See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262689818

Mode Choice Behavior of Commuters in Thiruvananthapuram City

Technical Report  in  Journal of Transportation Engineering · May 2013

DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000533

CITATIONS READS

7 625

3 authors, including:

Arun Baby Zacharia

National Institute of Technology Calicut
1 PUBLICATION   7 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Arun Baby Zacharia on 30 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Mode Choice Behavior of Commuters
in Thiruvananthapuram City
R. Ashalatha 1; V. S. Manju 2; and Arun Baby Zacharia 3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Baselios Mathews II College of Engineering on 06/26/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: Travel behavior plays an important role in transportation planning. Mode choice analysis is the process of arriving at a
decision about which mode to use under a set of circumstances. Choice of a particular mode by a commuter affects the general efficiency
of travel within the city. Various techniques are available in the literature for mode choice modeling. Among these, multinomial logit
models are found to be efficient in estimating the different mode shares in a scenario where more than two choices of modes of travel
are available for a commuter. The present study used multinomial logistic regression to analyze the mode choice behavior of commuters
in Thiruvananthapuram, a typical Indian city. The findings from the study revealed that as age increases preference to car increases and
preference to two-wheelers decreases in comparison with public transport. Increase in time per distance and increase in cost per distance
cause the commuters to switch to car and two-wheelers from public transport. Identification of such factors and its variations will help city
planners to formulate effective transport policies to improve the transport within the city. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000533.
© 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.
CE Database subject headings: Logistics; Urban areas; Commute; Travel patterns; Transportation management; India.
Author keywords: Mode choice; Revealed preference technique; Multinomial logistic regression; Odds ratio; Significance level.

Introduction Private modes are becoming popular in cities of developing

Mode choice behavior of commuters plays an important role in
transportation planning decisions. The commuter may choose a
mode out of many available modes for specific reasons. Many fac-
tors are responsible for a mode choice decision. A proper analysis
of the mode choice decisions can help in addressing issues such as
forecasting demand for new modes of transport, mitigating traffic
congestion, allocating resources, examining the general efficiency
of travel, and will provide insight into the traveler’s behavior char-
acteristics. Mode choice analysis is the third step of the classical
four-step transport planning process, coming after trip generation,
which explains the level of trip making, and trip distribution, which
explains the relative frequency of trip lengths. Mode choice analy-
sis is the process of arriving at a decision about the mode availed
of by the public in a particular set of circumstances. A commuter
having a choice for mode of transport perceives different weights
of disutility for the components of competing alternative modes
in comparison with his own mode. Based on the totality of these
weights, a commuter decides that mode which has the least disutil-
ity. Mode choice models generally form a critical part in analyzing
the travel demand of a study area.
1
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, College of Engineer-
ing, Trivandrum 695 016, Kerala, India (corresponding author). E-mail:
ashu.cet@gmail.com
2
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, College of Engineer-
ing, Trivandrum 695 016, Kerala, India.
3
QC Engineer, General Agencies and Contracting, P.O. Box 30013,
Yanbu Al Sinaiyah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; formerly, Postgraduate
Student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Trivandrum
695 016, Kerala, India.
Note. This manuscript was submitted on January 8, 2012; approved on
December 11, 2012; published online on December 13, 2012. Discussion
period open until October 1, 2013; separate discussions must be submitted
for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Transportation
Engineering, Vol. 139, No. 5, May 1, 2013. © ASCE, ISSN 0733-947X/
2013/5-494-502/$25.00.
countries like India due to insufficient and dismal performance
of public transport facility. This study was aimed at identifying
the various factors that contribute to selection of a particular mode
in Thiruvananthapuram, a typical Indian city located toward the
southern side.
Relevant Literature
Models of mode choice generally fall into two categories, aggregate
discrete choice models and disaggregate discrete choice models.
The two types share the same general concept that passengers will
maximize their utility by choosing the mode that offers them the
best package of attributes such as fare, time of travel, comfort. The
difference is that aggregate models predict the market share of a
mode based on the collective behavior of travelers in the market,
whereas disaggregate models examine the mode choice of an indi-
vidual or household.
Aggregate models are best suited to large-scale studies of traffic
flows in which modeling individual behavior is impractical. These
models in effect assume a representative traveler and estimate that
traveler’s utility from the attributes of transportation options. The
probability that the representative traveler chooses a particular
mode can be thought of as that mode’s market share. The drawback
of these models is that individual behavioral subtleties are lost
at the aggregate level. Disaggregate models treat each person or
household separately, and require data on many characteristics of
each traveler. These models can provide more accurate estimates
of the elasticity of demand for modal attributes, and they relate indi-
vidual characteristics to mode choice more effectively. Disaggre-
gate models provide rich behavioral predictions (Koppelman and
Bhat 2006). Extensive data requirements are the main drawback of
disaggregate models, and therefore it is only used with relatively
small sample populations.
Logit and probit models are well suited to analyze modal split
situation. The development of logit models for the analysis of mode

