Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Transport Geography

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jtrangeo

Shortest path distance vs. least directional change: Empirical testing of space T
syntax and geographic theories concerning pedestrian route choice
behaviour
⁎
Farjana Shatu, Tan Yigitcanlar , Jonathan Bunker
School of Civil Engineering and Built Environment, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), 2 George Street, Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Existing knowledge on the impact of built environment (BE) on route choice behaviour is doubtful due to an
Route choice unresolved tension between two schools of thought. One represented BE geographically and found that most
Built environment people tend to choose the shortest route. The other represented BE topologically and showed that least direc-
Virtual audit tional change is a key determinant of route choice. How do pedestrians make a trade-off between these two
Space syntax
factors in route choice? This question is answered using walking route data of 178 pedestrians in Brisbane,
Pedestrian behaviour
Brisbane
Australia. Their reported routes were examined against the corresponding shortest path and least directional
change routes using the percent overlap method. The effects of 25 additional BE factors were also estimated in a
conditional logit model. The results reveal that: (a) Together distance and direction are likely to explain 53% of
route choice decisions; (b) Individually, distance and direction are likely to explain 34% and 46% of route choice
decisions respectively; (c) 28% of the chosen routes satisfied both distance and direction criteria. These findings
confirm the claims of both schools, but also point that the least directional change route is a preferred option,
and that pedestrians tend to minimise both criteria if they can.

1. Introduction The planning school has represented BE geographically and found

There is clear evidence in the literature that walking has substantial
benefits for both physical and mental health (Gudes et al., 2010; Lee
and Buchner, 2008; Roe and Aspinall, 2011; Teimouri and Yigitcanlar,
2018; Vaeztavakoli et al., 2018). Besides, fulfilling travel through
walking is identified as having the potential to reduce congestion, lower
greenhouse gas emissions, and enhance social inclusion and interac-
tions (Dizdaroglu et al., 2012; Kamruzzaman et al., 2015; Yigitcanlar
and Kamruzzaman, 2014; Yigitcanlar and Dizdaroglu, 2015; Arbolino
et al., 2017). Despite ample studies having focused on pedestrian be-
haviour, limited research to date investigates the links between the
built environment (BE) and pedestrian route choice behaviour (Dessing
et al., 2016; Guo, 2009; Hoogendoorn and Bovy, 2004; Rodríguez et al.,
2015). The findings from route choice studies inform important policy
basis for BE interventions to foster walking by identifying BE attributes
that influence pedestrians (who already walk) in making a trade-off
between alternative routes (Handy et al., 2006; Koh and Wong, 2013).
However, such findings are questionable due to an unresolved tension
between two schools of thought—i.e., planning vs. space syntax
(Sharmin and Kamruzzaman, 2018).
that route distance alone can explain about 50–80% of route choice
behaviour (Gim and Ko, 2017; Guo and Loo, 2013; Seneviratne and
Morrall, 1985). This means that a majority of pedestrians tend to
choose the shortest path route between an origin and a destination. As a
result, geographical distance has become “a variable of pivotal im-
portance in transport studies” (Stigell and Schantz, 2011, p.563); and
consequently, most transport planning models assume the shortest path
distance in the route assignment stage (Zhu and Levinson, 2015). The
other school, based on the space syntax concept (Hillier et al., 1976;
Hillier and Hanson, 1984; Hillier et al., 1987), has represented BE to-
pologically and identified that configurational properties of the street
such as visual distance (number of directional changes) alone can ex-
plain between 55% and 75% of pedestrian movement in streets (Hillier
and Iida, 2005; Hillier et al., 1993; Jiang, 2009; Lerman et al., 2014;
Penn et al., 1998; Read, 1999).
These two schools of thought cannot be true at the same time in
pedestrian route choice behaviour unless the shortest distance route
perfectly overlaps with the least directional change route. Fig. 1 pre-
sents a hypothetical example to illustrate this based on a grid street
pattern. Let it be assumed that a pedestrian would like to travel from A

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: farjana.shatu@hdr.qut.edu.au (F. Shatu), tan.yigtcanlar@qut.edu.au (T. Yigitcanlar), j.bunker@qut.edu.au (J. Bunker).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.11.005
Received 28 May 2018; Received in revised form 5 November 2018; Accepted 6 November 2018
Available online 14 November 2018
0966-6923/ © 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
F. Shatu et al. Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52

