Transactions on Transport Sciences 2021, 12(1):25-37 | DOI: 10.5507/tots.2021.002

Public bus transport service satisfaction: Understanding its value to urban passengers towards improved uptake

Umair Hasana, c*, Andrew Whytea, Hamad Al Jassmib, c
a School of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia
b Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
c Roadway, Transportation and Traffic Safety Research Center (RTTSRC), United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

To accurately direct investments towards sustainable transit, current transport status and factors driving passengers towards private cars instead of public transport (PT) should be identified first. Past research advocated improvements in PT to shift mode-usage but has yet to model the different causal effects that direct bus users to cars in rapidly developing yet congested areas. On-board questionnaire survey data from intra-city Abu Dhabi bus passengers (n = 1520, variables = 31) over a month were gathered in this study during both weekends and weekdays. The study modelled existing bias of travellers and quality attributes as antecedents of bus service's perceived value for money (VfM) and satisfaction from level of service (LoS) and mode choice (car vs. bus) as the ultimate consequence. Findings revealed that any previous biased opinions of travellers adversely affected satisfaction and perceived value, while quality attributes had a positive effect. Mode use was influenced by satisfaction from LoS (frequency of buses and network coverage), which was a positive consequence of perceived VfM (quality of ride and level of fare trade-off). Journey time and bus-stop waiting area quality also positively influenced satisfaction from fare level while passenger socio-demographic distribution showed that most respondents travelled more than five times a week by bus and were full-time workers and transport agencies may target service improvements around office-hours.

Keywords: public transport; traffic; travel perception, satisfaction, bias; mode use; quality attributes