494 / JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013

J. Transp. Eng. 2013.139:494-502.

 choice decisions has been ongoing for at least thirty years. Logit is
superior to probit from the analytical point of view, whereas the
probit model has more reliable theoretical basis. The multinomial
logistic (MNL) model structure has been widely used for both
urban and intercity mode choice models primarily due to its simple
mathematical form, ease of estimation and interpretation, and the
ability to add or remove choice alternatives. The MNL model gives
the choice probabilities of each alternative as a function of the sys-
tematic portion of the utility of all the alternatives. The expression
for the probability of choosing an alternative i from a set of j alter-
natives is as follows:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Baselios Mathews II College of Engineering on 06/26/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
expðV i Þ
Pr ðiÞ ¼ PJ ð1Þ
j¼1 expðV j Þ
where Pr ðiÞ = probability of the decision maker choosing alterna-
tive i; V = systematic component of the utility of alternative j.
Relevant Works on Mode Choice Analysis
Seneviratne (1985) studied about acceptable walking distances in
central areas of Calgary, Canada. He identified a set of character-
istics that influenced the distribution of walking distances. Using
simple calculus, the critical distance that would be acceptable to
a group of people was derived, depending on the form of the
distribution.
Arasan et al. (1994) studied characteristics of trips by foot and
bicycle modes in Tiruchirapalli, Tamil Nadu, India. They analyzed
home-based walking and bicycling trips with respect to trip length
and the influential variables such as age, sex, occupation, purpose
of trip, and time of the day of travel. Significant variations in trip
lengths by walk and bicycle were found to exist among trip makers
of different categories. The acceptable trip length for these modes
was found by fitting polynomials to the trip-length distributions.
Arasan et al. (1996) studied the mode choice of travelers in
households without vehicles in Tiruchirapalli. They modeled work
trips using the binary logit model and further developed strat-
ified mode choice models based on the location of the travelers’
residence in relation to the central business district (CBD). The
trip distance was identified as the major factor influencing
mode choice.
Ghareib (1996) compared and evaluated the predictive ability of
logit and probit models when applied in the mode choice context.
The study analyzed two transit modes operating in different cities
of the Saudi Kingdom. He considered the attributes of transport
system, traveler, and trip as they represented the major components
of the utility function. The study termed a model as a partially
specified model when it included only transport system attributes,
whereas a full specified model included traveler and trip attributes.
Palma and Rochat (2000) investigated the mode choice for trips
to work in the city of Geneva using a nested logit approach. They
observed that the car ownership decision was primarily related to
the income level of the household and was also influenced by the
number of working people in the household and location issues.
The study highlighted the relative inadequacy of public transport
to some commuters’ needs, especially those who live in suburban
areas across the border. This was attributed to the peculiar geo-
graphical location of the city of Geneva.
Badoe and Wadhawan (2002) studied disaggregated logit mode
choice models by considering a number of issues like effect of
socioeconomic characteristics of travelers, different variance of
the random utilities. The study consisted of three modes, namely,
auto drive all way, transit all way (i.e., the transit access mode is
walk, not auto), and walk. They developed six models. The results
JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 495
J. Transp. Eng. 2013.139:494-502.
showed that well-specified jointly estimated models using data
from two periods yield comparable disaggregate and aggregate
forecasts with those obtained from conventional forecasting
models, estimated with data from a single cross-sectional survey.
Socioeconomic variables and transfer-bias-scale parameters were
found to enhance model fit to estimation data as well as precision
of predictions.
Rastogi and Rao (2003) studied the characteristics of travel of
commuters accessing transit stations in Mumbai, to identify the
policies that can improve the transit access environment. They con-
ducted a survey on transit access in the households of areas related
to two transit stations using the technique of face-to-face personal
interview. The survey was designed to collect the revealed and
stated information, including household and vehicular charac-
teristics, trip maker characteristics, trip characteristics, new mode
acceptability, willingness to shift, access environment information,
and responses under policy options. The microlevel analysis of
the data revealed that a certain relationship exists between the
economic status of the commuter/household and the vehicle owner-
ship of household and the distance at which they live from the
transit station.
Hsu and Guo (2006) studied the CBD-oriented commuters’
mode and residential location choices in Taipei. The study formu-
lated a commuters’ mode and route choice model as well as a
households’ residential choice model on a two-dimensional space.
The commuters’ mode and route choice model developed by them
assumed that commuters select the mode and route alternative
based on the least generalized travel cost. The households’ resi-
dential choice model was formulated to maximize households’
residential utilities subject to time and budget constraints. Results
indicated an increased attraction of households in cities of Taipei
County due to the completion of rail transit networks. The residen-
tial locations that were better served by rail transit lines were found
to attract more households, resulting in higher residential densities.
Nurdeen et al. (2007) modeled the transportation behavior for
coercive measures for car driving in Kuala Lumpur. A binary logit
model was developed for the three alternative modes: bus, train,
and car. It was found that time of travel, cost of travel, gender,
age, income level, and car ownership were significant factors in
influencing car users’ mode choice behavior. Reduction in total
time of travel and cost of travel for the bus and train mode emerged
as the most important element attracting car users toward public
transport and away from car mode.
Hensher and Rose (2007) used the state-of-the-art-stated choice
designs to parameterize modal choice models for commuting and
noncommuting travel futures in the presence of new public trans-
port infrastructure. This study recognized that nested logit models
are relatively easy to estimate with behavioral outputs that are also
easy to interpret.
Liu (2007) analyzed travelers’ choice behavior using combined
revealed preference/stated preference survey data on work-trip
mode choice in Shanghai, China. Several versions of a multinomial
choice model were specified and estimated in this study. For those
at middle and high income levels, the study observed that in-vehicle
time when traveling by bus and the money cost of choosing to
travel by taxi were more important attributes, whereas for low in-
comes, money cost and in-vehicle time of choosing to travel by bus
seemed to be more important.
Spurr and Chapleau (2007) estimated a simple logit model and
a confusion matrix was then applied to scrutinize the output of a
MNL mode split model. The results revealed that important details
about the underlying behavioral phenomena can be obtained
through detailed examination of the mis-specified elements in a
logit model.
 Mahlawat et al. (2007) examined the travel behavior of students
at Texas A&M University (College Station, TX). The mode choice
model showed that time of travel, cost of travel, income, expenses,
household type, number of hours in school, gender, and ethnicity
were important factors in the student’s choice of mode.
Using two comparable national travel surveys, Buehler (2011)