route and the least directional change routes respectively, suggesting

that the motorcyclists preferred least directional change routes over the
shortest path route. Note, however, that few studies have compared the
attributes of reported routes against the attributes of corresponding
shortest path routes to identify potential factors affecting the choice of
reported routes for pedestrian (Buliung et al., 2013; Koh and Wong,
2013).
Apart from distance and direction, research has shown that a range
of other BE factors affect pedestrian route choice behaviour. These
factors are classified into three groups: (a) Sidewalk characteristics; (b)
Characteristics of land uses along the sidewalk; (c) Characteristics of
the traffic environment along the sidewalk (Shatu and Yigitcanlar,
2018). Attributes of the sidewalk identified to be important are: side-
walk condition (continuity of sidewalk, quality of sidewalk such as the
presence or absence of pavements, sidewalk width) (Borst et al., 2009;
Broach and Dill, 2016; Dessing et al., 2016; Rodríguez et al., 2015;
Weinstein Agrawal et al., 2008); crowdedness in sidewalk (Gim and Ko,
2017; Koh and Wong, 2013; Seneviratne and Morrall, 1985); walking
friendly facilities available on sidewalk (benches, shade trees, water
Fig. 1. Route choice decision-making complexity between distance and direc- fountains, vending machines, weather protection) (Brown et al., 2007;
tion in a hypothetical grid network. Weinstein-Agrawal et al., 2008); presence of transit stops (Rodríguez
et al., 2015); and amount of litter/graffiti (Borst et al., 2009; Rodríguez
et al., 2015).
to D. Based on the geographic conceptualisation of space, an individual
Land use related factors that attract/repel walking route choice
can choose from a large number of routes from A to D without com-
behaviour are the presence of residential (Borst et al., 2009; Dessing
promising the shortest distance of 600 m (one such route is shown in
et al., 2016), commercial, and recreational (park) (Borst et al., 2009;
dotted line in Fig. 1). However, only two of these shortest routes will
Koh and Wong, 2013) land uses. Density and building height (Guo,
also have the least directional distance (ABD or ACD)—such that they
2009; Hahm et al., 2017), and distance of buildings from footpath
need to make just one turn (90°). If the two schools are to be true, does
(Ozbil et al., 2016) are also significant determinants of walking route.
this mean that pedestrians minimise both distance and direction at the
Land uses facilitating stop over activities are an important predictor of
same time? Or do they make a trade-off between distance and direction
chosen routes (Guo and Loo, 2013; Koh and Wong, 2013; Weinstein-
in route choice behaviour? If so, which one will they prefer? Empirical
Agrawal et al., 2008). The most commonly identified traffic environ-
evidence is lacking in the literature to answer these questions because
ment factors with a significant effect on route choice behaviour include
historically the two schools have followed separate paths (Batty, 2004b;
the presence of crossing facilities (Guo and Loo, 2013; Koh and Wong,
Sharmin and Kamruzzaman, 2018; Steadman, 2004). Koohsari et al.
2013), traffic volume (Duncan and Mummery, 2007; Guo and Loo,
(2016, p.91) have stated that “research has not yet examined how these
2013), and connectivity of streets (Guo, 2009).
two types of…measure[s] are associated with WT [walking for trans-
The above mentioned BE factors have been considered in research
port]”.
studies that followed the geographic approach but have rarely been
Although a few recent studies in the space syntax literature have
considered in studies following the topological approach. As a result,
started operationalising both measures simultaneously to assess their
their effectiveness in route choice behaviour is questionable if distance
relative impacts on pedestrian movement (Barton et al., 2014;
and direction are considered together as the explanatory factors. In
Hajrasouliha and Yin, 2015; Koohsari et al., 2016; Lamíquiz and López-
other words, if 100% of the observed routes are explained by only two
Domínguez, 2015; Lee et al., 2013; Lerman and Omer, 2016; Ozbil
factors (distance and direction), then theoretically the above factors
et al., 2016), these studies have focused on pedestrian flow/volume
should not have any effect on route choice. This raises the question of
modelling rather than pedestrian route choice modelling. In contrast,
the validity of BE interventions to foster walking given that both dis-
some studies in the route choice literature have identified that both
tance and direction are not essentially attributes of BE. Therefore, an
distance and direction are important determinants of route choice be-
understanding of their influence, after controlling for distance and di-
cause a higher number of turns increases the distance cognition—e.g.,
rectional effects, would help researchers and practitioners better in-
whereby a pedestrian taking the dotted route in Fig. 1 will perceive the
terpret results, improve future models, and inform policy to design a
route distance to be longer due to many turns than ABD or ACD routes
pedestrian friendly BE.
(Hine, 1996; Jansen-Osmann and Wiedenbauer, 2004). However, these
Based on the above discussion, this research has two objectives: (a)
studies are qualitative in nature, and as a result, they are inadequate to
To determine the relative influence of distance and directional changes
assess the trade-off between distance and directional changes. Although
on pedestrian route choice behaviour; (b) To identify BE factors af-
a recent route choice study has considered some indicators from the
fecting route choice behaviour with their perceived utility by control-
space syntax literature (metric choice, length-weighted metric choice,
ling the effects of both route distance and route direction. Following
and angular connectivity) (Tribby et al., 2017), these indicators (dis-
this introduction, Section 2 presents a brief review of the space syntax
cussed in Section 2) do not capture the directional changes made in a
method and applications due to their lack of familiarity among re-
chosen/nonchosen route.
searchers in planning/transportation. The data and method used to
To our knowledge, the only study that assesses the relative impacts
reach the research objectives are outlined in Section 3. Section 4 pre-
of geographic distance and directional distance on route choice was
sents the results of this research. Section 5 discusses the findings in
conducted by Turner (2009) in London. However, this study focuses on
research and policy terms, provides directions for further research, and
motorcycle route choice behaviour rather than pedestrian route choice.
concludes the study.
Using route data from courier motorcyclists, the author compared ob-
served route against the generated shortest path route and against the
least directional change routes. The study found that 51% and 63% of
the observed routes had an equal distance to that of the shortest path

