Final Phase
III Report:
Transit Tracker Information Displays
Contract Number: DTFH61-96-C-00098 Task Order 9822
Submitted to:
Final Phase
III Report:
Transit Tracker Information Displays
Contract Number: DTFH61-96-C-00098 Task Order 9822
Submitted to:
United States Department of Transportation
Submitted by:
Science Applications International Corporation
November 14, 2003
|
NOTICE Kelley Klaver
Pécheux, Ph.D. |
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................... viiI
ABBREVIATIONS........................................................................................................... ix
2.1 transit tracker system
description
2.2 transit tracker system
deployment
2.3.1 Use of Trip
Planning Information
2.3.2 Perceptions of
System Efficiency
2.3.3 Perceptions of
Personal Security
2.3.4 Perceptions of
Transit Tracker Service
2.3.5 Overall
Satisfaction with Bus Service
2.4 hypotheses and measures
of effectiveness
2.5 General Evaluation Approach
3. before and after
intercept interviews
3.1 survey approach and
location selection
3.2 summary of RESPONDENT
characteristics
3.3.1 Use of Trip
Planning Information
3.3.2 Perceptions of
Transit System Efficiency
3.3.3 Perception of
Personal Security
3.3.4 Perceptions of
Transit Tracker Service
3.3.5 Overall
Satisfaction with Bus Service
4.2 Boardings at Adjacent
Stops
5. Transit Tracker
Online Survey
5.2 Survey and Transit
Tracker Useage
5.3 summary of respondent
characteristics
5.4.1 Use of Trip
Planning Information
5.4.2 Perceptions of
Transit Tracker Online Service
5.4.3 Overall
Satisfaction with Bus Service
6.2.1 Assess Bus
Riders’ Use of Trip Planning Information
6.2.2 Assess Bus Riders’
Perceptions of Transit System Efficiency
6.2.3 Assess Bus
Riders’ Perceptions of Personal Security
6.2.4 Assess Bus Riders’
Perceptions of Transit Tracker Service
6.2.5 Assess Bus
Riders’ Overall Satisfaction With the System
Appendix A: Transit Tracker
“Before” Survey
Appendix B: Transit Tracker
“After” Survey
Appendix C: Transit Tracker ONLINE Survey
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
2‑1. Transit Tracker Display (Bus
Shelter)
Figure 2-2.
Transit Tracker Online Display
Figure 3-1. Age Distribution Comparison of Before and
After Survey Respondents
Figure 3-2.
Frequency with which Respondents Ride the Bus
Figure 3-3.
Response Distributions for Main Trip Purpose
Figure 3-4.
Distribution of Most Frequent Trip Purposes
Figure 3-5.
Frequency With Which Respondents Use Various Sources of Bus Schedule
Information
Figure 3-6.
Frequency With Which Respondents Use
Tranist Tracker Signs and Transit Tracker Online
Figure 3-8. Use of Transit Tracker Information by Riders at Salmon and 5th
Figure 3-9.
Riders’ Perceptions of the On-time Performance
Figure 3-10.
Riders’ Perceptions of On-Time Performance at Burnside and 28th
Street
Figure 3-11.
Distribution of Integer Responses for Wait Time
Figure 3-12.
Distribution of Responses for Those Giving a Range for Wait Time in the Before Survey
Figure 3-13.
Distribution of Responses for Those Giving a Range for Wait Time in the After Survey
Figure 3-14.
Riders’ Satisfaction with Bus Adherence
to Posted Schedules Before Transit Tracker
Figure 3-15.
Respondents’ Perceptions of Safety During the Day
Figure 3-16.
Respondents’ Perceptions of Safety at Night
Figure 3-17.
Respondents’ Perceptions of Safety at Night
Figure 3-18.
Perceptions of Safety During the Day
at Burnside and 28th Street
Figure 3-20.
Respondents’ Ratings of Transit Tracker Sign/Information
Figure 3-21.
Respondents’ Perceptions of the Transit Tracker System
Figure 3‑22. Riders’ Perceptions of Overall Service
Quality
Figure 4‑1. Percent of Boardings at the Transit Tracker
Equipped Stops
Figure 5‑1. Transit Tracker Web-use Trend Data
Figure 5-2.
Age Distribution of Survey Respondents
Figure 5-3.
Frequency with Which Respondents Ride the Bus
Figure 5-4.
