IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i24p7159-d297835.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Transport Quality Perception among Different Travellers in European Cities through Co-Cluster Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Miriam Pirra

    (DIATI, Politecnico di Torino, C.so Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy)

  • Ruggero G. Pensa

    (Department of Computer Science, University of Torino, C.so Svizzera 185, 10149 Torino, Italy)

Abstract

The quality of the transport system offered at city level constitutes an important and challenging goal for society, for local authorities, and transport operators. Therefore, appropriate evaluation of travellers’ satisfaction is required to support service performance monitoring, benchmarking, and market analysis. This aspect implies the collection of satisfaction levels for different passengers’ groups, as it could provide interesting suggestions for identifying priority areas of action. To this end, an original study aimed at understanding the main aspects affecting the common view of satisfaction among different kinds of travellers at European level is presented in this paper. A specific survey investigating how travellers perceive the quality of their journey is proposed to people living in cities characterised by different sizes. Data are then analysed through a multi-view co-clustering algorithm, an innovative machine learning technique that highlights clusters of respondents grouped according to various categories of features. Such results could be used by local authorities and transport providers to understand the specific actions to be operated to improve the quality of transport service offered in a market segmentation dimension.

Suggested Citation

  • Miriam Pirra & Ruggero G. Pensa, 2019. "Comparing Transport Quality Perception among Different Travellers in European Cities through Co-Cluster Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-17, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:24:p:7159-:d:297835
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/24/7159/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/24/7159/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shiftan, Yoram & Outwater, Maren L. & Zhou, Yushuang, 2008. "Transit market research using structural equation modeling and attitudinal market segmentation," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 186-195, May.
    2. Susilo, Yusak O. & Cats, Oded, 2014. "Exploring key determinants of travel satisfaction for multi-modal trips by different traveler groups," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 366-380.
    3. Abenoza, Roberto F. & Cats, Oded & Susilo, Yusak O., 2017. "Travel satisfaction with public transport: Determinants, user classes, regional disparities and their evolution," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 64-84.
    4. Marco Diana & Patricia Mokhtarian, 2009. "Grouping travelers on the basis of their different car and transit levels of use," Transportation, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 455-467, July.
    5. dell'Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Angel & Cecín, Patricia, 2010. "Modelling user perception of bus transit quality," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 388-397, November.
    6. Chica-Olmo, Jorge & Gachs-Sánchez, Héctor & Lizarraga, Carmen, 2018. "Route effect on the perception of public transport services quality," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 40-48.
    7. Cynthia Jacques & Kevin Manaugh & Ahmed El-Geneidy, 2013. "Rescuing the captive [mode] user: an alternative approach to transport market segmentation," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 625-645, May.
    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. Audronė Minelgaitė & Renata Dagiliūtė & Genovaitė Liobikienė, 2020. "The Usage of Public Transport and Impact of Satisfaction in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-13, 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. 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.
    2. Abenoza, Roberto F. & Cats, Oded & Susilo, Yusak O., 2017. "Travel satisfaction with public transport: Determinants, user classes, regional disparities and their evolution," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 64-84.
    3. Abenoza, Roberto F. & Ettema, Dick F. & Susilo, Yusak O., 2018. "Do accessibility, vulnerability, opportunity, and travel characteristics have uniform impacts on the traveler’s experience?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 114(PA), pages 38-51.
    4. Raky Julio & Andres Monzon & Yusak O. Susilo, 2024. "Identifying key elements for user satisfaction of bike-sharing systems: a combination of direct and indirect evaluations," Transportation, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 407-438, April.
    5. Audronė Minelgaitė & Renata Dagiliūtė & Genovaitė Liobikienė, 2020. "The Usage of Public Transport and Impact of Satisfaction in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-13, November.
    6. Guan, Xiaodong & Wang, Donggen, 2024. "Examining the roles of transport captivity and travel dissonance in travel satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    7. Grisé, Emily & El-Geneidy, Ahmed, 2018. "Where is the happy transit rider? Evaluating satisfaction with regional rail service using a spatial segmentation approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 114(PA), pages 84-96.
    8. Eldeeb, Gamal & Mohamed, Moataz, 2022. "Consumers oriented investments in transit service quality improvements: The best bang for your buck," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Rafiq, Rezwana & McNally, Michael G., 2021. "Heterogeneity in Activity-travel Patterns of Public Transit Users: An Application of Latent Class Analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 1-18.
    10. de Oña, Juan & Estévez, Esperanza & de Oña, Rocío, 2021. "How does private vehicle users perceive the public transport service quality in large metropolitan areas? A European comparison," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 173-188.
    11. Gao, Yanan & Rasouli, Soora & Timmermans, Harry & Wang, Yuanqing, 2018. "Trip stage satisfaction of public transport users: A reference-based model incorporating trip attributes, perceived service quality, psychological disposition and difference tolerance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 759-775.
    12. Abenoza, Roberto F. & Liu, Chengxi & Cats, Oded & Susilo, Yusak O., 2019. "What is the role of weather, built-environment and accessibility geographical characteristics in influencing travelers’ experience?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 34-50.
    13. Mayara Moraes Monteiro & João de Abreu e Silva & Jesper Bláfoss Ingvardson & Otto Anker Nielsen & Jorge Pinho de Sousa, 2021. "Public Transport Use and Satisfaction by International Students and Researchers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-17, July.
    14. van Lierop, Dea & El-Geneidy, Ahmed, 2016. "Enjoying loyalty: The relationship between service quality, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in public transit," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 50-59.
    15. Joewono, Tri B. & Tarigan, Ari K.M. & Susilo, Yusak O., 2016. "Road-based public transportation in urban areas of Indonesia: What policies do users expect to improve the service quality?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 114-124.
    16. 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.
    17. Ali, Fazilatulaili & Dissanayake, Dilum & Bell, Margaret & Farrow, Malcolm, 2018. "Investigating car users' attitudes to climate change using multiple correspondence analysis," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 237-247.
    18. Ahmad Nazrul Hakimi Ibrahim & Muhamad Nazri Borhan & Mohd Haniff Osman & Faridah Hanim Khairuddin & Nur Mustakiza Zakaria, 2022. "An Empirical Study of Passengers’ Perceived Satisfaction with Monorail Service Quality: Case of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-17, May.
    19. Chen, Pengfang & Zhang, Xiaoqiang & Gao, Dongsheng, 2024. "Preference heterogeneity analysis on train choice behaviour of high-speed railway passengers: A case study in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    20. Yanan Gao & Soora Rasouli & Harry Timmermans & Yuanqing Wang, 2020. "Prevalence of alternative processing rules in the formation of daily travel satisfaction in the context multi-trip, multi-stage, multi-attribute travel experiences," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1199-1221, June.

    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:11:y:2019:i:24:p:7159-:d:297835. 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.