empirically investigated the determinants of transport mode choice
in Germany and the United States. The analysis revealed significant
differences in travel behavior even between similar individuals in
Germany and the United States. The use of car was found to be on
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Baselios Mathews II College of Engineering on 06/26/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
two different levels in the two countries with significantly higher
rates of travel by car for all groups of society in the United States.
The Germans in households with more cars than drivers were found
to make three times higher share of trips by foot, bike, and public
transport compared with Americans in similar households.
The review of relevant works on mode choice analysis reveals
that the choice of the mode varies with socioeconomic and travel
characteristics of the trip maker. Most developing countries are
characterized by heavy dependence on personalized mode and in-
efficient public transport system. Limited studies are reported from
developing countries on mode choice behavior. In a country like
India, where exclusive bus lanes are almost absent and with limited
efforts for promoting the public transport, the attitudes and the pref-
erences of travelers for selecting the modes are different. Moreover,
majority of the cities in India are on the verge of taking major policy
decisions for improving existing public transport system and also
contemplating the need for introducing new systems of mass trans-
port such as Bus Rapid Transit System, Metro rail, Monorail. In this
context, carrying out a study on behavior of trip makers with regard
to mode choice will be useful to the planners and decision makers
to assess the shift to public transport, if the existing system is im-
proved or a new system is introduced. MNL has been proved as a
pragmatic disaggregate model of mode split. It is suitable for mode
choice modeling in mixed traffic conditions, and therefore used in
this study.
MNL Regression Model
The MNL model structure has been widely used for both urban and
intercity mode choice models primarily due to its simple math-
ematical form, ease of estimation and interpretation, and the ability
to add or remove choice alternatives. These are found to be efficient
in estimating the different mode shares in a scenario where more
than two choices of modes of travel are available for a commuter.
Logistic regression helps to predict the presence or absence of a
characteristic or outcome based on values of a set of predictor
variables. MNL regression helps to classify subjects based on val-
ues of a set of predictor variables. This type of regression is similar
to binary logistic regression, but is more general because the
dependent variable is not restricted to two categories. Therefore,
the MNL model was adopted to analyze the mode choice behavior
of commuters in the city of Thiruvananthapuram, because there
are many competing modes such as buses, cars, motorized two-
wheelers, motorized three wheelers, intermediate public transport
that are available for commuters. Most of these are transit modes,
except three wheelers and intermediate public transit. Intermediate
public transits are confined to selected locations within the city and
three wheelers are used for very short trips only. The study was
aimed at identifying the various factors that contribute to selection
of a particular mode in the city. Therefore, all important socioeco-
nomic and trip characteristic variables are included in the model
and coefficients are estimated using maximum likelihood criterion.
496 / JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013
J. Transp. Eng. 2013.139:494-502.
Description of the Study City
Thiruvananthapuram, also known as Trivandrum, which is the
capital of the Indian state of Kerala is selected for this study.
It is one of the largest and most populous cities in Kerala. The city
had a population of approximately 1.1 million as on Nov 2006 with
a population density of 1,500=km2 . The city houses many Central
and State government offices, organizations, private sector com-
panies, educational institutions, and research institutions. There
are approximately 20 government-owned and 60 private-owned
medium and large-scale industrial units in Thiruvananthapuram.
There are also approximately 30,000 small-scale industrial units
employing approximately 115,000 people (Census of India 2001).
The intracity public transport is dominated by the state-owned
Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) buses. Cabs
and auto-rickshaws (motorized three wheelers) are the other means
of public transportation within the city. Cars and motorized two-
wheelers are the commonly used personalized modes. Private buses
are allowed to ply along selected routes within the city, but are lim-
ited in number. The city services of KSRTC were revamped in 2005
with the introduction of modern buses and electronic ticketing
mechanisms. Some low-platform Volvo A/C buses have started op-
erating recently in the city along certain routes. Cyclists are very
rare in the city and due to poor pedestrian facilities such as footpath,
pedestrian subways, and traffic signals with pedestrian phase, walk-
ing is not a predominant mode.
Studies have shown that the bus services in the city have not
come up to the expectations of the public. This is mainly due to
improper scheduling/nonadherence to schedule time. The fre-
quency of the buses is also inadequate. The waiting time at bus
stops during peak hours as well as off-peak hours is found to be
substantially high. The comfort offered to passengers is far from
satisfactory: the improper seating arrangements and the difficulty
faced by passengers in boarding and alighting are typical examples.
The facilities hardly cater for the aged, blind, and physically chal-
lenged. Aggravating the inconvenience is the total lack of proper
integration of bus service with other modes of transportation
available in the city. Because of this the transfer between modes
becomes difficult. The cumulative effects of all these detrimental
factors have a negative impact on the travel efficiencies of
commuters.
Methodology
This work intends to analyze the mode choice behavior of commut-
ers in the city of Thiruvananthapuram. It is aimed at identifying the
various factors that contribute to the selection of a particular mode
in the city of Thiruvananthapuram and the factors which influence
the commuters to use public transport, and those factors that stand
in their way in using public transport. The study is restricted to
work trips only. Revealed preference survey, the technique used to
study the travel pattern in an actual situation, was adopted in the
study to determine the travel patterns of all available modes in
the city.
MNL modeling was adopted in the study because of its capabil-
ity in estimating the mode shares where more than two choices of
modes of travel are available for a commuter. The questionnaire
covered areas of socioeconomic and trip information of commuters.
The following data were elicited from respondents:
1. The choice set for each individual.
2. Socioeconomic characteristics of each individual (age, gender,
occupation, vehicle ownership, and monthly income).
3. Trip-related variable represented by conveyance mode, wait-
ing time, and walking time.
 4. Characteristics of the transport system specific to the trip such Table 1. Case Processing Summary along with Coding Pattern Adopted
as travel time (min) and travel cost. Marginal
The data for the study were collected by directly inter- Factors Coding percentage
viewing the employees in various government as well as private considered Categories pattern N (%)
offices, schools, and educational institutions located in the city of Mode of Bus 1 338 45.7
Thiruvananthapuram. Instructions and explanations were given by conveyance Two-wheeler 2 237 32.1
surveyors to respondents wherever necessary. Car 3 164 22.2
Age group 21–30 1 276 37.3
31–40 2 151 20.4
Design of Questionnaire 41–50 3 256 34.6
51–60 4 56 7.6
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Baselios Mathews II College of Engineering on 06/26/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