How Respondents Access Transit Tracker Online
Figure 5-5.
Reasons Respondents Reported They Have Used Transit Tracker Online
Figure 5-6.
Decisions Respondents Reported Making
After Consulting Transit Tracker Online
Figure 5-7.
Respondents’ Perceptions of Three Aspects of Transit Tracker Online
Figure 5-8.
Reported Frequency of Transit Tracker Usefulness and Accuracy
Figure 5‑9. Respondents’ Level of Satisfaction With
Online Transit Tracker
Figure 5‑10. Transit Tracker Online Increases My
Satisfaction With Bus Services.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2‑1.
Hypotheses and Measures of Effectiveness for the Evaluation of Transit
Tracker
Table 3‑1.
Ridership Data for Transit Tracker Bus Stops in Portland
Table 3‑2.
Number of Completed Transit Tracker Surveys
Table 3‑3.
Percent of Riders Surveyed at Each Bus Stop
Table 3‑4.
Actual On-Time Performance
Table 3‑5.
TriMet Service Area Residents’ Perception of TriMet Job Performance
Table 4‑1.
Nighttime Boardings Before and After Transit Tracker Implementation
Table 4‑2.
Boardings at Transit Tracker Locations and Locations Just Upstream and
Downstream
ABBREVIATIONS
AVL Automatic Vehicle
Location
COATS Rural California/Oregon
Advanced Transportation System
C-TRAN Clark
C-VAN Clark County’s Curb-to-Curb
Paratransit Service
GPS Global Positioning System
ITS Intelligent
Transportation Systems
MAX
MOEs Measures of Effectiveness
ODT Oregon Department of
Transportation
RTC Regional Transportation
Council
SAIC Science
Applications International Corporation
TriMet Tri-County Metropolitan
Transportation District
USDOT United States Department of
Transportation
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
The
Under the direction and funding of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), national ITS evaluations are conducted to accelerate the integration and interoperability of ITS in metropolitan and rural areas. As part of an ongoing process to investigate the success of ITS across the country and provide insights into the potential strengths and weaknesses of the overall national integration program, the Oregon Regional ITS Integration Program was selected for independent national evaluation. Specifically, four projects were selected for evaluation:
· Regional Intermodal Transit Traveler Information and Security System – Transit Tracker Information Displays.
· I-5/Barbur Boulevard Parallel Corridor Traffic Management Demonstration Project.
· Rural California/Oregon Advanced Transportation System (COATS), a bi-state rural integration project.
· Transit Buses as Traffic Probes project.
Science Applications International Corporation was selected by USDOT as the Independent Evaluator for these projects. This document presents the evaluation strategies and objectives, the data collection methodologies, and the results of the evaluation of the Transit Tracker information displays. This is the first of four Phase III documents that will be delivered as part of this evaluation.
The
Transit Tracker Evaluation
Transit Tracker uses global positioning system (GPS) technology to track how far a bus is along its scheduled route. Every TriMet bus is equipped with a transmitter that allows continuous satellite tracking with an accuracy of approximately 30 feet. This real-time location information is used to calculate real-time bus and train arrival information. The information is then routed to electronic displays in the frequently used bus shelters and to the Transit Tracker Online Website in the form of arrival countdowns.
The Transit Tracker evaluation was structured to collect and analyze data reflecting changes in bus riders’ behaviors, perceptions, and satisfaction as a result of the Transit Tracker information displays and Transit Tracker Online. The evaluation was designed to meet the following five objectives:
· Assess bus riders’ use of trip planning information.
· Assess bus riders’ perceptions of transit system efficiency.
· Assess bus riders’ perceptions of personal security.
· Assess bus riders’ perceptions of Transit Tracker service.
· Assess bus riders’ overall satisfaction with the system.
The approach to the Transit Tracker evaluation was three-fold and involved the following elements:
· Administration of a before-and-after intercept survey of bus riders at bus stops.
· Analysis of ridership data at the bus stops surveyed.
· Administration of an Online survey of Transit Tracker Online users.
In all, surveyors obtained 240 complete “Before” intercept surveys (administered at four bus stops in late January 2002) and 278 complete “After” intercept surveys (administered at four bus stops in early February 2003). During a three-week period in the spring of 2003, 358 Transit Tracker Online users completed the Online survey. The survey and ridership results are summarized below according to each of the evaluation objectives.
