IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i8p2723-d161604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Bus Service Evaluation Method from Passenger’s Perspective Based on Satisfaction Surveys: A Case Study of Beijing, China

Author

Listed:
  • Jiancheng Weng

    (Beijing Key Laboratory of Traffic Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China)

  • Xiaojian Di

    (Beijing Key Laboratory of Traffic Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China)

  • Chang Wang

    (China Aerospace Science & Industry Corp., Beijing 100000, China)

  • Jingjing Wang

    (Beijing Municipal Commission of Transport, Beijing Municipal Transportation Operations Coordination Center, Beijing 100000, China)

  • Lizeng Mao

    (Beijing Municipal Commission of Transport, Beijing Municipal Transportation Operations Coordination Center, Beijing 100000, China)

Abstract

As an important part of urban public transport, bus service quality is an important factor affecting the choice of passenger travel mode. This paper constructs a set of satisfaction evaluation indicator systems from the perspective of passenger perception, covering the whole travel process. It is composed of 6 first-level indexes (timeliness, safety, convenience, comfort, reliability and economy) and 21 second-level indexes. Considering the scale of bus service in Beijing, this research carried out a stratified sampling on 100 bus lines and collected 3012 field questionnaire surveys. The basic information of the bus routes investigated, demographic questions and their opinions of the satisfaction of the bus service were all recorded in the questionnaire. After testing the reliability and validity of the indicator system, the paper proposes a satisfaction evaluation model weighted by the related coefficient. The results show that overall satisfaction score is 78.2 and the proportion of bus passengers who are satisfied with the bus service nearly 70%. Multivariate analysis of variance methods were employed to evaluate the satisfaction influencing factors. Conclusions can be drawn that the satisfaction score of timeliness is lowest, which is mainly influenced by three factors: the passenger’s age, travel purpose and time. The research provides positive contributions toward normalizing performance evaluation for public transportation and enhancing the sustainable development of bus.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiancheng Weng & Xiaojian Di & Chang Wang & Jingjing Wang & Lizeng Mao, 2018. "A Bus Service Evaluation Method from Passenger’s Perspective Based on Satisfaction Surveys: A Case Study of Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2723-:d:161604
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2723/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2723/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Celik, Erkan & Bilisik, Ozge Nalan & Erdogan, Melike & Gumus, Alev Taskin & Baracli, Hayri, 2013. "An integrated novel interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM method to improve customer satisfaction in public transportation for Istanbul," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 28-51.
    3. Shreya Das & Debapratim Pandit, 2016. "Methodology to determine service delivery levels for public transportation," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(2), pages 195-217, March.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    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. Sergey VIKHAREV & Maxim LYAPUSTIN & Danil MIRONOV & Irina NIZOVTSEVA & Vladimir SINITSYN, 2019. "Modeling Of Passengers’ Choice Using Intelligent Agents With Reinforcement Learning In Shared Interests Systems; A Basic Approach," Transport Problems, Silesian University of Technology, Faculty of Transport, vol. 14(2), pages 43-53, June.
    2. Paula Vicente & Abdul Suleman & Elizabeth Reis, 2020. "Index of Satisfaction with Public Transport: A Fuzzy Clustering Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Muhammad Fadhlullah Abu Bakar & Shuhairy Norhisham & Herda Yati Katman & Chow Ming Fai & Nor Najwa Irina Mohd Azlan & Nur Sarah Shaziah Samsudin, 2022. "Service Quality of Bus Performance in Asia: A Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-21, June.
    4. Xu-Hui Li & Lin Huang & Qiang Li & Hu-Chen Liu, 2020. "Passenger Satisfaction Evaluation of Public Transportation Using Pythagorean Fuzzy MULTIMOORA Method under Large Group Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Thi Quynh Mai Pham & Gunwoo Lee & Hwayoung Kim, 2020. "Toward Sustainable Ferry Routes in Korea: Analysis of Operational Efficiency Considering Passenger Mobility Burdens," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-22, October.
    6. Liu, Jiaguo & Zhao, Huida & Li, Jian & Yue, Xiaohang, 2021. "Operational strategy of customized bus considering customers’ variety seeking behavior and service level," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    7. Methawadee Chaisomboon & Sajjakaj Jomnonkwao & Vatanavongs Ratanavaraha, 2020. "Elderly Users’ Satisfaction with Public Transport in Thailand Using Different Importance Performance Analysis Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Weng, JianCheng & Yu, JiangBo & Di, XiaoJian & Lin, PengFei & Wang, Jing-Jing & Mao, Li-Zeng, 2023. "How does the state of bus operations influence passengers’ service satisfaction? A method considering the differences in passenger preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).