A pilot questionnaire survey was first conducted. The questions Gender Male 1 340 46.0
pertained to the socioeconomic condition and travel characteristics Female 2 399 54.0
of the trip maker. The socioeconomic characteristics were assessed Monthly Less than 10,000 1 230 31.1
by considering factors such as age, gender, nature of job, monthly income 10,000–15,000 2 192 26.0
income, and vehicle ownership. Travel characteristics included dis- 15,000–20,000 3 110 14.9
20,000–25,000 4 72 9.7
tance from home to office, mode of conveyance, reasons for choos-
Above 25,000 5 135 18.3
ing the mode, waiting time, in-vehicle travel time, cost of travel, Vehicle Does not own a vehicle 1 222 30.0
etc. Commuters’ satisfactory levels with respect to present mode, ownership Owns car only 2 194 26.3
their willingness to switch over to another mode, and reasons for Owns two-wheeler 3 181 24.5
it were also arrived through the questionnaire survey. It also Owns both car and 4 142 19.2
contained questions that enabled ranking of mode attributes in two-wheeler
general and ranking of performance of the existing KSRTC service Distance (km) 0–5 1 292 39.5
in the city. Efficiency level of existing KSRTC service were ranked 6–10 2 185 25.0
based on factors such as comfort, time of travel, cost of travel, 11–20 3 136 18.4
safety, ease of boarding, frequency/availability, travel in peak 21–50 4 126 17.1
Time/distance 0–2 1 400 54.1
hours, reliability, travel in difficult weather. A pilot survey was
(min=km) 3–5 2 232 31.4
conducted and 90 samples were obtained. Based on the response, 6–10 3 107 14.5
preferences, and the suggestions of the commuters, the variables Cost/distance 0–2 1 323 43.7
were shortlisted and the questionnaire was further refined. A large- (Rs:=km) 3–5 2 247 33.4
scale survey was conducted among the commuters using this 6–12 3 169 22.9
refined questionnaire. Valid 739 100.0
Total 739 —