Assess
Bus Riders’ Use of Trip Planning Information
The first objective of the evaluation was to assess bus riders’ use of trip planning information. The hypothesis associated with this objective was:
Transit
Tracker will provide bus riders with accurate and useful information with which
they can make informed decisions about their trips in real-time.
A comparison of the use of several types of fixed-schedule information (e.g., paper timetables, schedules posted at stops, 238-RIDE information line, online schedules) showed no differences in reported use of the information before and after Transit Tracker. Interestingly, in the After survey, many more respondents reported using the Transit Tracker information display than the fixed-schedule information. Only about 35 percent of respondents before and after implementing Transit Tracker reported that they frequently or almost always used the schedule guides posted at the stops (the most frequently used source of fixed-schedule information in both the Before and After survey). In contrast, 78 percent of the respondents reported that they frequently or almost always used the Transit Tracker information display.
On the Online survey, respondents were asked to indicate for what reasons they accessed the Transit Tracker Online information. Ninety percent of the respondents reported that they had used Transit Tracker Online when they did not want to wait too long at the bus stop. Half of the respondents reported that they had used Transit Tracker Online when they were not sure of the scheduled arrival time of the bus and wanted the real-time arrival information instead and/or when they wanted to know if they had already missed their bus. The most common single response (given by 34 percent of respondents) was the combination of the three response choices.
The majority of riders on the After-intercept survey and the Online survey reported that they used the Transit Tracker information to make one or more decisions about their trip (e.g., take and alternate bus route, wait for the bus in a more sheltered location). The most common decision made by riders surveyed at the bus stops was leave the stop and return when the bus is due. The most common decision made by riders surveyed online was wait longer before leaving home/work for the bus stop. Thirty-eight percent of riders surveyed at the bus stops reported making multiple decisions based on the information received from the Transit Tracker display, while 77 percent of riders surveyed online reported making multiple decisions based on the information received from Transit Tracker Online.
Regarding decisions made after consulting Transit Tracker, a comparison was made between the response distributions at three stops that had recently been implemented with a Transit Tracker display to the stop at Salmon and 5th, where the display had been in place for 18 months prior to the survey. A visual examination of the response distributions suggests that more riders at the bus stop at Salmon and 5th used the information to make decisions about their trips, and more riders made multiple trip decisions based on the information. This could indicate that users at this stop learned, over the 18-month time period, how to use the information for their benefit. A follow-up survey at the other three stops would show whether this is the case or not.
Assess
Bus Riders’ Perceptions of Transit System Efficiency
The second objective of the evaluation was to assess bus riders’ perceptions of transit system efficiency. The hypothesis associated with this objective was:
Transit
Tracker will increase bus riders’ perceptions of bus system efficiency, even if
there is no change in the actual system performance.
Riders’
perceptions of on-time performance before and after Transit Tracker differed
very little overall. Statistical
comparisons of the response distributions at each of the stops showed no
significant differences at two of the three stops surveyed both before and
after Transit Tracker; however a significant difference was found at the bus
stop at Burnside and
In addition to asking riders up front if their bus was usually on-time, riders’ perceived wait times were used as a surrogate for perceived efficiency. Statistical comparisons of wait times (those reported as integer values only) showed that no change in mean perceived wait time after the installation of Transit Tracker. In addition, there was no decrease in the variability of reported wait times after the installation of Transit Tracker.
On the Before survey, riders were asked how satisfied they were with the bus’ adherence to the posted schedules. The overwhelming majority of riders, 91 percent, reported that they were either satisfied or extremely satisfied. These results show that riders were already very satisfied with bus efficiency before the installation of Transit Tracker, which might explain why there were not more significant differences found between the before and after results.
Assess
Bus Riders’ Perceptions of Personal Security
The third objective of the Transit Tracker evaluation was to assess bus riders’ perceptions of personal security. The hypothesis associated with this objective was:
Transit
Tracker will increase bus riders’ perceptions of personal security, even if
there are no other measures taken to increase security.
An overwhelming majority (97 and 98 percent in the Before and After survey, respectively) reported that they agreed or completely agreed that they felt safe waiting for the bus at the stops during the day. Somewhat fewer respondents (63 and 79 percent in the Before and After survey, respectively) reported that they agreed or completely agreed that they felt safe waiting for the bus at the stops at night.
