IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i14p5955-d1433953.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Road–Rail Intermodal Travel Mode Choice Behavior Considering Attitude Factors

Author

Listed:
  • Boqing Wang

    (School of Transportation, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China)

  • Jiajun Li

    (Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Urban ITS, Southeast University, 2 Southeast University Road, Nanjing 211189, China)

  • Fan Jiang

    (Key Laboratory of Transport Industry of Comprehensive Transportation Theory (Nanjing Modern Multimodal Transportation Laboratory), Ministry of Transport, Nanjing 211135, China)

Abstract

Road–rail intermodal transportation (RRIT) leverages the advantages of multiple transport modes and is crucial for addressing the current issue of imbalanced development in the transportation sector. However, passengers’ behavior in choosing RRIT remains unclear, and it is necessary to optimize travel service quality through analyzing RRIT choice behavior based on user perceptions. This study designed a stated preference experiment that included both direct and multi-modal travel options. A hybrid choice model considering attitude variables was constructed, and four latent attitude variables—convenience, economy, comfort, and riskiness—were extracted to analyze their impact on intercity travel mode choice behavior under conditions of ticket booking uncertainty. The results revealed that the ticket booking success rate is a critical factor in travelers’ decision-making. Passengers tend to choose travel options with higher ticket booking success rates, even if it entails a slight increase in the ticket prices for the high-speed rail to high-speed rail transfer option. The attitude variables significantly influence intercity travel mode choice behavior, with travelers generally exhibiting a preference for risk avoidance in their travel options. Moreover, there are differences among various groups of travelers in their preferences and demands for the convenience, economy, and comfort aspects of travel options. These research findings can enhance our understanding of the key factors influencing the selection of RRIT services, thereby supporting RRIT designers and planners in improving service quality and facilitating the future growth of RRIT.

Suggested Citation

  • Boqing Wang & Jiajun Li & Fan Jiang, 2024. "Road–Rail Intermodal Travel Mode Choice Behavior Considering Attitude Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:14:p:5955-:d:1433953
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/14/5955/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/14/5955/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xiao Fu & William Lam, 2014. "A network equilibrium approach for modelling activity-travel pattern scheduling problems in multi-modal transit networks with uncertainty," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 37-55, January.
    2. Poudel, Sushil Raj & Marufuzzaman, Mohammad & Bian, Linkan, 2016. "A hybrid decomposition algorithm for designing a multi-modal transportation network under biomass supply uncertainty," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-25.
    3. Caspar Chorus & Theo Arentze & Harry Timmermans, 2007. "Information impact on quality of multimodal travel choices: conceptualizations and empirical analyses," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 625-645, November.
    4. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, September.
    5. Zhu, Zhenran & Zhang, Anming & Zhang, Yahua, 2018. "Connectivity of intercity passenger transportation in China: A multi-modal and network approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 263-276.
    6. Wang, Xinchang & Meng, Qiang, 2017. "Discrete intermodal freight transportation network design with route choice behavior of intermodal operators," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 76-104.
    7. Ching-chih Chou & Chien-wen Shen, 2018. "An exploration of the competitive relationship between intercity transport systems," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 186-197, February.
    8. Behrends, Sönke, 2017. "Burden or opportunity for modal shift? – Embracing the urban dimension of intermodal road-rail transport," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 10-16.
    9. Dan Liu & Zhenghong Deng & Qipeng Sun & Yong Wang & Yinhai Wang, 2019. "Design and Freight Corridor-Fleet Size Choice in Collaborative Intermodal Transportation Network Considering Economies of Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    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. Bounie, Nathan & Adoue, François & Koning, Martin & L'Hostis, Alain, 2019. "What value do travelers put on connectivity to mobile phone and Internet networks in public transport? Empirical evidence from the Paris region," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 158-177.
    2. Huang, Yan & Zong, Huiming, 2022. "The intercity railway connections in China: A comparative analysis of high-speed train and conventional train services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 89-103.
    3. Archetti, Claudia & Peirano, Lorenzo & Speranza, M. Grazia, 2022. "Optimization in multimodal freight transportation problems: A Survey," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(1), pages 1-20.
    4. Zhifeng Gao & Ted C. Schroeder, 2009. "Consumer responses to new food quality information: are some consumers more sensitive than others?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 339-346, May.
    5. Cheng, Leilei & Yin, Changbin & Chien, Hsiaoping, 2015. "Demand for milk quantity and safety in urban China: evidence from Beijing and Harbin," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(2), April.
    6. Wen, Chieh-Hua & Huang, Chia-Jung & Fu, Chiang, 2020. "Incorporating continuous representation of preferences for flight departure times into stated itinerary choice modeling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 10-20.
    7. Johannes Buggle & Thierry Mayer & Seyhun Orcan Sakalli & Mathias Thoenig, 2023. "The Refugee’s Dilemma: Evidence from Jewish Migration out of Nazi Germany," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(2), pages 1273-1345.
    8. Christelis, Dimitris & Dobrescu, Loretti I. & Motta, Alberto, 2020. "Early life conditions and financial risk-taking in older age," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    9. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    10. Tina Birgitte Hansen & Jes Sanddal Lindholt & Axel Diederichsen & Rikke Søgaard, 2019. "Do Non-participants at Screening have a Different Threshold for an Acceptable Benefit–Harm Ratio than Participants? Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 12(5), pages 491-501, October.
    11. Doyle, Orla & Fidrmuc, Jan, 2006. "Who favors enlargement?: Determinants of support for EU membership in the candidate countries' referenda," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 520-543, June.
    12. Tovar, Jorge, 2012. "Consumers’ Welfare and Trade Liberalization: Evidence from the Car Industry in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 808-820.
    13. Pereira, Pedro & Ribeiro, Tiago, 2011. "The impact on broadband access to the Internet of the dual ownership of telephone and cable networks," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 283-293, March.
    14. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    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. Sant'Anna, Ana Claudia & Bergtold, Jason & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Caldas, Marcellus & Granco, Gabriel, 2021. "Deal or No Deal? Analysis of Bioenergy Feedstock Contract Choice with Multiple Opt-out Options and Contract Attribute Substitutability," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315289, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Mark Morrison & Craig Nalder, 2009. "Willingness to Pay for Improved Quality of Electricity Supply Across Business Type and Location," The Energy Journal, , vol. 30(2), pages 117-134, April.
    18. Simon P. Anderson & André de Palma, 2012. "Competition for attention in the Information (overload) Age," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(1), pages 1-25, March.
    19. Mtimet, Nadhem & Ujiie, Kiyokazu & Kashiwagi, Kenichi & Zaibet, Lokman & Nagaki, Masakazu, 2011. "The effects of Information and Country of Origin on Japanese Olive Oil Consumer Selection," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114642, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).

    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:16:y:2024:i:14:p:5955-:d:1433953. 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.