38
F. Shatu et al.
Fig. 2. Study area and the audited street segments forming the alternative walking routes to QUT-GP.
2. Space syntax: methods and application to study pedestrian
behaviour
The space syntax method was developed as a tool for understanding
spatial structure from a topological point of view (Jiang and Liu, 2009).
It quantifies the relative accessibility of places based on its road net-
works. The argument put forward is that the pattern of movement in a
city is likely to be shaped to a large extent by the topology of its route
network alone, irrespective of all other factors (e.g. distribution of land
uses) (Steadman, 2004). Therefore, the network itself, and the analysis
of its shape, is the focus of space syntax analysis and is an area that
remains minimally explored (Foltete et al., 2013).
In space syntax, the streets are represented in two ways: axial map
and segment map (Sharmin and Kamruzzaman, 2018). The axial map
derives the longest straight lines (axial lines) which facilitates the
counting of the number of turns required to travel from an origin to a
destination. This means that the axial lines represent the degree of vi-
sual accessibility from the perspective of a person moving in urban
space. Therefore, physical distance does not necessarily act as a deter-
rent in this context; rather, it is the relative topological association of
streets through their common junctions or intersections that provides a
measure of distance (Batty, 2004a). A segment map splits the axial lines
at junctions or intersections and therefore allows the derivation of an-
gular distance (sum of angles) from an origin to a destination in addi-
tion to topological distance (number of turns) (Hillier and Iida, 2005;
39
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
Turner, 2001, 2007).
Despite the application of space syntax to study pedestrian beha-
viour having a long history, only a few recent studies have applied the
method to study other modes of transport (Cutini, 2016; Paul, 2011,
2012; Rybarczyk and Wu, 2014). Pedestrian behavioural studies are
often geographically scale specific and range from: movement within a
facility (e.g. park, library) (Chang and Penn, 1998; Chen et al., 2015;
Kiliç-Çalgici et al., 2013; Lo et al., 2015; Lu and Seo, 2015; Sailer,
2015), movement within a precinct (e.g. shopping district) (Edgü et al.,
2015; Mansouri and Ujang, 2016); and movement within a city (Baran
et al., 2008; Edwards and Griffin, 2013; Foltête and Piombini, 2007).
These studies have derived a range of space syntax indicators to link
with pedestrian volume such as: connectivity—number of lines directly
intersecting (Jiang and Claramunt, 2002; Mansouri and Ujang, 2016;
Turner, 2004); control—the degree to which a line controls access to its
intersecting lines (Chen et al., 2015), integration/mean depth—the
average number of directional changes required to reach a line in a
network from all other lines in that network (Chen et al., 2015; Edgü
et al., 2015; Kiliç-Çalǧici et al., 2013; Lerman et al., 2014), and choice/
betweenness—the ratio of the number of shortest paths through a line
over the total number of all shortest paths in an axial map (Volchenkov
and Blanchard, 2008). Note that some of these indicators are derived as
either global (based on entire network) or local measures (for example,
based on neighbouring lines) such as connectivity and control, while
others are derived as both local and global measures such as integration
F. Shatu et al.
and choice. These studies have demonstrated that a street with high
integration, connectivity, and control attracts more pedestrians (Foltête
and Piombini, 2007), including tourists (Edwards and Griffin, 2013).
3. Data and methods
3.1. Data
This research required two types of data to address the research
objectives: (a) Pedestrians' reported travel routes and associated origins
and destinations to be used to generate the route choice set; (b) BE data
that potentially affect pedestrian route choice behaviour.
3.1.1. Survey to collect reported route data
Pedestrian travel route data were collected from a representative
sample of 178 students attending Queensland University of Technology
Gardens Point Campus (QUT-GP) through intercept surveys. A sys-
tematic random sampling technique was utilised. Every fifth student
entering the university was intercepted and requested to participate in
this research. A structured questionnaire was used to collect data from
the students. The first page of the questionnaire contained a street map
covering QUT-GP and its surrounding environment including Brisbane
central business district (CBD), transit stops, the Brisbane River and
other landmarks. Fig. 2 shows a smaller version of the map.
The students were asked: “Which route did you take for your
walking trip from your city origin (e.g., transit stop, inner city home or
workplace) to QUT Gardens Point Campus today? Please draw your
walking route on the map below. If you stopped to undertake any
stopover activities enroute, please mark these locations with a circle
and a short description (e.g., newsagent, café, fast food, bank, window
shopping)”. Drawing walking routes on a map to collect route data is a
widely applied method in the literature (Borgers and Timmermans,
2014; Borgers and Timmermans, 1986; Borst et al., 2009; Guo and Loo,
2013; Koh and Wong, 2013; Ozbil et al., 2016; Weinstein-Agrawal
et al., 2008; Zhu and Timmermans, 2009, 2011). The survey was con-
ducted in July–September 2017.
University students were selected in this research for three reasons:
(a) While they make the highest number of walking trips, their route
choice behaviour has rarely been studied in the literature (Glover,
2011; Kamruzzaman et al., 2011; Khattak et al., 2011; Queensland
Government, 2012; Whalen et al., 2013); (b) Although car-based trips
of students correspond to one-third of peak-hour congestion, they are
often overlooked in transport policy (Kamruzzaman et al., 2011;
Queensland Government, 2012); (c) A university is a large trip at-
tractor. As a result, any walking supportive policy to university students
will not only benefit students, but also a range of other groups (staff and
wider community) (Whalen et al., 2013; Davison et al., 2015). The
required sample size (164) is determined using Eq. (1) (Bonsall, 1997).
z2 × cv 2
n=
E2 (1)
where, n is the required sample sizes; z represents the standard normal
variable, which was chosen as 1.96 for the 95% confidence level; E is
the permitted margin of error which was chosen as 10% of the true
student population mean; and cv represents coefficient of variation (i.e.,
ratio of the standard deviation to the mean), which was calculated as
0.65 using average walking trip distance of 1.04 km with standard de-
viation of 0.68 km for educational trips of students who attended QUT-
GP based on 2008 Tertiary Student Travel Survey data1 (Ortúzar and
Willumsen, 2011). This research collected data from 178 students (over
the minimum sample size of 164) with a response rate of 15%.
1
Available at https://data.qld.gov.au/dataset/2008-tertiary-student-travel-
survey
40
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
3.1.2. Built environment data collection
BE data were collected in two ways: virtual observation and com-
putation in geographic information system (GIS)—ArcGIS. For virtual
observation, a virtual street audit tool (SWATCH) was developed as a
part of the research project to collect street environment data for route
choice analysis. The development procedure, content and construct
validity of the SWATCH tool is outlined in Shatu and Yigitcanlar
(2018), so are not discussed here in detail. Briefly, the tool contains 22
street environment attributes that have been identified to have a sig-
nificant effect on pedestrian route choice behaviour in different con-
texts (Table 1).
Note that some factors likely to influence route choice decisions
were not included in the SWATCH tool because of their lack of re-
levance in this context. These variables included: topography (hilli-
ness), posted speed limit, traffic volume, and on-street parking. The
topographical data also was not collected because of the relatively flat
topography of the study area, which is unlikely to provide any varia-
tions in the collected data. A similar reason was applied for posted
speed limit. Given that this research was conducted in a CBD context,
most of the streets belong to a 40 km/h zone. Of the streets traversed by
the students, only one had a 60 km/h and another had a 50 km/h speed
limit. Traffic volume data were captured by the variable ‘number of
lanes to cross’. A wider road is expected to have a large volume of traffic
compared to a narrow road. On-street paid parking is allowed on almost
every street in the study area although a variation in parking duration
may apply.
The crowd level variable was measured using three categories:
none, a few (1–30 people per street segment at a time), and a lot (> 30
people per street segment at a time). These were defined based on the
2000 edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) of Transportation
Research Board. According to the pedestrian level of service as specified
in HCM, a pedestrian requires at least 3.7 m2 of space for walking freely
(level of service A and B) (see, Lo, 2009). This research found that the
average segment length within the study area is 112 m with an average
width of sidewalk of approximately one metre. This means that 30
pedestrians (≈112 × 1.0/3.7) can freely move at a time in the sidewalk
of a street segment in the case study area. When the number ex-
ceeds > 30, pedestrians may encounter conflict.
The SWATCH tool was used by an auditor to collect street en-
vironment data using Google Street View. The use of Google Street
View to collect BE data has become commonplace in the public health
literature (Badland et al., 2010; Gullón et al., 2015; Kurka et al., 2016;
Roda et al., 2016). The tool was operationalised segment-by-segment
on road networks forming the reported routes and the two alternative
routes (shortest path route and least directional change route) con-
sidered in this research (Fig. 2). The audit was conducted in October
2017 by a single trained auditor.
Three BE factors were derived through computation in GIS because
they were not possible to collect using the SWATCH tool. These are:
distance, directional changes, and connectivity. ArcGIS (version 10.3)
and Depthmap (version Xnet 35) (www.spacesyntax.net/software/)
software were used to generate these indicators based on existing road
networks data of the study area. Route distances (network) of alter-
native routes were generated in ArcGIS. The directional change in-
dicator of each route from its origin (first segment from the origin) to
the QUT-GP destination (last segment needed to traverse to reach the
destination) were derived in Depthmap. As indicated earlier, space
syntax indicators have been derived based on two types of re-
presentation of the street networks (axial and segment). This research
used segment-based analysis rather than axial analysis because prior
studies have shown that segment-based indicators better explain pe-
destrian behaviour than the axial map-based indicators (Sharmin and
Kamruzzaman, 2018). An axial representation of street networks mea-
sures directional changes based on the number of turns whereas a
segment-based representation of street networks enables to measure
directional changes based on angles/degrees (°). As a result, the
F. Shatu et al. Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52