A
statistical comparison of riders’ perceptions of personal security before and
after Transit Tracker showed no significant difference between the perceptions
of security at two of the three stop during the day or at night. The results
did show a significant difference in response distribution between the Before and After surveys at Burnside and
On the Online survey, the majority of respondents agreed or completely agreed that Transit Tracker Online made them feel safer knowing they would not have to wait a long time at the bus stop. In addition, one comment at the end of the survey was specifically related to safety: “It [Transit Tracker Online] allows me to be safer, [which is] important to me as I am a woman usually traveling alone.”
A look at nighttime ridership at the stops showed no changes in ridership after the installation of Transit Tracker. In the adjacent stop analysis, only the stop at Burnside and 28th showed a considerable shift of riders to the Transit Tracker equipped location. Before Transit Tracker was implemented, 78 percent of the riders in the vicinity of Burnside and 28th boarded at Burnside and 28th. After Transit Tracker was installed, 86 percent of the riders in the vicinity of Burnside and 28th actually boarded at that stop.
Assess
Bus Riders’ Perceptions of Transit Tracker Service
The fourth objective of the Transit Tracker evaluation was to assess bus riders’ perceptions of the Transit Tracker service. The hypothesis associated with this objective was:
Transit
Tracker will provide bus riders with accurate and useful information that will
be understandable and easy to use.
The majority of riders surveyed at the bus stops reported that the Transit Tracker sign/information at the stops was almost always working (84 percent), useful (73 percent), and accurate (56 percent). Very few riders (less than 5 percent) reported that the Transit Tracker sign/information was rarely or almost never working, useful, or accurate. Likewise, the majority of riders rated the visibility of the sign (62 percent) and the understandability of the information (72 percent) as very good. Forty-four percent of riders rated the information accuracy as very good. Very few riders rated the Transit Tracker sign/information as poor or very poor (less than 5 percent).
Many of the riders’ felt that the Transit Tracker information at bus stops helped them in a number of ways. Sixty percent reported that the information reduced their anxiety at the bus stop, 55 percent reported that the information increased their sense of security at the bus stop, 43 percent reported that the information gave them more control over their travel, and 7 percent reported that the information saved them time at the bus stop. In fact, 17 percent of respondents reported that the information did all of the above.
On the Online survey, 96 percent of respondents agreed or completely agreed that Transit Tracker Online was easy for them to use (only four respondents disagreed with the statement), and 95 percent of respondents agreed or completely agreed that Transit Tracker Online saved them time. Regarding its accuracy and usefulness, 86 percent of respondents reported that Transit Tracker Online was frequently or almost always accurate, and 85 percent of respondents reported that Transit Tracker Online information is frequently or almost always useful for making decisions about their trips.
Overall, 61 percent of riders surveyed at bus stops rated the Transit Tracker as very good, and 31 percent rated it as good. The ratings of the Online Transit Tracker were comparable; 51 percent of online users reported that they were completely satisfied with Transit Tracker Online, and 42 percent of users reported that they were satisfied with the service.
Assess
Bus Riders’ Overall Satisfaction With the System
The final objective of the Transit Tracker evaluation was to assess bus riders’ overall perceptions of the bus service. The hypothesis associated with this objective was:
Transit Tracker will increase bus riders’ overall satisfaction with bus service.
An overwhelming 91 percent of respondents in both the Before and After surveys indicated that they were either satisfied or extremely satisfied with the bus service at the stops. About 5 percent reported being dissatisfied or extremely dissatisfied before Transit Tracker, and a mere 1 percent reported being dissatisfied or extremely dissatisfied after Transit Tracker. A statistical comparison of riders’ satisfaction with bus service before and after Transit Tracker at the stops showed no significant difference between the satisfaction ratings. This could be attributed to the fact that riders were very satisfied before Transit Tracker was deployed.
Eighty-nine percent of riders surveyed online agreed or completely agreed that Transit Tracker Online increased their satisfaction with bus services. Only 9 and 2 percent were neutral or disagreed, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the evaluation results, the following conclusions are made:
· Bus riders surveyed at the stops like the Transit Tracker information displays; the large majority of riders surveyed feel that the information provided is understandable, useful, and accurate. Riders’ feel that the information helps them by reducing their anxiety, increasing their sense of security, giving them more control over their travel, and saving them time.