Received: October 13, 2020; Revised: January 20, 2021; Accepted: March 11, 2021; Prepublished online: April 22, 2021; Published: June 29, 2021  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Hasan, U., Whyte, A., & Al Jassmi, H. (2021). Public bus transport service satisfaction: Understanding its value to urban passengers towards improved uptake. Transactions on Transport Sciences, 12(1), 25-37. doi: 10.5507/tots.2021.002
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Abenoza, R. F., Cats, O., & Susilo, Y. O. (2017). Travel satisfaction with public transport: Determinants, user classes, regional disparities and their evolution. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 95, 64-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2016.11.011 Go to original source...
    2. Abou-Zeid, M., & Fujii, S. (2016). Travel satisfaction effects of changes in public transport usage. Transportation, 43(2), 301-314. DOI: 10.1007/s11116-015-9576-3 Go to original source...
    3. AECOM. (2015). Working Paper No. 1: Task 3 Review and Recommendations on the Proposed Travel Surveys. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
    4. Alawadi, K., & Benkraouda, O. (2017). The Debate over Neighborhood Density in Dubai: Between Theory and Practicality. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 18-34. DOI: 10.1177/0739456X17720490 Go to original source...
    5. Andreev, P., Heart, T., Maoz, H., & Pliskin, N. (2009). Validating formative partial least squares (PLS) models: Methodological review and empirical illustration. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Information Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
    6. Beirão, G., & Cabral, J. S. (2007). Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: a qualitative study. Transport Policy, 14(6), 478-489 Go to original source...
    7. Benbasat, I., & Wang, W. (2005). Trust in and adoption of online recommendation agents. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 6(3), 4 Go to original source...
    8. Buehler, R., Pucher, J., Gerike, R., & Götschi, T. (2017). Reducing car dependence in the heart of Europe: lessons from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Transport Reviews, 37(1), 4-28. DOI: 10.1080/01441647.2016.1177799 Go to original source...
    9. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105 Go to original source...
    10. Chaloux, N., Boisjoly, G., Grisé, E., El-Geneidy, A., & Levinson, D. (2019). I only get some satisfaction: Introducing satisfaction into measures of accessibility. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 62, 833-843. DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2019.03.008 Go to original source...
    11. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (Vol. 295, pp. 295-336). London, U.K.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
    12. Currie, G., & De Gruyter, C. (2018). Exploring links between the sustainability performance of urban public transport and land use in international cities. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 11(1), 325-342. DOI: 10.5198/jtlu.2018.957 Go to original source...
    13. Daleure, G. (2017). Wages, Salaries, and Expatriate Labor. In Emiratization in the UAE Labor Market (pp. 57-71): Springer Go to original source...
    14. de Oña, J., de Oña, R., Eboli, L., & Mazzulla, G. (2013). Perceived service quality in bus transit service: a structural equation approach. Transport Policy, 29, 219-226 Go to original source...
    15. De Vos, J., Mokhtarian, P. L., Schwanen, T., Van Acker, V., & Witlox, F. (2016). Travel mode choice and travel satisfaction: bridging the gap between decision utility and experienced utility. Transportation, 43(5), 771-796. DOI: 10.1007/s11116-015-9619-9 Go to original source...
    16. dell'Olio, L., Ibeas, A., & Cecin, P. (2011). The quality of service desired by public transport users. Transport Policy, 18(1), 217-227. DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.08.005 Go to original source...
    17. Dong, T., Jiao, L., Xu, G., Yang, L., & Liu, J. (2019). Towards sustainability? Analyzing changing urban form patterns in the United States, Europe, and China. Science of the Total Environment, 671, 632-643. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.269 Go to original source...
    18. DoT Abu Dhabi. (2009). Surface Transport Master Plan - a Vision for Connecting Abu Dhabi. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
    19. Echaniz, E., dell'Olio, L., & Ibeas, Á. (2018). Modelling perceived quality for urban public transport systems using weighted variables and random parameters. Transport Policy, 67, 31-39. DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.05.006 Go to original source...
    20. Friman, M., & Fellesson, M. (2009). Service supply and customer satisfaction in public transportation: The quality paradox. Journal of Public Transportation, 12(4), 57-69. DOI: 10.5038/2375-0901.12.4.4 Go to original source...
    21. Fu, X.-m., Zhang, J.-h., & Chan, F. T. (2018). Determinants of loyalty to public transit: a model integrating Satisfaction-Loyalty Theory and Expectation-Confirmation Theory. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 113, 476-490 Go to original source...
    22. Guirao, B., García-Pastor, A., & López-Lambas, M. E. (2016). The importance of service quality attributes in public transportation: Narrowing the gap between scientific research and practitioners' needs. Transport Policy, 49, 68-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.003 Go to original source...
    23. Hadiuzzman, M., Das, T., Hasnat, M. M., Hossain, S., & Rafee Musabbir, S. (2017). Structural equation modeling of user satisfaction of bus transit service quality based on stated preferences and latent variables. Transportation Planning and Technology, 40(3), 257-277 Go to original source...
    24. Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414-433 Go to original source...
    25. Hasan, U., Whyte, A., & Al Jassmi, H. (2018a). Framework for Delivering an AV-based Mass Mobility Solution: Integrating Government-Consumer Actors and Life-cycle Analysis of Transportation Systems. Paper presented at the 46th European Transport Conference, Dublin, Ireland
    26. Hasan, U., Whyte, A., & Al Jassmi, H. (2018b). Life-cycle asset management in residential developments building on transport system critical attributes via a data-mining algorithm. Buildings, 9(1). DOI: 10.3390/buildings9010001 Go to original source...
    27. Hasan, U., Whyte, A., & Al Jassmi, H. (2019). a life-cycle decision-making framework to assess the need for autonomous mobility. Transportation Research Procedia, 42, 32-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.trpro.2019.12.004 Go to original source...
    28. Hasan, U., Whyte, A., & Al Jassmi, H. (2020). a review of the transformation of road transport systems: Are we ready for the next step in artificially intelligent sustainable transport? Applied System Innovation, 3(1), 1 Go to original source...