Table 1
Categories and indicators of the SWATCH tool used to collect street environment data.
Categories Items/Indicators Levels Measuring scales

Sidewalk Sidewalk width <1m 1

1m – 2m 2
>2m 3
Sidewalk continuity Sidewalk is incomplete 0
Sidewalk is complete 1
Sidewalk condition Poor (many bumps/cracks/holes) 1
Fair (some bumps/cracks/holes) 2
Good (Few bumps/cracks/holes) 3
Number of garbage bins located – Continuous scale
Other obstruction (e.g. presence of poles, parked cars, building constructions, No 0
stair case)
Yes 1
Number of shade trees None or very few 1
Some 2
Many/dense 3
Number of benches – Continuous scale
Number of fountains – Continuous scale
Number of vending machines – Continuous scale
Number of bus stops – Continuous scale
Crowd level None 0
Few (1–30 pedestrians on the sidewalk of a segment at a 1
time)
A lot (> 30 pedestrians on the sidewalk of a segment at a 2
time)
Land use Distance of building from footpath No building 0
> 6 m away 1
< 6 m away but not at the edge 2
At the edge of footpath 3
Presence of residential land use in the ground floor No 0
Yes 1
Presence of commercial land uses in the ground floor No 0
Yes 1
Presence of office/institutional land uses in the ground floor No 0
Yes 1
Presence of industrial land uses in the ground floor No 0
Yes 1
Presence of recreational land uses in the ground floor No 0
Yes 1
Presence of vacant land uses in the ground floor No 0
Yes 1
Presence of stop over activities None present 0
Presence of coffee shop, newspaper agent etc. 1
Average building height Short (1–2 stories) 1
Medium (3–5 stories) 2
Tall (> 5 stories) 3
Traffic Presence of crossing facilities No 0
environment Yes 1
Number of lanes to cross at the end of street segment – Continuous scale

segment-based representation takes into account minor variations in
directional changes. In Depthmap, the number of directional changes is
referred to as Step Depth (axial representation) whereas the degree of
directional changes is referred to as Angular Step Depth (or more
generally angular distance) (segment-based representation). The gen-
eral convention of measuring angular step depth is 0 for no turn to 2 for
a 180° turn (U-turn) (Turner, 2007). The segment-based analysis is also
justified in this research because the SWATCH tool was applied to
collect street environment data for each road segment. Therefore, the
segment-based analysis in Depthmap corresponds well with the audited
data. The connectivity of road segment was also calculated in
Depthmap.
3.2. Generation of route choice set
The generation of route alternatives ‘choice set’ is an important pre-
requisite in route choice modelling because an incorrect generation of
route alternatives can lead to misspecification of choice models and
bias in predicted choice probabilities (Cascetta, 2009; Ortúzar and
Willumsen, 2011). However, the generation of alternative routes is
difficult in pedestrian route choice behaviour because pedestrians are
free to walk where they like, at a pace they find comfortable, and can
unexpectedly stop or make abrupt course changes (Jalalian et al., 2011;
Markowski and Faghri, 2009). As a result, unlike other choice situations
such as mode choice where the discrete alternatives are easy to extract
(e.g. bus, train, car), pedestrians can choose between very large number
of routes for their travel from an origin to a destination, which are in
general impossible to generate explicitly (Frejinger et al., 2009).
These routes are not readily identifiable, as opposed to the case of
travel modes, and need to be explicitly extracted from the networks.
Researchers have applied a range of techniques to generate choice sets
in route choice modelling. These techniques are broadly classified into
two categories: stochastic (probabilistic), and deterministic (Frejinger
et al., 2009; Prato, 2012). Within these broader categories, different
techniques of choice set generation process exist in the literature and
are discussed elsewhere (see, Bovy, 2009; Zhu and Levinson, 2015).
Although the stochastic choice set concept seems very natural, Bovy
(2009) found that nearly all route choice modelling applications in
research and practice have adopted a deterministic approach for the
generation of choice set.