· Riders at stops use the real-time Transit Tracker information more frequently than all other available sources of fixed-schedule information. The flexibility that Transit Tracker’s real-time information provides to riders appears to be a significant improvement over that provided by fixed-schedule information.
· There is evidence to suggest that riders learn over time how to use the real-time information for their benefit. Many riders surveyed at the bus stops and online reported making multiple decisions about their trips (e.g., taking a different bus route) with the Transit Tracker information at hand. It appears that riders use the real-time bus arrival information provided by Transit Tracker to more effectively and creatively plan and execute their trips.
· An overwhelming majority of riders were satisfied or extremely satisfied with bus adherence to the posted schedules before Transit Tracker; therefore, there was little “room for improvement” in perceptions of on-time performance after Transit Tracker. (There was no significant difference in mean reported wait times before and after Transit Tracker, and there were no significant differences in reported on-time performance before and after Transit Tracker at two of the three stops.)
· There is evidence to suggest, at least at one bus stop, that the presence of the Transit Tracker information has a positive influence on riders’ perceptions of on-time performance, while, at the same time, helps riders to have a better idea of whether the bus is running on-time.
· The large majority of riders reported feeling safe at the stops during the day and at night both before and after Transit Tracker, and there was no significant difference in the before and after ratings; however, there is evidence to suggest, at least at one bus stop, that Transit Tracker has a positive impact on riders’ perceptions of personal security during the day and at night.
· At this point, there are no changes in nighttime ridership at the bus stops as a result of Transit Tracker; however, at one of the stops, a considerable increase in “vicinity” boardings at the Transit Tracker equipped location since the installation suggests that riders have shifted from adjacent stops to the Transit Tracker equipped location to have access to the information.
· The overwhelming majority of riders surveyed at the bus stops are satisfied with the bus service at the stop; however, because riders were already very satisfied with bus service prior to the installation of Transit Tracker, there was not a significant improvement in customer satisfaction.
· Transit Tracker Online users like the system; the overwhelming majority of users feel that the system is easy to use, that the information provided is useful and accurate, and that it saves them time during the day.
· The majority of Transit Tracker Online users access the information for multiple reasons. They maximize their time at home, work, or school before leaving for the bus stop. When running late, users check Transit Tracker Online to see if they have already missed their bus and, at the same time, can check the predicted arrival time for the next bus.
· The majority of Transit Tracker Online users feel safer knowing they do not have to wait a long time at the bus stop as a result of the information.
· Overall, users are satisfied with Transit Tracker Online and agree that the service increases their satisfaction with bus service as a whole.
Based on the results of this evaluation and the conclusions drawn, the hypotheses stated up front have either been supported by the results of the evaluation or have not been supported by the results of the evaluation:
· Hypothesis: Transit Tracker will provide bus riders with accurate and useful information with which they can make informed decisions about their trips in real-time—Supported.
· Hypothesis: Transit Tracker will increase bus riders’ perceptions of bus system efficiency, even if there is no change in the actual system performance—Supported at Burnside & 28th; Not supported at other locations.
· Hypothesis: Transit Tracker will increase bus riders’ perceptions of personal security, even if there are no other measures taken to increase security—Supported at Burnside & 28th and by Transit Tracker Online users; Not supported at other locations.
· Hypothesis: Transit Tracker will provide bus riders with accurate and useful information that will be understandable and easy to use— Supported.
· Hypothesis: Transit Tracker will increase bus riders’ overall satisfaction with bus service—Supported, at least by Transit Tracker Online users.
The
Under the direction and partial funding of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), independent national evaluations are being conducted to accelerate the integration and interoperability of ITS in metropolitan and rural areas, to investigate the success of ITS across the country, and to provide insights into the potential strengths and weaknesses of the overall national integration program. In fiscal year 2000, the Oregon Regional ITS Integration Program was selected for national evaluation. Specifically, four projects were selected for evaluation:
· Regional Intermodal Transit Traveler Information and Security System –Transit Tracker.
· I-5/Barbur Boulevard Parallel Corridor Traffic Management Demonstration Project.
· Rural California/Oregon Advanced Transportation System (COATS), a bi-state rural integration project.
· Transit Buses as Traffic Probes project.
This
document outlines the evaluation strategies, data collection approach, and a
comparison of baseline and post-deployment results for “Transit Tracker,” a
real-time transit arrival information system in
Science Applications International Corporation was selected as the Independent Evaluator for this project. This Phase III Report is structured in the following format:
· Section 1 – Introduction. Provides information on the Oregon Regional ITS Integration Program projects that are being evaluated nationally.