Variables Used in the Study

The following variables were considered for analyzing the mode the questionnaire survey, and therefore were not included for
choice behavior of commuters in the city of Thiruvananthapuram. further analysis.

Socioeconomic Variables
Users’ socioeconomic characteristics as reflected through their
age, gender, designation, monthly income, and vehicle ownership
are believed to be important factors in mode choice. The categories
of different socioeconomic variables used for this study are shown
in Table 1. In the vehicle ownership category, the captive riders
were also considered, because there are chances of them hiring a
taxi or opting for a car pooling.
Transport System Variables
The travel cost and travel time data per kilometer were extracted
from the data collected. The time of travel (min) for bus users
was taken as the summation of time taken for accessing the nearest
bus stop, waiting time at bus stop, and in-vehicle travel time. The
categories of different transport system variables used for this study
are shown in Table 1.
Attitudinal Variables
Attitudinal variables are those attributes for which no objective
measurement is possible. The questionnaire included variables
about travel mode such as comfort, safety, ease of boarding, travel
in peak hour, reliability, and travel in difficult weather. Attitudinal
variables were given least preference by the commuters during
Sampling Procedure
Sufficient care was taken to ensure that the sample is of optimum
size. The sample size depends on the population of the city under
study. In the city of Thiruvananthapuram, the total employed
people in public and private sector is 190,000 (Census of India
2001). Assuming the population to be normally distributed, empir-
ical formulas given by Levy and Lemeshow (2008) [shown in
Eqs. (2) and (3)] were used to determine the sample size.
Z2 pq
n0 ¼ ð2Þ
e2
where n0 = sample size for infinite population; Z = statistical
parameter corresponding to confidence level (Z is 1.96 for 95%
confidence interval); e = desired margin of error (adopted as 5%);
p = hypothesized true proportion for population (adopted as 0.5 to
account for the worst case) and
n0
q¼1−p n¼
 ð3Þ
1 þ ðn0N−1Þ
where n = sample size for finite population; N = population size.
Based on Eqs. (2) and (3) the minimum sample size was ob-
tained as 385. For the present study, a total of 739 samples were
collected. It was ensured that the data represented all age groups