41
F. Shatu et al.
Table 2
Some renowned choice set generation methods in pedestrian route choice studies.
Study Number of alternative routes considered
Borgers and Timmermans (1986) 50 (maximum)
Dessing et al. (2016) 2 (shortest and reported)
Tribby et al. (2017) 60 (maximum)
Foltête and Piombini (2010) 2 (shortest and deviated)
Guo (2009) 2 (different paths station to downtown)
Duncan and Mummery (2007) 2 (shortest and reported)
Koh and Wong (2013) 2 (shortest and reported)
Rodríguez et al. (2015) Not provided
Gim and Ko (2017) 2 (shortest and reported)
Guo and Loo (2013) 15 (maximum)
Dalton et al. (2015) 2 (shortest and reported)
The deterministic approaches always generate the same set of paths
for a given origin-destination pair. As shown in Table 2, the labelling
method is the most commonly applied deterministic technique in pe-
destrian route choice behaviour with a few applications of K shortest
paths, and branch and bound method. The K shortest paths method is
executed by finding the exact K number of least cost paths according to
some criterion (e.g. distance). However, the method tends to generate
only minor variations among the shortest path alternatives. This pro-
blem is usually solved by either eliminating (link elimination) (Azevedo
et al., 1993) or penalizing (link penalty) (De la Barra et al., 1993) links
from previously selected paths. Given that the link elimination method
introduces network discontinuity problems, the link penalty approach
is usually preferred because it maintains network continuity (Prato,
2012). Although distance and travel time are the most common criteria,
other network variables (e.g. scenery) can also be used (Ramming,
2001).
Broach et al. (2010) have identified a range of potential biases with
the K shortest path method including a lack of rationale for why the Kth
path might be attractive and unique enough for the traveller to consider
it as a reasonable option. The labelling method by Ben-Akiva et al.
(1984) addresses some of the behavioural criticisms of the K shortest
path approach. Rather than multiple iterations based on a single cri-
terion (e.g., distance), the criterion itself changes (e.g., shortest distance
route, straightest route) in the labelling method. The number of gen-
erated alternatives is equal to the number of criteria, or labels, where
each labelled path optimizes a criterion. The labels are based on net-
work features believed to be important to travellers, such as distance,
delays, road hierarchy, and scenery. Broach et al. (2010) have criticised
this approach because it generates a relatively small number of alter-
natives. Existing applications specify between two and 15 labels in
pedestrian route choice studies (Table 2).
Based on the discussion above and also influenced by the need to
address the research objectives (to determine the relative influence of
distance and directional changes on pedestrian route choice behaviour),
this research used the labelling method and generated two alternative
routes, in addition to the reported route, for each of the 178 sample
respondents: shortest path route, and least directional change route.
Therefore, the choice set comprises of three different routes in this re-
search: reported route, shortest path route and least directional route.
3.2.1. Extraction of reported routes
A road network shapefile containing all roads in the Brisbane CBD
and surrounding areas was downloaded from the website of Queensland
Government Data (https://data.qld.gov.au/). Only walkable roads were
retained for the analysis (e.g., by excluding motorways, ramps etc.)
with a similar geographical extent to the map used in the questionnaire.
The reported routes were extracted from the walkable roads following
the route map provided by the students during the intercept survey.
Fig. 3 shows the reported route of a male student (ID#1) from Brisbane
Central Railway Station to QUT-GP.
42
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
Methods of generating route alternatives Statistical model used for analysis
K-shortest paths (distance) Multinomial logit
Labelling method Conditional logit
Calibrated labelling method Conditional logit with PS factor
Labelling method Multinomial logit
Labelling method Binary logit
Labelling method Paired sample t-test
Labelling method Binary logit
Heuristic branch and bound algorithm Conditional logit with PS factor
Labelling method Binary logit
Firth logistic regression
Labelling method Multinomial probit
Labelling method Multilevel linear regression
3.2.2. Generation of the shortest path routes
The walkable road network shapefile was converted into a network
dataset using distance as impedance in ArcGIS. The ArcGIS Network
Analyst tool was used to generate the shortest path route between the
origins as associated with each reported route and QUT-GP as the
destination. Fig. 3 shows the shortest path route of student ID#1 against
his reported route.
3.2.3. Generation of least directional change routes
The walkable road network was converted as a segment map using
the Depthmap software. The segment map was then used to calculate
angular step depth from each of the trip origins—i.e., 178 angular step
depth maps were generated. Fig. 4 shows angular step depth map from
Brisbane Central Railway Station—i.e., the angular directional changes
required to reach different destinations from the station. The angular
step depth map was then converted into a shapefile and ArcGIS soft-
ware was used to extract the least angular directional change routes
from each origin to the QUT-GP destination (Fig. 3).
3.3. Generation of route attributes
As indicated earlier, the SWATCH tool was used to collect 22 street
environment attributes for each road segment. To generate route level
indicators, the values of the respective segment level attributes were
averaged based on the number of segments forming a route. In addition
to the 22 audit-based indicators, ArcGIS/Depthmap was used to gen-
erate three indicators for each route: distance, angular step depth, and
segment connectivity. For example, as shown in Fig. 3, the distance of
the reported route of Student ID#1 is 1681 m. The student needed to
travel 1520 m and 1896 m respectively if he would have travelled using
the shortest route or the least directional change route respectively.
Similarly, the student reportedly made 5.45 (490.5°) directional
changes. However, he would have made 4.93 (443.7°) and 2.28
(205.2°) directional changes respectively if the shortest path route or
the least directional change route were chosen respectively.
3.4. Analytical strategy
3.4.1. Assessment of the choice: shortest path route vs. least directional
change route
The reported routes were spatially compared segment by segment
against the corresponding shortest path routes and against the corre-
sponding least directional change routes using the ArcGIS Intersect tool.
This procedure generated the proportion of reported route that over-
lapped with the competitive shortest path or least directional change
routes. A 100% overlap, for example with the shortest path route, in-
dicates that the reportedly chosen route overlapped perfectly with the
corresponding shortest path route. This means that the student pre-
ferred to travel using the shortest path route. Three overlap criteria
were used for this assessment: 100% overlap, 90% overlap, and 80%
F. Shatu et al.
Fig. 3. Route choice set for a student travelling from Brisbane Central Railway Station to QUT-GP.
overlap. A similar approach has been applied in prior studies to com-
pare route choice between reported route and the shortest path route
(Buliung et al., 2013; Dalton et al., 2015; Zhu and Levinson, 2015).
3.4.2. Comparison of route attributes: reported vs. shortest path routes, and
reported vs. least directional routes
To understand the reasons for a student choosing a particular route
(reported route), this research compared 22 route attributes2 between
the reported routes and the shortest path routes, and between the re-
ported routes and the least directional change routes. The research
estimated their mean differences and conducted paired t-tests for each
attribute to test whether the differences are statistically significant (Koh
and Wong, 2013; Krenn et al., 2014; Papinski and Scott, 2011; Stigell
and Schantz, 2011; Winters et al., 2010). This analysis also indicates the
factors that potentially affect route choice behaviour (Koh and Wong,
2013). Reported routes with a 100% overlap with either the shortest
path routes or the least directional routes were excluded from this
analysis because the determinants of their choice are likely to be
2
Three route attributes (number of vending machines, presence of industrial
land use, and presence of crossing facilities) were excluded from further ana-
lysis due to a lack of variation in data. No vending machine and industrial land
use were present along any of the routes considered in this research. In contrast,
crossing facilities were found to be equally present in all routes.
43
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
known—i.e., they could be either distance or direction or both.
3.4.3. Identifying non-distance/directional BE factors affecting pedestrian
route choice
Traditionally, route choice models are based on the utility max-
imization behavioural postulates (McFadden, 1973), and fall within the
discrete choice mathematical model classes. However, given that the
alternative routes within a choice set often have overlapping structure,
this violates the assumption of random utility theory (i.e., finite number
of mutually exclusive alternatives). As a result, the modelling efforts
have focused on how to overcome the route overlapping problem (see,
Bliemer and Bovy, 2008; Prato, 2009). Table 2 outlines the logit models
commonly applied in pedestrian route choice behaviour. This research
applied the conditional (fixed-effects)3 logit model to identify the route
attributes that affect pedestrian route choice behaviour.
Unlike binary and multinomial logit models, which are well suited
to identify the characteristics of individual decision makers (e.g., age,
gender) affecting a choice, the conditional logit model is appropriate
when a choice among alternatives is treated as a function of the
3
An alternative specific conditional logit model was not possible to estimate
in this research because the choice outcome was always the reported route
given that the analysis was conducted among the 47% of the respondents who
did not take the shortest or least directional routes.
F. Shatu et al.
Fig. 4. Directional changes (angular step depth) required to reach different destinations from Brisbane Central Railway Station.
characteristics of the alternatives (Hoffman and Duncan, 1988). To
account for the route overlap problem, first, respondents whose re-
ported route has a 100% overlap with either the shortest path route or
the least directional change route were excluded from analysis as sug-
gested in the literature (Ben-Akiva et al., 1984; Ramming, 2001);
second, a path size factor, as proposed by Bovy et al. (2008) and applied
in prior pedestrian route choice studies (Rodríguez et al., 2015; Tribby
et al., 2017), was added within the deterministic part of the conditional
logit model for the remaining students. Odds ratios are reported as the
model output for an easy interpretation.
As an analytical strategy, initially a correlation analysis among the
23 explanatory factors4 was conducted and variables with stronger
correlations (> 0.7) were not considered for further analysis in order to
avoid the multicollinearity effect. Table 3 shows the results from the
correlation analysis. Eight variables were excluded based on Table 3:
footpath condition, garbage can, crowd, setback distance, commercial
land uses, recreational land uses, building height, and number of lanes
to cross. To avoid the model over-specification problem (a large number
of explanatory factors with a relatively small sample size) (Wilson et al.,
2006), this research applied the purposeful selection method of ex-
planatory factors as outlined by Hosmer et al. (2013). First, a bivariate/
4
Path size variable was also included in the correlation analysis
44
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
simple (unadjusted) model was estimated separately for each of the
remaining 15 explanatory factors on the outcomes to identify factors
that have a significant association (Appendix A). Second, only factors
that were found to be significant at the p < .1 level in the unadjusted
model were entered into an adjusted model (Bursac et al., 2008)
(Appendix A). Finally, a parsimonious model (maximally adjusted) was
estimated by step-wise exclusion of factors with statistical insignif-
icance. Hosmer et al. (2013, p.90) stated that “the rationale for mini-
mizing the number of variables in the model is that the resultant model
is more likely to be numerically stable, and is more easily adopted for
use”. The multicollinearity among the selected explanatory factors was
tested by estimating an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model
(Piya et al., 2013). The model was estimated in Stata (version 15)
software using the clogit command. The model outputs help better
contextualise and explain more robustly the results of the paired sample
t-tests on the factors influencing students' route choice (Koh and Wong,
2013).
3.4.4. Assessing the perceived utility of pedestrian environment
This research applies the method proposed by Guo and Loo (2013)
to quantify the perceived utility of the pedestrian environment based on
pedestrians' revealed route choice. The method calculates the equiva-
lence of one unit of each independent variable to route length in metres,
which is the ratio of the coefficients of the two variables, as derived
 F. Shatu et al.