·
Section 2 – Background. Provides background information on ITS in
· Section 3 – Before and After Intercept Interviews. Details the data collection plan and process, and provides a comparison of the baseline and post-deployment results from the Transit Tracker intercept surveys.
· Section 4 – Ridership Data Analysis. Details an analysis of ridership data, specifically nighttime boardings and adjacent stop boardings before and after implementation of Transit Tracker.
· Section 5 – Transit Tracker Online Survey. Details the data collection plan and process, and presents the results from the Transit Tracker Online survey.
· Section 6 – Summary and Conclusions. Summarizes the major findings of the evaluation, states the major conclusions drawn from the results, and lists recommendations to FHWA for next steps.
The TransPort 2000 project partners have been working to continue progress on the incremental conceptualization, planning, design, and deployment of operational ITS. The project partners include the following agencies:
·
·
City of
· Metro—The directly-elected regional government.
·
Southwest Washington Regional Transportation
Council (RTC)—The metropolitan planning organization
for
·
The
·
Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District
of Oregon (TriMET)—The public transit provider for the
·
C-TRAN—
· Academic and private partners.
The remainder of this section is organized as follows:
· 2.1 Transit Tracker System Description
· 2.2 Participants and Stakeholders
· 2.3 Evaluation Objectives
· 2.4 Hypotheses and Measures of Effectiveness
· 2.5 General Evaluation Approach
Transit
Tracker uses global positioning system (GPS) technology to track how far a bus
is along its scheduled route. Every
TriMet bus is equipped with a transmitter that allows continuous satellite
tracking with an accuracy of approximately 30 feet. This real-time location
information is used to calculate real-time bus and train arrival
information. The information is then routed to electronic displays in the
frequently used bus shelters and to the Transit Tracker Online Website in
the form of arrival countdowns (Figure
2‑1 and Figure 2-2, respectively).
Figure 2‑1. Transit Tracker Display (Bus Shelter)
Arrival countdowns are estimates of when the bus will arrive
(number of minutes) based on the location of the bus (the distance from the
stop) and the scheduled speed along its route. If the system cannot make an
accurate prediction (e.g., the vehicle is too far away or the transmitter on
the vehicle is not working), the scheduled arrival time is displayed instead.
In the event of an emergency, Transit Tracker information displays at bus stops
can also provide important information and instructions to riders.[6]
Figure 2-2. Transit Tracker Online Display
The first two Transit Tracker information displays were installed in
January 2001 at
The evaluation of Transit Tracker was based on standard evaluation practices developed by USDOT. For each evaluation objective, hypotheses were formulated to identify anticipated impacts of the project. One or more measures of effectiveness (MOEs) were then associated with each hypothesis to assess the accuracy of the hypothesis. This section presents a discussion of the evaluation objectives and lists the hypothesis and MOEs associated with each objective.
The Transit Tracker evaluation was structured to collect and analyze data reflecting changes in bus riders’ behaviors, perceptions, and satisfaction as a result of the Transit Tracker information displays and Transit Tracker Online. The evaluation was designed to meet the following five objectives as more fully described in Sections 2.3.1 through 2.3.5:
· Assess bus riders’ use of trip planning information.
· Assess bus riders’ perceptions of transit system efficiency.
· Assess bus riders’ perceptions of personal security.
· Assess bus riders’ perceptions of Transit Tracker service.
· Assess bus riders’ overall satisfaction with the system.
One of
the objectives of the Transit Tracker evaluation was to assess riders’ use of
trip planning information. The hypothesis stated that Transit Tracker would
provide riders with accurate and useful information with which they could make
informed decisions about their trips in real-time. Before Transit Tracker,
riders could access only fixed-schedule information (e.g., paper brochures,
schedules posted at bus stops, on-line schedules). Although frequent users may
have memorized many of their schedules and routes, newer or less frequent
riders may not be aware of when or how often the buses operate. Transit Tracker
information displays allow riders to see the number of minutes until the next
two buses arrive. With this type of information, transit riders may have more
opportunities to make alternative route or travel decisions. This information may also afford riders the
opportunities to make better use of their time by, for example, running an
errand while waiting, instead of waiting at the stop longer than necessary.