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 497

J. Transp. Eng. 2013.139:494-502.

 (from 21 to 60) and all sections of society (low income to high
income). Both genders had almost equal representation. Coding
of data was done to facilitate easy handling of information and
the pattern followed is given in Table 1. The coded data were in-
putted to Statistical Package for Social Sciences (release 15.0.0 for
Windows, SPSS; SPSS 2006) for analysis.
Preliminary Data Analysis
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Baselios Mathews II College of Engineering on 06/26/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
A preliminary analysis of the coded data was performed to yield
an overview of the mode choice behavior of commuters in the city
of Thiruvananthapuram. Various cross-classification charts were
prepared with respect to age, gender, vehicle ownership, income,
etc. The various analysis conducted are explained in the following
sections.
The effect of age of commuters on the choice of mode is shown
in Fig. 1. It can be observed that higher age groups preferred
bus mode. Among the personalized vehicles, car was preferred by
higher age group, whereas two-wheelers were more preferred
by lower age groups.
Gender was also found to have an influence on the choice
of mode as can be observed from Fig. 2. Car as mode of travel
is mostly preferred by males than females. Similar trend was
observed in the case of two-wheelers as well. Of the various modes
of travel within the city, females preferred public transport system
(buses) more than any other mode, whereas males preferred
two-wheelers.
Fig. 1. Age group–based classification of mode preference
Fig. 2. Gender-based classification of mode preference
498 / JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013
J. Transp. Eng. 2013.139:494-502.
Fig. 3 shows monthly income-based classification of mode pref-
erence. As evidenced in Fig. 3, lower and middle income groups
preferred public transport system. With the increase in income,
percentage of people preferring buses decreases. For high-income
groups, car is the main mode of travel. Two-wheeler usages are
highest among the middle income groups.
Mode preference based on vehicle ownership is given in Fig. 4.
It shows that two-wheeler owners preferred public transport system
operated by government (buses) compared with to car owners,
whereas those who owned both two-wheelers and car gave least
preference to bus mode and highest preference to car mode.
Analysis Using MNL Regression
When using MNL regression, one category of the dependent var-
iable is chosen as the reference category. All parameters in the
model are interpreted with reference to it. It is the standard/
reference category to which others (response category) would
naturally be compared. The coefficients are estimated through an
iterative maximum likelihood method. Odds ratios are determined
for all independent variables for each category of the dependent
variable except the reference category. Odds ratio represents the
change in the odds of being in the dependent variable category ver-
sus the reference category associated with a one unit change in the
independent variable.
MNL regression was done to identify the influence of various
factors on the switching behavior of commuters from bus to car and
two-wheeler. Such an analysis will help policymakers to improve
the government-owned buses and attract more commuters from per-
sonalized modes such as cars and two-wheelers. Therefore, for the
analysis, the mode of conveyance is chosen as dependent variable,
as the problem is concerned with choice of mode. In order to get
the preference of bus relative to other modes, bus is chosen as the
reference category. Bus was compared with car and two-wheeler
separately to understand the factors and their degree of influence
in shifting commuters from bus (public transport) to personalized
modes (car and two-wheeler). The independent variables chosen
are age group, gender, monthly income, vehicle ownership, dis-
tance from home to office, time per distance, and cost per distance.
The independent variables are classified into various categories.
The output of analysis is shown in Table 1, in which N repre-
sents the number of observations under each case. The marginal
percentage lists the proportion of valid observations found in each
of the outcome variable’s groups. Valid indicates the number of
observations in the data in which the output variable and all pre-
dictor variables are nonmissing.
The likelihood ratio tests that show the contribution of each var-
iable to the model are shown in Table 2. From Table 2, it can be
seen that all variables have significance less than 0.05. Therefore,
it can be concluded that all the variables used in the model have
significant contribution toward predicting the mode choice behav-
ior of commuters. Of these, age, vehicle ownership, distance to
travel, and cost of travel are found to be the most significant ones.
Table 3 shows a statistical comparison of intercept-only model
and final model. Intercept only describes a model that does not in-
clude any predictor variables and simply fits an intercept to predict
the output variable. Final describes a model that includes the speci-
fied predictor variables and has been arrived at through an iterative
process that maximizes the log likelihood of the outcomes seen in
the output variable (Table 3). By including the predictor variables
and maximizing the log likelihood of the outcomes seen in the data,
the final model is an improvement on the intercept-only model.
The likelihood ratio test shows the contribution of each variable
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Baselios Mathews II College of Engineering on 06/26/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 3. Monthly income–based classification of mode preference

100 Table 3. Values of Likelihood Ratio Tests

bus
90 Model-fitting
two-wheeler
80 criteria Likelihood ratio tests
car
Trip makers (%)

70 −2 Log Degree of
60 Model likelihood Chi-square freedom Significance
50 Intercept only 1,430.833 — — —
40 Final 556.465 874.369 36 0.000
30
20
10 that larger percentage of variation can be explained by the model.
0 Thus, based on the pseudo R2 values it can be concluded that
does not own owns car owns two- owns two- the model developed in the present study explains approximately
vehicle wheeler wheeler & car
56–79% variation. Therefore, the model can be considered statisti-
Fig. 4. Vehicle ownership–based classification of mode preference cally significant.
The overall goodness of fit of the MNL model developed is
shown in Table 4. It can be seen that for each case, the predicted
response category is chosen by selecting the category with the
to the model. This fact is revealed by the statistical tests on the two highest model-predicted probability. Cells on the diagonal are
models as given in Table 3. The chi-square statistic is the difference correct predictions. Cells off the diagonal are incorrect predictions.
between the –2 log-likelihoods of the null/intercept-only and final It can be observed that out of the 338 commuters who are found to
models. Because the significance level of the test is less than 0.05, use bus, the MNL model predicted total number of bus commuters
it can be concluded that the final model is outperforming the null as 263 and wrongly predicted that 46 bus commuters used two-
model. The pseudo R2 value of the final model according to Cox wheelers and 29 used cars. Therefore, the accuracy of prediction
and Shell, Nagelkerke, and McFadden tests were 0.694, 0.789, for bus is 77.8%. Similar analysis on two-wheeler commuters gave
0.560, respectively. Pseudo R2 value indicates the proportion of a prediction accuracy of 92.4%, and car as 75.6%. The model has
variance of the response variable explained by the predictors an overall accuracy of 82%.
and its maximum value is 1. Larger pseudo R2 statistics indicate Tables 5 and 6 give the parameter estimates that summarize the
effect of each predictor for commuters’ choice of car relative to bus
and car relative to two-wheeler, respectively. B values are the esti-
Table 2. Model-Fitting Information mated MNL regression coefficients for the models. Parameters with
Model-fitting negative coefficients decrease the likelihood of that response cat-
criteria Likelihood ratio tests egory with respect to the reference category. ExpðBÞ values are
−2 Log Degree of
Parameter likelihood Chi-square freedom Significance
Intercept only 1,430.833 0.000 0 — Table 4. Prediction Accuracies
Age group 593.120 36.656 6 0.000 Predicted
Gender 568.837 12.372 2 0.002
Percent
Income 579.880 23.415 8 0.003
Observed Bus Two-wheeler Car correct
Vehicle 1,133.842 577.377 6 0.000
ownership Bus 263 46 29 77.8
Distance 588.936 32.472 6 0.000 Two-wheeler 10 219 8 92.4
Time/distance 567.748 11.283 4 0.002 Car 23 17 124 75.6
Cost/distance 580.186 23.721 4 0.000 Overall percentage (%) 40.1 38.2 21.8 82.0