Table 3
Correlations (coefficient) among the explanatory variables.
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

1. Distance 1.00
2. Step depth 0.45 1.00a
3. Connectivity −0.01 −0.49 1.00
4. Footpath width 0.18 −0.13 0.53 1.00
5. Footpath continuity 0.25 −0.07 0.11 0.45 1.00
6. Footpath condition 0.23 −0.07 0.11 0.46 0.99 1.00
7. Garbage can 0.09 −0.25 0.03 0.15 0.32 0.33 1.00
8. Other obstruction −0.07 0.10 0.14 −0.20 −0.56 −0.56 −0.51 1.00
9. Shade trees −0.09 −0.03 0.18 0.56 −0.10 −0.10 −0.21 0.03 1.00
10. Bench 0.23 0.04 0.07 0.17 0.08 0.09 0.66 −0.30 −0.16 1.00

45
11. Fountain −0.07 −0.15 −0.02 0.15 0.06 0.06 0.41 −0.42 0.02 0.43 1.00
12. Bus stop 0.18 0.06 0.16 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.17 −0.04 0.21 −0.03 −0.18 1.00
13. Crowd 0.13 −0.13 −0.12 0.05 0.24 0.24 0.78 −0.38 −0.20 0.42 0.13 0.31 1.00
14. Setback 0.24 −0.16 0.39 0.70 0.23 0.23 0.48 −0.34 0.48 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.36 1.00
15. Residential use 0.29 0.24 −0.04 −0.18 0.03 0.01 −0.17 0.01 −0.15 −0.13 −0.15 −0.05 −0.30 −0.10 1.00
16. Commercial use 0.31 −0.25 0.46 0.46 0.43 0.44 0.68 −0.25 −0.16 0.42 0.18 0.32 0.60 0.62 −0.15 1.00
17. Institutional use 0.09 −0.21 −0.22 0.02 0.54 0.54 0.54 −0.43 −0.32 0.05 0.07 0.25 0.71 0.16 −0.17 0.49 1.00
18. Recreational use −0.27 0.06 0.03 0.09 −0.48 −0.48 −0.39 0.27 0.64 −0.14 −0.01 −0.05 −0.44 −0.02 −0.19 −0.58 −0.72 1.00
19. Vacant land −0.03 0.13 −0.22 −0.21 0.01 0.00 −0.19 0.19 −0.09 −0.23 −0.22 −0.16 −0.18 −0.35 0.21 −0.25 0.11 −0.15 1.00
20. Stop over activity 0.29 −0.27 0.33 0.40 0.44 0.45 0.75 −0.39 −0.22 0.43 0.31 0.26 0.66 0.62 −0.17 0.95b 0.59 −0.62 −0.26 1.00
21. Building height 0.20 −0.18 0.19 0.46 0.42 0.42 0.57 −0.44 0.04 0.26 0.32 0.24 0.59 0.68 −0.26 0.73 0.64 −0.54 −0.12 0.80 1.00
22. Lane to cross 0.28 −0.11 0.08 0.13 0.50 0.50 0.49 −0.33 −0.40 0.08 0.11 0.28 0.56 0.24 0.11 0.69 0.75 −0.85 0.10 0.74 0.67 1.00
23. Path size 0.07 −0.05 0.19 0.29 0.16 0.16 −0.05 −0.05 0.29 0.03 −0.02 0.19 −0.06 0.19 −0.11 0.03 −0.07 0.16 −0.09 −0.01 0.06 −0.11 1.00