This information could also be especially useful during inclement weather
conditions (which are common in
Another objective of the Transit Tracker evaluation was to assess riders’ perceptions of system efficiency. It was hypothesized that riders would perceive an increase in bus system efficiency in terms of on-time performance, even if there were no change in the actual system performance. This premise of this hypothesis is that Transit Tracker provides riders with real-time bus arrival information. Even though the bus may be operating behind schedule, the Transit Tracker displays show the actual (versus scheduled) time of arrival. If the system is accurate, the bus arrives when the counter on the display nears zero and the sign displays the word “Due.” In the minds of riders, a bus arriving when the display says it will arrive (whether or not it is at the scheduled arrival time) may constitute and be perceived as an improvement in system efficiency.
Another objective of the Transit Tracker evaluation was to assess transit riders’ perceptions of personal security. The hypothesis stated that riders would perceive an increase in personal security, even if there were no other measures taken to increase security (e.g., increased police presence). While the Transit Tracker information, per se, has no impact on the actual security of transit riders, having access to more accurate arrival time information may afford travelers the opportunity to wait elsewhere for the bus (e.g., a coffee shop) if they have a long wait, if it is after dark, or if they are not familiar or comfortable with the area. In addition, the online information can enable riders to leave home/work later for the bus stop, thereby shortening their wait time at the stop, and therefore, their exposure to potential harm. Having information available to make these types of decisions could impact users’ perception of personal security.
If Transit Tracker is to be successful, the system must be easy for riders to use and understand. The hypothesis stated that Transit Tracker would provide bus riders with accurate and useful information that would be understandable and easy to use This information could allow people to stay at home/work longer before leaving for the bus stop and could allow opportunities to do other things while they wait for their bus (e.g., running an errand), while remaining confident about the bus’ arrival time.
There are many aspects of transit service that may contribute to riders’ perceptions of service quality (frequency of buses, on-time arrivals, cleanliness of bus, friendliness of driver, etc.). The hypothesis stated that Transit Tracker, in and of itself, has the potential to increase riders’ satisfaction with bus services. Assuming all other things remain constant, an increase in overall customer satisfaction could be attributed to the deployment of Transit Tracker.
The MOEs associated with each of the hypotheses generated for the Transit Tracker evaluation are identified in Table 2-1.
Table 2‑1. Hypotheses and Measures of Effectiveness for the Evaluation of Transit Tracker
|
Hypothesis |
Measures of Effectiveness |
|
Transit Tracker will provide bus riders with accurate and useful information with which they can make informed decisions about their trips in real-time. |
Riders’ use of pre-trip planning information (e.g., types of information used, frequency of use, how information is used) and the impacts of the information use on time savings and perceptions of personal security. |
|
Transit Tracker will increase bus riders’ perceptions of bus system efficiency, even if there is no change in the actual system performance. |
Riders’ perceptions of system efficiency. |
|
Transit Tracker will increase bus riders’ perceptions of personal security, even if there are no other measures taken to increase security. |
Riders’ perceptions of personal security. |
|
Transit Tracker will provide bus riders with accurate and useful information that will be understandable and easy to use. |
Riders’ satisfaction ratings of Transit Tracker (e.g., ease of use, usefulness and accuracy of information). |
|
Transit Tracker will increase bus riders’ overall satisfaction with bus service. |
Riders’ overall satisfaction ratings of bus services. |
The approach to the Transit Tracker evaluation was three-fold and involved the following elements:
· Administration of a before-and-after intercept survey of bus riders at bus stops.
· Analysis of ridership data at the bus stops surveyed.
· Administration of an Online survey of Transit Tracker Online users.
The first step in the Transit Tracker evaluation was to administer “Before” and “After” intercept surveys to bus riders. The goal was to use one survey instrument to obtain information for each of the five objectives of the Transit Tracker evaluation:
· Assess riders’ use of trip planning information.
· Assess riders’ perceptions of transit system efficiency.
· Assess riders’ perceptions of personal security.
· Assess riders’ perceptions of Transit Tracker service (After survey and Online survey only).
· Assess riders’ overall satisfaction with bus service.