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 499

J. Transp. Eng. 2013.139:494-502.

 Table 5. Parameter Estimates of Choice between Bus and Car chances of choosing car over bus, whereas it is 16.43 times for
Response Predictor variables age group (31–40) and 28.02 times for age group (41–50).
category and their categories B ExpðBÞ Therefore, it can be seen that the preference of car relative to
bus is higher for high-age groups and lower for low-age groups.
Car Intercept 0.750 —
Age group = 1.00 2.582 13.217
• Gender. Compared with females, males have been found to have
Age group = 2.00 2.799 16.428 2.01 times more chance of choosing car compared with bus.
Age group = 3.00 3.333 28.016 • Monthly income. MNL regression revealed the influence of in-
Gender = 1.00 0.700 2.013 come on choice of mode between car and bus as follows. Those
Income = 1.00 −0.711 0.491 belonging to low monthly income group (less than Rs. 10,000–
Income = 2.00 −1.126 0.324 15,000) have 0.32–0.491 times the chance of choosing car
Income = 3.00 1.021 1.360
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Baselios Mathews II College of Engineering on 06/26/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

over bus, whereas those with higher income level (between

Income = 4.00 1.578 1.206 Rs. 15,000 and greater than Rs. 25,000) have 1.21–1.36 times
Vehicle ownership = 0.00 −6.173 0.002 the chance of choosing car over bus. It shows that as monetary
Vehicle ownership = 1.00 0.486 1.615
capacity of commuters increases, their chance of switching to
Vehicle ownership = 2.00 3.069 1.046
Distance = 1.00 1.699 5.470 a personalized mode (car) also increases. It can be seen from
Distance = 2.00 1.698 5.461 Table 5 that among income categories, there is a decrease in
Distance = 3.00 −0.957 0.605 odds ratio between group 1 and 2 and also between 3 and 4. The
Time/distance = 1.00 −0.750 0.472 reason for this could be the fact that generally people, especially
Time/distance = 2.00 0.191 1.210 lower and middle income groups, are reluctant to reveal their
Cost/distance = 1.00 −1.692 0.184 actual income. Therefore, a specific trend is missing.
Cost/distance = 2.00 0.941 1.390 • Vehicle ownership. Regarding the influence of vehicle owner-
ship over mode choice, the MNL regression model revealed that
compared with reference category, the respondents with car
Table 6. Parameter Estimates of Choice between Bus and Two-Wheeler ownership have 1.05 times more chance of choosing car over
bus, whereas those who own only two-wheeler have 1.62 times
Response Predictor variables
category and their categories B ExpðBÞ chance of choosing car over bus. The preference of car relative
to bus is higher for two-wheeler owners. This could be because
Two-wheeler Intercept 1.248 — two-wheeler owners (the moment they attain a position to own
Age group = 1.00 1.363 1.256
a car) would prefer to travel by car due to the safety, comfort,
Age group = 2.00 −0.661 0.516
Age group = 3.00 −1.549 0.213
and flexibility offered by car. Those who own both car and two-
Gender = 1.00 1.105 3.019 wheeler show lesser preference to car in comparison with bus.
Income = 1.00 −0.445 0.560 This shows that those who own both car and two-wheeler might
Income = 2.00 −0.216 0.242 be preferring two-wheeler for short trips and car for longer
Income = 3.00 0.138 1.871 trips. Those who do not own either of these is found to have
Income = 4.00 0.523 1.687 very low chance of choosing car in comparison with bus. This
Vehicle ownership = 0.00 −7.012 0.001 result underlines the ability of the model in predicting matters
Vehicle ownership = 1.00 −4.694 0.009 closer to reality.
Vehicle ownership = 2.00 −0.765 0.465
• Distance (km). In the case of influence of distance traveled by
Distance = 1.00 2.243 9.423
Distance = 2.00 1.980 7.240
a commuter over his/her mode choice behavior, the MNL re-
Distance = 3.00 −1.914 0.783 gression model revealed that, compared with longer distance ca-
Time/distance = 1.00 −0.522 0.593 tegory (21–50 km), shorter distance commuters (up to 10 km)
Time/distance = 2.00 0.345 1.412 have 5.5 times more chance of choosing car over bus. When the
Cost/distance = 1.00 −0.369 0.692 distance is between 11 and 20 km, the chances of commuters
Cost/distance = 2.00 0.175 1.839 preferring car to bus is only 0.61 times. Therefore, it can be con-
cluded that as distance to travel increases, the commuters switch
to bus from car. This could be because as distance increases,
odds ratios for the various categories of the predictors/dependent most commuters prefer bus and for short trips, car is preferred.
variable. The odds ratio of a coefficient indicates how the risk of • Travel time per distance (min=km). Multinomial regression
the outcome falling in the comparison group compared with the risk model also sheds light into the choice of modes of commuters
of the outcome falling in the reference group changes with the in the city of Thiruvananthapuram with respect to travel time per
variable in question. The odds ratio value for each category of the distance (min=km). It was observed that the chance of choosing
predictors is computed with reference to a category of the same car over bus is only 0.47 times for travel time per distance less
predictor, chosen by default. In the present study, the last category than 2 and for a range of 3–5, the choice of car over bus is 1.21,
of each predictor is chosen as reference by default. compared with that in the reference range of 6–10. Therefore, it
can be inferred that as travel time per distance increases, the
chance of commuters shifting from bus to car increases. It points
Analysis of MNL Regression Model of Car in Relation to the fact that as congestion sets in (which is manifested in the
to Bus
form of increase in travel time per distance, min=km) it causes
The MNL model estimates for a unit increase in each variable commuters to choose car rather than bus. Therefore, it can be
affecting commuters’ choice of car relative to bus, when the other observed that as travel time per distance increases, commuters
variables in the model are held constant, are discussed in the fol- prefer car to public transport system (bus).
lowing sections (as given in Table 5). • Cost per distance (Rs:=km). Multilogistic regression model
• Age group. Choice of mode (car with respect to bus) based on revealed that as travel cost per distance (Rs:=km) increases,
age revealed that age group (21–30) has 13.22 times as much as commuters shift to car from bus. The reason may be due to

