Stated choices and simulated experiences
Differences in the value of travel time and reliability
Muhammad Fayyaz (University of Sydney)
Michiel C J Bliemer (University of Sydney)
Matthew J. Beck (University of Sydney)
Stephane Hess (University of Leeds)
JWC van Lint (TU Delft - Transport and Planning)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Surveys with stated choice experiments (SCE) are widely used to derive values of time and reliability for transport project appraisal purposes. However, such methods ask respondents to make hypothetical choices, which in turn could create a bias between choices made in the experiment compared to those in an environment where the choices have consequence. In this paper, borrowing principles of experimental economics, we introduce an incentive compatible driving simulator experiment, where participants are required to experience the travel time of their chosen route and actually pay any toll costs associated with the choice of a tolled road. In a first for the literature, we use a within respondent design to compare both the value of travel time savings (VTT) and value of travel time reliability (VOR) across a typical SCE and an environment with simulated consequence. Given the importance of VTT and VOR to transport decision making and the difficulty in estimating VOR using revealed preference data, our results are noteworthy and emphasise that more research on this topic is imperative. We provide suggestions on how the results herein may be used in future studies, to potentially reduce hypothetical bias that may be exhibited in SCE.