This section describes the survey approach, respondent characteristics, and the findings from the Before and After Transit Tracker intercept surveys, and is organized as follows:
· 3.1 Survey Approach
· 3.2 Summary of Respondent Characteristics
·
3.3 Findings
The Before surveys were administered on Tuesday afternoon,
January 22, 2002 through Friday morning, January 25, 2002. The After surveys
were administered on Tuesday morning, February 4, 2003 through Thursday afternoon,
February 6, 2003. The Before surveys were conducted at
four stops located in different areas throughout the city of
Table 3‑1 shows the mean
weekday boardings from 2002 and 2003 for the five Transit Tracker locations at
which TriMet passengers were interviewed and the variation in ridership between location
and between time periods. Surveys were administered during the time periods
when ridership was the highest at each of the locations (e.g., during the
morning peak at
Table
3‑1. Ridership Data for Transit Tracker Bus Stops
in
|
Bus Stop |
Mean Weekday Boardings |
|||||
|
7 – 9 a.m. |
9 a.m. – 4 p.m. |
4 – 6 p.m. |
||||
|
2002 |
2003 |
2002 |
2003 |
2002 |
2003 |
|
|
|
284 |
292 |
141 |
142 |
55 |
58 |
|
Weidler at
Lloyd Center |
12 |
11 |
146 |
139 |
68 |
68 |
|
Burnside and 28th |
67 |
62 |
172 |
157 |
42 |
38 |
|
Burnside & Grand |
28 |
23 |
94 |
94 |
39 |
40 |
|
Salmon and 5th |
97 |
90 |
607 |
551 |
387 |
336 |
Weidler at
Burnside and Grand and Burnside and 28th are
located between ½ mile and 1 mile east of downtown
Salmon and 5th is located in downtown
After surveys were conducted at three of the four locations shown in Table 3‑1. After surveys were not administered at Burnside and Grand, as the Transit Tracker information display was not installed at that location at the time of After-survey administration. Instead, After surveys were conducted at Salmon and 5th Street because the Transit Tracker information display had been in place at that location since June 2001, about a year longer than at the other locations. This site was chosen as the Evaluation Team believed that responses at the Salmon and 5th Street location might differ from those at the other locations, as riders had more time to use the information and form opinions about its accuracy and usefulness.
Surveys were administered by a team of two at each stop during the morning peak (7 – 9 a.m.), midday (11:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.), and/or during the evening peak (4 – 6 p.m.). Riders were approached and informed that surveyors were asking a few questions related to customer satisfaction with the TriMet service. They were asked if they would be willing to answer the questions while they waited for their bus to arrive. Riders who agreed to participate were given a copy of the survey to follow along visually as the surveyor read each question aloud. Surveyors recorded each rider’s responses on a separate survey form.
Overall, bus riders were extremely receptive and cooperative. In fact, about 9 out of 10 people agreed to participate in the survey. The only difficulty experienced in survey administration was the ability to complete the survey before the bus arrived. Between 10 and 20 percent of the time, surveys were not able to be completed before the bus arrived, and therefore, could not be used in the analyses. This was particularly problematic on cool, rainy days at small shelters, as many riders arrived at the stops just before the bus arrived.
Table 3‑2 shows the number of completed surveys
obtained at each bus stop. In all, surveyors were able to obtain 240 complete Before surveys and 278 complete After surveys.
Table 3‑3 shows the percentage of total daytime riders (7 a.m. to 6
p.m.) surveyed at each stop. For most of the study sites, the number of riders
interviewed totaled approximately 20 percent of the number of average daily
boardings. The exceptions were the stops at Burnside and Grand and at Salmon
and 5th where the percentage was about 10%.
Table 3‑2. Number of Completed
Transit Tracker Surveys
|
Bus Stop |
Number of Completed Surveys |
|
|
Before |
After |
|
|
|
109 |
83 |
|
Weidler at Lloyd Center |
53 |
48 |
|
Burnside and 28th |
62 |
61 |
|
Burnside and Grand |
16 |
Not
Surveyed |
|
Salmon and 5th |
Not Surveyed |
86 |
|
Total |
240 |
278 |
Table 3‑3. Percent of Riders Surveyed at Each Bus Stop
|
Bus Stop |
2002 (Before) |
2003 (After) |
||||
|
Average Daily Boardings (7am – 6pm) |
# Surveys (7am – 6pm) |
# Surveys /Average Daily Boardings |
Average Daily Boardings (7am – 6pm) |
Completed Surveys (7am – 6pm) |
# Surveys /Average Daily Boardings |
|
|
|
480 |
109 |
| |||