a
Number in the columns represents the corresponding variable as shown in the variable column.
b
Bold indicates a stronger correlation.
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
F. Shatu et al.
from the conditional (fixed-effects) logit model discussed previously.
4. Results
Results from the overall sample show that on average each student
walked 1053 m to reach their QUT-GP destination. This distance was
found to be similar (1040 m) to that found in the 2008 Tertiary Student
Travel Survey data from QUT-GP, which justifies the validity of the
collected data for this research (https://data.qld.gov.au/dataset/2008-
tertiary-student-travel-survey). However, students would have walked
988 m if they took the shortest path routes from their trip origins to
QUT-GP. This means that on average each student walked 65 m (7%)
longer than they would if the shortest path route was taken. In contrast,
students would have walked 1107 m (5% longer) if they took the least
directional change route. On average each student made 3.48
(3.48 × 90 = 313°) directional changes. However, they would have
made 3.09 (278°) and 2.50 (225°) directional changes if they took the
shortest route and least directional change route respectively. This
means that students made an additional 39% directional change than
they would have if the least directional change routes were taken. These
findings indicate that not all reported routes correspond fully with the
shortest path route or the least directional change route.
4.1. Route choice: shortest path route vs. least directional change route
This section presents findings from the route overlap analysis. If the
reported route of a student overlaps perfectly with the competitive
routes (shortest path route and least directional change route), then the
overlap is said to be 100%.
Table 4 shows that 34% of the shortest path routes overlapped
perfectly (100% overlap) with their corresponding reported routes as
mapped by the students. A similar finding has been reported in previous
studies—albeit the study has not focused specifically on pedestrians
(Dalton et al., 2015; Zhu and Levinson, 2015). The rate of overlap be-
tween the shortest path route and the reported route does not change
much if the standard is relaxed to 90% or 80%. In contrast, the rate of
perfect overlap was found to be relatively higher (46%) between the
least directional change routes and their corresponding reported routes.
It should be noted here that about 28% of the reported routes
overlapped perfectly with both the shortest path route and the least
directional change route, which suggests that these students likely at-
tempted to minimise both distance and directional changes in their
route choice behaviour. This also indicates that about 6% (34% -
28% = 6%) of the students likely chose their route mainly based on
distance minimisation criterion whereas 18% of the students considered
least directional change as the preferred criterion for their route choice
behaviour. Overall, 53% (94 students) of the routes were found to be
chosen based on either distance or direction. These findings indicate
that: (a) Students are more likely to choose the least directional route
compared to the shortest path route; (b) Many students likely deviate
from their shortest path routes or least directional change routes which
point to the importance of other BE factors in route choice behaviour.
Note that this investigation is based on route overlap. It is still
possible that students might have chosen the shortest path route,
however this is not reflected here. For example, as shown in Fig. 1,
students may choose multiple routes without compromising the
Table 4
Ratio of the shortest path routes and least directional change routes overlapped
with the reported routes.
Competitive routes Overlap threshold
100% 90% 80%
Shortest path route (SPR) 34.27 34.83 34.83
Least directional change route (LDCR) 46.07 47.19 48.31
46
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
shortest distance in a grid-based network. Our further analysis using
distance (not based on overlap), however, shows a similar result (35%)
using the strictest criterion of 0% difference in distance between the
reported routes and corresponding shortest path route. When the cri-
terion is relaxed to 10%, about 80% of the students were found to
choose the shortest path route. However, a similar argument can be
made for the least directional change route. As shown in Fig. 1, students
may choose multiple routes without compromising the directional
changes required (e.g., Route ABD or Route ACD).
4.2. Comparing the attributes of alternative routes against reported routes
The route attributes are summarised for the remaining 84 students
who did not take the shortest path route or the least directional change
route in Table 5. The summary statistics (mean, standard deviation) are
shown for all three route types considered in this research. Table 5 also
shows the differences in these attributes between the reported routes
and the shortest path routes, and between the reported routes and the
least directional change routes. The t-test results highlight whether the
differences between the route types are statistically significant. A larger
difference with statistical significance in an attribute indicates that the
said attribute could be a partial reason for not taking the alternative
route.
Table 5 shows that a significant difference exists between the re-
ported and the shortest path routes for 20 of the 22 route attributes.
Two attributes with statistically insignificant difference between these
two route types are sidewalk width and distance of buildings from
footpath. These findings suggest the reasons for not choosing the
shortest path routes. Perhaps, students tried to make a trade-off be-
tween the BE attributes rather than just minimizing the distance. In
contrast, as shown in Table 5, these students did not take the least di-
rectional change route probably because they wanted to take routes
with wider footpath and more bus stops but with fewer institutional
land uses and stopover activities enroute. The independent effects of
these factors are analysed in a conditional (fixed-effects) logit model
and the results are presented in the following section.
4.3. BE factors affecting pedestrian route choice behaviour
The different route attributes with a statistically significant asso-
ciation with route choice behaviour, as found from the estimated con-
ditional (fixed-effects) logit model, are outlined in Table 6. Table 6
presents findings from the maximally adjusted model. The unadjusted
effects of individual factors are presented in Appendix A. The maxi-
mally adjusted model was found to be statistically significant with good
explanatory power (0.60). As shown in Table 6, students' chosen routes
were slightly longer than the average of the competitive two routes. As
shown in Table 5, on average each student walked about 1304 m which
is, as expected, longer than the shortest path route (1194 m).
However, their chosen routes were shorter than the least directional
change route (1335 m). The average of the shortest and least directional
change route (1265 m) is shorter than the reported route (1304 m). The
amount of directional changes made to travel through their chosen
route was also found to be significantly higher compared to the two
alternative routes when all other factors are held constant (Table 6). As
shown in Table 5, on average each student made 4.6 (414°) directional
changes in their reported routes. But they would have made 3.7 (333°)
and 2.4 (216°) directional changes if they took the shortest path and the
least directional change routes respectively.
The above findings highlight that these 84 students had the op-
portunity to minimise both distance and directional changes if they
would have taken the shortest path routes. However, they did not do so
because of the likely attractiveness/repulsiveness of other BE factors.
Table 6 shows that these factors mainly include the number of bus stops
and connectivity of road networks, and to some extent the number of
benches. The odds of selecting a route is lower when it is featured by
 F. Shatu et al.

Table 5
Attributes of different routes and their comparison (reported vs. shortest path route, and reported vs. least directional change route) based on paired sample t-test.a
Route attributes Reported route (RR) Shortest path route (SPR) Least directional change route (LDCR) Mean difference (RR - SPR) Mean difference (RR - LDCR)

Mean Std. Mean Std. Mean Std. Difference t Sig Difference t Sig

Distance 1303.612 411.137 1193.539 382.810 1335.042 571.485 110.073 10.216 0.000 −31.430 −0.740 0.462
Space syntax measures
Angular step depth 4.594 2.244 3.724 2.103 2.408 1.396 0.869 4.790 0.000 2.186 11.131 0.000
Connectivity 3.796 0.712 4.364 0.783 3.973 0.694 −0.568 −8.043 0.000 −0.178 −2.530 0.013
Virtual street audit
Sidewalk width 2.546 0.387 2.546 0.376 2.390 0.471 −0.001 −0.024 0.981 0.156 4.448 0.000
Sidewalk continuity 0.980 0.045 0.960 0.064 0.970 0.085 0.020 2.814 0.006 0.010 1.030 0.306
Sidewalk condition 2.962 0.089 2.920 0.128 2.938 0.169 0.042 3.000 0.004 0.024 1.277 0.205
Number of garbage bins 1.449 0.655 0.875 0.395 1.525 0.627 0.574 8.027 0.000 −0.076 −1.079 0.284
The other sidewalk obstruction 0.090 0.089 0.126 0.089 0.075 0.116 −0.036 −2.687 0.009 0.014 0.823 0.413