    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. Sajjakaj Jomnonkwao & Thanapong Champahom & Vatanavongs Ratanavaraha, 2020. "Methodologies for Determining the Service Quality of the Intercity Rail Service Based on Users’ Perceptions and Expectations in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-20, May.
    2. Verbich, David & Badami, Madhav G. & El-Geneidy, Ahmed M., 2017. "Bang for the buck: Toward a rapid assessment of urban public transit from multiple perspectives in North America," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 51-61.
    3. Esmailpour, Javad & Aghabayk, Kayvan & Aghajanzadeh, Mohammad & De Gruyter, Chris, 2022. "Has COVID-19 changed our loyalty towards public transport? Understanding the moderating role of the pandemic in the relationship between service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 80-103.
    4. 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.
    5. Luo, Shuli & He, Sylvia Y. & Grant-Muller, Susan & Song, Linqi, 2023. "Influential factors in customer satisfaction of transit services: Using crowdsourced data to capture the heterogeneity across individuals, space and time," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 173-183.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Weng, JianCheng & Yu, JiangBo & Di, XiaoJian & Lin, PengFei & Wang, Jing-Jing & Mao, Li-Zeng, 2023. "How does the state of bus operations influence passengers’ service satisfaction? A method considering the differences in passenger preferences," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    9. Díez-Mesa, Francisco & de Oña, Rocio & de Oña, Juan, 2018. "Bayesian networks and structural equation modelling to develop service quality models: Metro of Seville case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 1-13.
    10. Mandhani, Jyoti & Nayak, Jogendra Kumar & Parida, Manoranjan, 2020. "Interrelationships among service quality factors of Metro Rail Transit System: An integrated Bayesian networks and PLS-SEM approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 320-336.
    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. Eldeeb, Gamal & Sears, Sean & Mohamed, Moataz, 2023. "What do users want from transit? Qualitative analysis of current and potential users' perceptions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    13. 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.
    14. Sun, Shichao & Duan, Zhengyu, 2019. "Modeling passengers’ loyalty to public transit in a two-dimensional framework: A case study in Xiamen, China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 295-309.
    15. 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.
    16. Echaniz, Eneko & dell’Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Ángel, 2018. "Modelling perceived quality for urban public transport systems using weighted variables and random parameters," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 31-39.
    17. Sun, Shichao & Xu, Lingyu & Yao, Yukun & Duan, Zhengyu, 2021. "Investigating the determinants to retain spurious-loyalty passengers: A data-fusion based approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 70-83.
    18. Kiani Mavi, Reza & Zarbakhshnia, Navid & Khazraei, Armin, 2018. "Bus rapid transit (BRT): A simulation and multi criteria decision making (MCDM) approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 187-197.
    19. Benedetto Barabino & Nicola Aldo Cabras & Claudio Conversano & Alessandro Olivo, 2020. "An Integrated Approach to Select Key Quality Indicators in Transit Services," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 1045-1080, June.
    20. Weiya Chen & Zixuan Kang & Xiaoping Fang & Jiajia Li, 2020. "Design a Semantic Scale for Passenger Perceived Quality Surveys of Urban Rail Transit: Within Attribute’s Service Condition and Rider’s Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-21, October.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2723-:d:161604. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.