500 / JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013

J. Transp. Eng. 2013.139:494-502.

 the fact that when travel cost increases, public transport will not
be much economical compared with car. Therefore, commuters
switch to car as economical advantage ceases to become a
controlling factor in mode choice.
Analysis of MNL Regression Model of Two-Wheeler
in Relation to Bus
The MNL model estimates for a unit increase in each variable
affecting commuters’ choice of two-wheeler relative to bus, when
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Baselios Mathews II College of Engineering on 06/26/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
the other variables in the model are held constant, are discussed
in the following sections (as given in Table 6).
Based on the parameters estimated through MNL regression
given in Table 6, the following observations are made.
• Age group. MNL regression analysis of those who choose
two-wheelers relative to bus observed that compared with com-
muters of age group (51–60), commuters of age group (21–30)
have 1.26 times as much chance of choosing two-wheeler rather
than bus. Therefore, it can be concluded that the preference of
two-wheeler relative to bus is higher for lower age groups and
lower for higher age groups.
• Gender. Regarding the influence of gender over choice between
two-wheeler and bus, compared with females, males have al-
most 3.02 times more chance of switching to two-wheeler from
bus. The reason may be because females are not comfortable in
using two-wheeler as it is an unsafe mode, and therefore they
prefer bus to two-wheeler.
• Monthly income. The preference of two-wheeler relative to
bus is lower for low-income groups (monthly income less
than Rs. 10,000–15,000) and higher for high-income groups
(monthly income Rs. 15,000 to greater than 25,000). The trend
is similar to the observation regarding choice between car and
bus given in the previous section. Therefore, the same argument
holds good for this case as well.
• Vehicle ownership. The preference of two-wheeler relative to
bus is lower for those who own only car and higher for those
who own both two-wheeler and car. The reason for this might be
because those who own only car, preference of two-wheeler to
bus does not make any sense. Only teenagers might prefer
such a shift if they get an opportunity to own a two-wheeler.
However, those who own both two-wheeler and car have shown
a greater trend to switch to two-wheeler from bus compared with
those who own only two-wheeler. The better manoeuvrability of
two-wheelers and their ability to travel faster than car under con-
gested conditions could be the reason for this trend. Moreover,
considering the total cost, two-wheelers are more economical.
The MNL model has correctly predicted captive riders as their
odds ratio is near to zero.
• Distance (km). Multinomial analysis reveals that as travel dis-
tance increases, the chances of switching to two-wheeler from
bus decreases. The chance of switching to two-wheeler from bus
is almost 9.42 times for short-distance commuters (0–5 km),
whereas it is only 7.24 for commuters having travel distance
in the 6–10 km range. The preference of two-wheeler relative
to bus is higher for short-distance commuters. It decreases with
increase in travel distance.
• Travel time per distance (min=km). The analysis revealed that
the preference of two-wheeler relative to bus is higher for higher
values of time per distance. As travel time per distance in-
creases, commuters prefer two-wheeler over bus. Infact increase
in travel time per distance is an indication of congestion, and
therefore it can be concluded that as congestion increases, com-
muters switch from bus to two-wheelers.
JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013 / 501
J. Transp. Eng. 2013.139:494-502.
• Cost per distance (Rs:=km). Normally cost per distance in-
creases as congestion sets in and it also varies with type of ve-
hicle used for travel. MNL analysis revealed that the preference
of two-wheeler relative to bus is higher for higher values of cost
per distance. To sum up, as travel cost per distance increases,
commuters prefer two-wheeler over bus.
Specific Conclusions
Age-wise comparison revealed that bus is more preferred by lower
age groups, whereas preference to cars is higher among higher age
groups. Two-wheeler is a preferred mode of conveyance among
lower age group. Therefore, it can be concluded that with increase
in age, preference to car increases and preference to two-wheelers
decreases in comparison with bus.
Gender-wise comparison revealed that preference to car as well
as two-wheeler is higher among male commuters compared with
females. Female commuters preferred bus given a choice between
car and bus as well as between two-wheeler and bus.
Income-wise comparison revealed that those with monthly in-
come less than Rs. 10,000 and up to Rs. 15,000 showed more pref-
erence to bus. With increase in monthly income above Rs. 15,000
commuters preferring bus as a mode of transport decreased. As ex-
pected, among the higher income group, car is the preferred mode
of travel. This trend is expected in a city like Thiruvananthapuram
where there is no mass transport system and the existing public
transport system is very inefficient and unreliable. Therefore, it
can be observed that there is a trend of shifting to personalized ve-
hicles with increase in financial position of commuters. Moreover
with increase in travel distance (intercity traveling), commuters
were found to give less preference to car and two-wheeler relative
to bus. This also points to the nonavailability and nonreliability of
intracity public transport system.
With increase in travel time per distance, commuters were found
to give more preference to car and two-wheelers relative to bus.
Similar trend was also observed with increase in travel cost per
distance. Among the personalized modes, preliminary analysis
showed that two-wheeler is the most preferred mode. With increase
in travel time per distance as well as cost per distance, two-wheeler
commuters switch from bus. Therefore, transport planners should
ensure that time per distance as well as cost per distance is kept
to the minimum to attract more commuters to the public transport
system.
MNL analysis on the influence of vehicle ownership over choice
of bus revealed that those who own both car and two-wheeler prefer
two-wheeler for shorter trips and car for longer trips. Commuters
who own only car showed lower preference of two-wheelers to bus,
whereas those who own both two-wheeler and car showed higher
preference of two-wheeler especially for shorter trips.
A comparison between two-wheeler users and car users with
reference to their preference to bus revealed that two-wheeler own-
ers showed a greater preference to bus compared with car users.
This may be because users of two-wheelers generally fall under
low/middle income category, and therefore their next natural choice
will be bus. The commuters, who own both two-wheeler and car,
gave least preference to bus and higher preference to car. This is
because in a developing country like India, given the poor state of
public transport, those owning car as well as two-wheelers prefer
car owing to its safety and flexibility. The study also revealed that
the bus commuters who own both car and two-wheeler preferred
two-wheeler when faced with a situation that demands switching
from bus. This shifting from bus is mainly due to the inefficient and
nonreliability of bus transport. This also points to the fact that in the
 cities of developing countries like India where there is a predomi-
nant share of two-wheeler traffic, improving public transport will
likely attract more commuters to bus. This will likely lead to sig-
nificant reduction in traffic volume on urban roads.
The MNL modeling which has been made use of in this study
will be of much help to the policymakers to introduce various
schemes to improve government-owned bus system, so that it can
be made more attractive. This will ensure that more commuters
shift from personalized mode to public transport system. Such a
shift is highly recommended for a developing country like India, as
it will ensure substantial reduction in traffic volume along already
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Baselios Mathews II College of Engineering on 06/26/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
choked urban corridors, and will reduce vehicular emission, delay,
and fuel consumption.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Ms. Anu P. Alex, Assistant
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering,
Trivandrum for the meticulous proofreading and her help in inter-
preting the results. They would also like to thank the authorities
and employees of St. Mary’s School, State Bank of Travancore,
Indian Bank, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Mar Ivanios College,
and Medical College Trivandrum for co-operating with the ques-
tionnaire survey.
References
Arasan, V. T., Rengaraju, V. R., and Krishna Rao, K. V. (1994). “Character-
sitics of trips by foot and bicycle modes in Indian city.” J. Transp. Eng.,
120(2), 283–294.
Arasan, V. T., Rengaraju, V. R., and Krishna Rao, K. V. (1996). “Trip
characteristics of travellers without vehicles.” J. Transp. Eng., 122(1),
76–81.
Badoe, D. A., and Wadhawan, B. (2002). “Jointly estimated cross-
sectional mode choice models: Specification and forecast performance.”
J. Transp. Eng., 128(3), 259–269.
502 / JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY 2013
View publication stats J. Transp. Eng. 2013.139:494-502.
Buehler, R. (2011). “Determinants of transport mode choice: A com-
parison of Germany and the USA.” J. Transp. Geogr., 19(4),
644–657.
Census of India. (2001). Series 10 Kerala, Government of India.
Ghareib, A. H. (1996). “Evaluation of logit and probit models in mode
choice situation.” J. Transp. Eng., 122(4), 282–290.
Hensher, D. A., and Rose, J. M. (2007). “Development of commuter and
non-commuter mode choice models for the assessment of new public
transport infrastructure projects: A case study.” Transport. Res. Pol.
Pract., 41(5), 428–443.
Hsu, C. I., and Guo, S. P. (2006). “CBD oriented commuters’ mode and
residential location choices in an urban area with surface streets and rail
transit lines.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 132(4), 235–246.
Koppelman, F. S., and Bhat, C. (2006). A self instructing course in mode
choice modeling: Multinomial and nested logit models, U.S. Department
of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DC.
Levy, S. P., and Lemeshow, S. (2008). Sampling of populations: Methods
and applications, 4th Ed., Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
Liu, G. (2007). “A behavioral model of work-trip mode choice in
Shanghai.” China Econ. Rev., 18(4), 456–476.
Mahlawat, M., Rayan, S., Kuchangi, S., and Patil, S. (2007). “Exami-
nation of student travel mode choice.” Rep. 07-2616, Transportation
Research Board 86th Annual Meeting, Transportation Research
Board, Washington DC.
Nurdeen, A., Rahmat, R. A. O. K., and Ismail, A. (2007). “Modeling of
transportation behavior for coercive measures for car driving in Kuala
Lumpur.” ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci., 2(2), 18–24.
Palma, A., and Rochat, D. (2000). “Mode choices for trips to work in
Geneva: Anempirical analysis.” J. Transp. Geogr., 8(1), 43–51.
Rastogi, R., and Rao, K. V. (2003). “Travel characteristics of commuters
accessing transit: Case study.” J. Transp. Eng., 129(6), 684–694.
Seneviratne, P. N. (1985). “Acceptable walking distances in central areas.”
J. Transp. Eng., 111(4), 365–376.
SPSS. (2006). “SPSS for Windows.” Statistical analysis software, Release
15, SPSS, Chicago.
Spurr, T., and Chapleau, R. (2007). “The contribution of the confusion
matrix to the analysis of mode choice in Montreal.” Rep. 07-2925,
Transportation Research Board 86th Annual Meeting, Transportation
Research Board, Washington DC.