IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v84y2016icp18-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Index numbers for monitoring transit service quality

Author

Listed:
  • de Oña, Juan
  • de Oña, Rocío
  • Eboli, Laura
  • Mazzulla, Gabriella

Abstract

The measurement of transit service quality is very important for guaranteeing a transport supply characterized by satisfactory service levels for the passengers. Even more important is the monitoring of the levels of service quality over time, which can be very useful to determine if the goals established by the transport planners are being met or exceeded. The status and evolution of transit service quality can be monitored through periodic and regular updating of the opinions expressed by the passengers about the service during the well-known Customer Satisfaction Surveys, allowing the effect of policies to be evaluated and specific interventions to be introduced. In this work, just the issue of monitoring service quality based on users’ opinions is approached, and the index numbers usually applied in the economic and industrial field are proposed for this purpose. Index numbers permit to study the fluctuations or variations of a variable or more variables over time, providing a powerful measurement for making comparisons and predictions of the analyzed concept. The index numbers were calculated on the basis of data collected from Customer Satisfaction Surveys addressed to the passengers of the metropolitan public service of Granada (Spain). The analyzed time period has been established from 2007 to 2013. Interesting results derive from the calculation of the index numbers. Since both perceptions and importance rates are considered in this methodology, the results can inform, not only on the satisfaction tendencies but also on the trend on customers’ priorities, which is actually the expected quality. Therefore, policies could more efficiently be designed to adjust the service to the users’ real needs.

Suggested Citation

  • de Oña, Juan & de Oña, Rocío & Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2016. "Index numbers for monitoring transit service quality," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 18-30.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:84:y:2016:i:c:p:18-30
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2015.05.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415001469
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2015.05.018?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. Pakdil, Fatma & Aydın, Özlem, 2007. "Expectations and perceptions in airline services: An analysis using weighted SERVQUAL scores," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 229-237.
    2. David A. Hensher & Paola Prioni, 2002. "A Service Quality Index for Area-wide Contract Performance Assessment," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 36(1), pages 93-113, January.
    3. Hassan, Mohammad Nurul & Hawas, Yaser E. & Ahmed, Kamran, 2013. "A multi-dimensional framework for evaluating the transit service performance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 47-61.
    4. dell'Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Angel & Cecin, Patricia, 2011. "The quality of service desired by public transport users," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 217-227, January.
    5. Hensher, David A. & Stopher, Peter & Bullock, Philip, 2003. "Service quality--developing a service quality index in the provision of commercial bus contracts," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 499-517, July.
    6. Kim, Yu Kyoung & Lee, Hyung Ryong, 2011. "Customer satisfaction using low cost carriers," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 235-243.
    7. Shreya Das & Debapratim Pandit, 2013. "Importance of user perception in evaluating level of service for bus transit for a developing country like India: a review," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 402-420, July.
    8. Tyrinopoulos, Yannis & Antoniou, Constantinos, 2008. "Public transit user satisfaction: Variability and policy implications," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 260-272, July.
    9. de Oña, Juan & de Oña, Rocío & Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2013. "Perceived service quality in bus transit service: A structural equation approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 219-226.
    10. Mokonyama, Mathetha & Venter, Christoffel, 2013. "Incorporation of customer satisfaction in public transport contracts – A preliminary analysis," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 58-66.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Juan de Oña & Rocio de Oña, 2015. "Quality of Service in Public Transport Based on Customer Satisfaction Surveys: A Review and Assessment of Methodological Approaches," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 605-622, August.
    2. Eboli, Laura & Forciniti, Carmen & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2018. "Spatial variation of the perceived transit service quality at rail stations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 114(PA), pages 67-83.
    3. Rong, Rui & Liu, Lishan & Jia, Ning & Ma, Shoufeng, 2022. "Impact analysis of actual traveling performance on bus passenger’s perception and satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 80-100.
    4. Iván Manuel Mendoza-Arango & Eneko Echaniz & Luigi dell’Olio & Eduardo Gutiérrez-González, 2020. "Weighted Variables Using Best-Worst Scaling in Ordered Logit Models for Public Transit Satisfaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-20, July.
    5. Celik, Erkan & Aydin, Nezir & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2014. "A multiattribute customer satisfaction evaluation approach for rail transit network: A real case study for Istanbul, Turkey," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 283-293.
    6. Echaniz, Eneko & Ho, Chinh Q. & Rodriguez, Andres & dell'Olio, Luigi, 2019. "Comparing best-worst and ordered logit approaches for user satisfaction in transit services," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 752-769.
    7. Zhang, Chunqin & Juan, Zhicai & Lu, Weite & Xiao, Guangnian, 2016. "Do the organizational forms affect passenger satisfaction? Evidence from Chinese public transport service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 129-148.
    8. Wan, Dan & Kamga, Camille & Liu, Jun & Sugiura, Aaron & Beaton, Eric B., 2016. "Rider perception of a “light” Bus Rapid Transit system - The New York City Select Bus Service," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 41-55.
    9. Hernandez, Sara & Monzon, Andres & de Oña, Rocío, 2016. "Urban transport interchanges: A methodology for evaluating perceived quality," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 31-43.
    10. Ganji, S.S. & Ahangar, A.N. & Awasthi, Anjali & Jamshidi Bandari, Smaneh, 2021. "Psychological analysis of intercity bus passenger satisfaction using Q methodology," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 345-363.
    11. Aydin, Nezir & Celik, Erkan & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2015. "A hierarchical customer satisfaction framework for evaluating rail transit systems of Istanbul," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 61-81.
    12. Aydin, Nezir, 2017. "A fuzzy-based multi-dimensional and multi-period service quality evaluation outline for rail transit systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 87-98.
    13. Eneko Echaniz & Chinh Ho & Andres Rodriguez & Luigi dell’Olio, 2020. "Modelling user satisfaction in public transport systems considering missing information," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 2903-2921, December.
    14. Carreira, Rui & Patrício, Lia & Natal Jorge, Renato & Magee, Chris, 2014. "Understanding the travel experience and its impact on attitudes, emotions and loyalty towards the transportation provider–A quantitative study with mid-distance bus trips," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 35-46.
    15. Zhang, Chunqin & Liu, Yong & Lu, Weite & Xiao, Guangnian, 2019. "Evaluating passenger satisfaction index based on PLS-SEM model: Evidence from Chinese public transport service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 149-164.
    16. Rubén Cordera & Soledad Nogués & Esther González-González & Luigi dell’Olio, 2019. "Intra-Urban Spatial Disparities in User Satisfaction with Public Transport Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-22, October.
    17. Alessandro Vitale & Giuseppe Guido & Daniele Rogano, 2016. "A smartphone based DSS platform for assessing transit service attributes," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 315-340, September.
    18. Redman, Lauren & Friman, Margareta & Gärling, Tommy & Hartig, Terry, 2013. "Quality attributes of public transport that attract car users: A research review," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 119-127.
    19. Hongjun Cui & Mingzhi Li & Minqing Zhu & Xinwei Ma, 2023. "Investigating the Impacts of Urban–Rural Bus Service Quality on Rural Residents’ Travel Choices Using an SEM–MNL Integration Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-22, August.
    20. Ingvardson, Jesper Bláfoss & Nielsen, Otto Anker, 2019. "The relationship between norms, satisfaction and public transport use: A comparison across six European cities using structural equation modelling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 37-57.

    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:84:y:2016:i:c:p:18-30. 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.