    29. Heinen, E., & Chatterjee, K. (2015). The same mode again? An exploration of mode choice variability in Great Britain using the National Travel Survey. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 78, 266-282. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2015.05.015 Go to original source...
    30. Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 116(1), 2-20. DOI: 10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382 Go to original source...
    31. Kamaruddin, R., Osman, I., & Pei, C. A. C. (2017). Customer expectations and its relationship towards public transport in Klang Valley. Journal of ASIAN Behavioural Studies, 2(4), 29-39 Go to original source...
    32. Kim, M. J., Lee, C.-K., & Bonn, M. (2017). Obtaining a better understanding about travel-related purchase intentions among senior users of mobile social network sites. International Journal of Information Management, 37(5), 484-496 Go to original source...
    33. Kroesen, M., Handy, S., & Chorus, C. (2017). Do attitudes cause behavior or vice versa? An alternative conceptualization of the attitude-behavior relationship in travel behavior modeling. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 101, 190-202. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2017.05.013 Go to original source...
    34. Kwan, S. C., Sutan, R., & Hashim, J. H. (2018). Trip characteristics as the determinants of intention to shift to rail transport among private motor vehicle users in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Sustainable Cities and Society, 36, 319-326. DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2017.10.030 Go to original source...
    35. Lavery, T. A., Páez, A., & Kanaroglou, P. S. (2013). Driving out of choices: An investigation of transport modality in a university sample. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 57, 37-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2013.09.010 Go to original source...
    36. Liu, Y., Sheng, H., Mundorf, N., Redding, C., & Ye, Y. (2017). Integrating norm activation model and theory of planned behavior to understand sustainable transport behavior: Evidence from China. International journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(12), 1593 Go to original source...
    37. Loch, K. D., Straub, D. W., & Kamel, S. (2003). Diffusing the internet in the Arab world: The role of social norms and technological culturation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(1), 45-63 Go to original source...
    38. Lovelock, C., & Wirtz, J. (2016). Services marketing: People, technology, strategy (K. Samsudin Ed. 8th ed.). Singapore: World Scientific
    39. Mezghani, M. (2006). North Africa and the Middle East: a promising region for public transport. Public Transport International, 55(2)
    40. Mouwen, A. (2015). Drivers of customer satisfaction with public transport services. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 78, 1-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2015.05.005 Go to original source...
    41. Mugion, R. G., Toni, M., Raharjo, H., Di Pietro, L., & Sebathu, S. P. (2018). Does the service quality of urban public transport enhance sustainable mobility? Journal of Cleaner Production, 174, 1566-1587. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.052 Go to original source...
    42. Qamhaieh, A., & Chakravarty, S. (2020). Drive-through cities: Cars, labor, and exaggerated automobilities in Abu Dhabi. Mobilities, 15(6), 792-809. DOI: 10.1080/17450101.2020.1822103 Go to original source...
    43. Rahman, S. M., Khondaker, A. N., Hasan, M. A., & Reza, I. (2017). Greenhouse gas emissions from road transportation in Saudi Arabia - a challenging frontier. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 69, 812-821. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.047 Go to original source...
    44. Renne, J. L., Hamidi, S., & Ewing, R. (2016). Transit commuting, the network accessibility effect, and the built environment in station areas across the United States. Research in Transportation Economics, 60(Supplement C), 35-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2017.02.003 Go to original source...
    45. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. In. Bönningstedt: SmartPLS
    46. Sam, E. F., Hamidu, O., & Daniels, S. (2018). SERVQUAL analysis of public bus transport services in Kumasi metropolis, Ghana: Core user perspectives. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 6(1), 25-31 Go to original source...
    47. SBS Transit Ltd. (2019). Fares and Concessions. Retrieved from https://www.sbstransit.com.sg/Uploads/Whats%20New/Press%20Release%20Attachments/2019/Flyer%20-%20Bus%20and%20train%20fares%20from%2028%20Dec%202019.pdf
    48. SCAD. (2014). Statistical Yearbook of Abu Dhabi. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: Statistics Centre - Abu Dhabi (SCAD) Retrieved from https://www.scad.ae/Release%20Documents/SYB-2014_V1.1_EN.pdf
    49. Shen, W., Xiao, W., & Wang, X. (2016). Passenger satisfaction evaluation model for Urban rail transit: a structural equation modeling based on partial least squares. Transport Policy, 46, 20-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.10.006 Go to original source...
    50. ªimºekoğlu, Ö., Nordfjærn, T., & Rundmo, T. (2015). The role of attitudes, transport priorities, and car use habit for travel mode use and intentions to use public transportation in an urban Norwegian public. Transport Policy, 42, 113-120. DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.05.019 Go to original source...
    51. Taylor, M. A. P., Young, W., Wigan, M. R., & Ogden, K. W. (1992). Designing a large-scale travel demand survey: New challenges and new opportunities. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 26(3), 247-261. DOI: 10.1016/0965-8564(92)90035-6 Go to original source...
    52. Transport for NSW. (2021). Adult Fares. Retrieved from https://transportnsw.info/tickets-opal/opal/fares-payments/adult-fares
    53. van Lierop, D., & El-Geneidy, A. (2016). Enjoying loyalty: The relationship between service quality, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in public transit. Research in Transportation Economics, 59, 50-59. DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2016.04.001 Go to original source...
    54. Wu, I., & Pojani, D. (2016). Obstacles to the creation of successful bus rapid transit systems: The case of Bangkok. Research in Transportation Economics, 60(Supplement C), 44-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2016.05.001 Go to original source...
    55. Yuda Bakti, I. G. M., Rakhmawati, T., Sumaedi, S., Widianti, T., Yarmen, M., & Astrini, N. J. (2020). Public transport users' WOM: an integration model of the theory of planned behavior, customer satisfaction theory, and personal norm theory. Transportation Research Procedia, 48, 3365-3379. DOI: 10.1016/j.trpro.2020.08.117 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content