements on the accessibility to public transport for people with reduced mobility or disability?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 445-452.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mohd Shafie Rosli & Nor Shela Saleh & Azlah Md. Ali & Suaibah Abu Bakar, 2022. "Self-Determination Theory and Online Learning in University: Advancements, Future Direction and Research Gaps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luis Márquez & Víctor Cantillo & Julián Arellana, 2020. "Assessing the influence of indicators’ complexity on hybrid discrete choice model estimates," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 373-396, February.
    2. Kim, Seheon & Rasouli, Soora, 2022. "The influence of latent lifestyle on acceptance of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS): A hierarchical latent variable and latent class approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 304-319.
    3. Daina, Nicolò & Sivakumar, Aruna & Polak, John W., 2017. "Modelling electric vehicles use: a survey on the methods," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P1), pages 447-460.
    4. Dea van Lierop & Francisco J. Bahamonde-Birke, 2023. "Commuting to the future: Assessing the relationship between individuals’ usage of information and communications technology, personal attitudes, characteristics and mode choice," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 353-371, June.
    5. John Buckell & David A Hensher & Stephane Hess, 2021. "Kicking the habit is hard: A hybrid choice model investigation into the role of addiction in smoking behavior," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 3-19, January.
    6. Andy S. Choi & Kelly S. Fielding, 2016. "Cultural Attitudes as WTP Determinants: A Revised Cultural Worldview Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-18, June.
    7. Xuemei Fu, 2021. "How habit moderates the commute mode decision process: integration of the theory of planned behavior and latent class choice model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2681-2707, October.
    8. Ching-Hua Yeh & Monika Hartmann, 2021. "To Purchase or Not to Purchase? Drivers of Consumers’ Preferences for Animal Welfare in Their Meat Choice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-25, August.
    9. Hess, Stephane & Palma, David, 2019. "Apollo: A flexible, powerful and customisable freeware package for choice model estimation and application," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Maya Abou-Zeid & Moshe Ben-Akiva, 2014. "Hybrid choice models," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 17, pages 383-412, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Schmid, Basil & Axhausen, Kay W., 2019. "In-store or online shopping of search and experience goods: A hybrid choice approach," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 156-180.
    12. Isabel P Albaladejo & M Teresa Díaz-Delfa, 2021. "The effects of motivations to go to the country on rural accommodation choice: A hybrid discrete choice model," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(7), pages 1484-1507, November.
    13. Hwang, Jinuk & Kim, Seheon, 2023. "Autonomous vehicle transportation service for people with disabilities: Policy recommendations based on the evidence from hybrid choice model," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    14. Márquez, Luis & Soto, Jose J., 2021. "Integrating perceptions of safety and bicycle theft risk in the analysis of cycling infrastructure preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 285-301.
    15. Potoglou, Dimitris & Palacios, Juan & Feijoo, Claudio & Gómez Barroso, Jose-Luis, 2015. "The supply of personal information: A study on the determinants of information provision in e-commerce scenarios," 26th European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2015 127174, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    16. Fosgerau, Mogens & Bierlaire, Michel, 2007. "A practical test for the choice of mixing distribution in discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 784-794, August.
    17. Carlos Madeira, 2019. "Adverse selection, loan access and default in the Chilean consumer debt market," Working Papers Central Bank of Chile 838, Central Bank of Chile.
    18. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    19. Faulques, Martin & Bonnet, Jean & Bourdin, Sébastien & Juge, Marine & Pigeon, Jonas & Richard, Charlotte, 2022. "Generational effect and territorial distributive justice, the two main drivers for willingness to pay for renewable energies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    20. Martínez-Pardo, Ana & Orro, Alfonso & Garcia-Alonso, Lorena, 2020. "Analysis of port choice: A methodological proposal adjusted with public data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 178-193.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:165:y:2022:i:c:p:172-185. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.