47
Number of shade trees 1.974 0.375 2.108 0.230 1.937 0.311 −0.134 −3.806 0.000 0.037 0.946 0.347
Number of benches 1.477 1.005 1.067 0.448 1.322 0.622 0.410 4.247 0.000 0.155 1.375 0.173
Number of fountains 0.078 0.100 0.042 0.054 0.089 0.061 0.036 3.474 0.001 −0.011 −1.024 0.309
Number of bus stops 0.273 0.250 0.201 0.207 0.165 0.148 0.072 2.566 0.012 0.108 3.315 0.001
Crowd level 1.784 0.291 1.431 0.281 1.764 0.340 0.353 11.326 0.000 0.020 0.606 0.546
Distance of building from footpath 2.598 0.450 2.545 0.405 2.622 0.528 0.053 1.315 0.192 −0.024 −0.535 0.594
Presence of residential land uses 0.032 0.111 0.023 0.107 0.029 0.066 0.009 1.998 0.049 0.003 0.345 0.731
Presence of commercial land uses 0.464 0.256 0.356 0.194 0.457 0.241 0.107 6.773 0.000 0.007 0.400 0.690
Presence of office/institutional land uses 0.682 0.238 0.460 0.230 0.771 0.265 0.222 7.509 0.000 −0.089 −2.997 0.004
Presence of recreational land uses 0.363 0.239 0.535 0.202 0.351 0.225 −0.172 −7.567 0.000 0.012 0.495 0.622
Presence of vacant land uses 0.016 0.049 0.006 0.027 0.018 0.053 0.010 1.853 0.067 −0.002 −0.392 0.696
Presence of stopover activities 0.468 0.269 0.330 0.197 0.506 0.279 0.138 6.489 0.000 −0.038 −1.790 0.077
Average building height 2.295 0.435 2.122 0.338 2.341 0.473 0.172 4.434 0.000 −0.046 −1.024 0.309
Number of lanes to cross 1.088 0.412 0.801 0.362 1.082 0.412 0.288 8.747 0.000 0.006 0.137 0.891

a
Excluding routes that perfectly overlapped which resulted in 84 sample sizes.
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
F. Shatu et al. Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52

Table 6 conceptualisation of space and verified that visual distance (or least
Conditional (fixed-effects) logistic regression analysis results of pedestrian directional change) alone can explain most pedestrian movement in a
route choice behaviour (maximally adjusted model). city. Theoretically, both schools of thought cannot be true at the same
Explanatory factors Outcome variable: chosen routes (reported routes) compared time because the explanatory power of distance and direction exceeds
to the shortest path routes and least directional change routes 100% of route choice behaviour when combined. This points to the
hypothesis of this research that both schools are essentially measuring
Odds Ratio z P>z
the same thing, albeit in a different way. Given that the two schools
Distance 1.002 2.690 0.007 worked in parallel, the need for a research study to empirically verify
Angular step depth 3.027 4.850 0.000 the hypothesis has long been called for in the literature (Batty, 2004b;
Connectivity 0.162 −2.570 0.010 Koohsari et al., 2016; Steadman, 2004). A resolution of this debate is
Number of benches 2.114 1.750 0.080
also important in order to inform pedestrian friendly design/planning
Number of bus 45.920 2.400 0.016
stops
policy to encourage walking. Although such a policy is often not related
Path size 0.360 −3.320 0.001 to distance or direction but related to other BE attributes (e.g., orga-
Log likelihood −36.57 nisation of land uses), the significance of these other BE attributes
LR chi2 111.43 largely depends on the explanatory power of the distance and direction
Pseudo R2 0.60
variables. If these two factors can explain most route choice behaviour,
N 252
then the need for other BE interventions does not hold.
Note: The model was estimated in Stata (version 15) software using the clogit The findings as presented in this research show that distance and
command. direction are likely to explain about 53% variations in pedestrian route
choice behaviour. Overall this finding was found to be within the range
highly connected street perhaps to avoid longer delay in traffic signals. of explanatory power of either distance or direction as reported else-
In contrast, the odds of selecting a route is higher if it is attributed with where (Gim and Ko, 2017; Guo and Loo, 2013; Hillier and Iida, 2005;
more bus stops and walking supportive facilities like the benches (sig- Hillier et al., 1993; Jiang, 2009; Lerman et al., 2014; Penn et al., 1998;
nificant at the 0.1 level). Although a few other BE factors were found to Read, 1999; Seneviratne and Morrall, 1985). Individually, distance and
be significant in an unadjusted model (Appendix A), they appeared to direction are likely to explain 34% and 46% variations in route choice
be statistically insignificant in the maximally adjusted model. behaviour. These findings confirm the claim made by the two schools
that distance or direction is the main determinant of route choice. It
also points to the fact that least directional change is likely to be the
4.4. Perceived utility of BE factors: relationship between distance and other
preferred option in pedestrian route choice decision. Previously, a si-
route attributes
milar finding has been reported for motorcyclists in London (Turner,
2009).
Table 7 summarises the results from the equivalence of distance
The implication of the above findings for practice is that we need to
measure, which shows the link between one unit of respective attributes
rethink about using the shortest path distance rule in transport models
and route length in metres. It shows that angular step depth has a value
(e.g., four stage model), in the measurement of accessibility for pe-
of 369, which means that 1 (90°) more directional changes is viewed as
destrians, and for the provision of destinations for them (Zhu and
equivalent to 369 m. Similarly, a pedestrian will choose a longer route
Levinson, 2015). The findings, in terms of directional effects, also bear
with more bus stops if the extra length does not exceed 1275 m. Con-
an important urban policy guidance in the Australian context where
versely, a pedestrian is prepared to walk about 607 m to avoid highly
urban development is still predominantly greenfield oriented (i.e. new
connected streets.
development occurs on previously undeveloped land), which provides a
great opportunity to translate the directional finding into practice
5. Discussion and conclusion (Sharmin and Kamruzzaman, 2017). For example, a greenfield devel-
opment makes it easier to configure road networks to be straighter and
This research aims to empirically resolve a decade long debate in directing to important destinations. In contrast, changing the alignment
pedestrian behaviour, more specifically in pedestrian route choice be- of existing road networks within an already built-up area, such as the
haviour, that progressed in parallel between two schools of researchers CBD context of this research, to make it straighter is almost impossible
(Sharmin and Kamruzzaman, 2018). Following the geographic con- because such realignment would necessarily involve the costly demo-
ceptualisation of space, the planning school has shown that route dis- lition of buildings and infrastructure. However, the translation of this
tance is the primary determinants of route choice behaviour along with finding in the context of greenfield development warrants further in-
other BE factors (e.g., land use). Consequently, a dominant theme of vestigation. Fortunately, walking friendliness can be improved within
early work on pedestrian route choice was related to whether the route existing built-up areas by changing the other BE factors, particularly
with the shortest distance was selected, and if not, why (Rodríguez those appeared to be significant (e.g., provisioning of bus stops and
et al., 2015). The space syntax based school applied the topologic walking supportive facilities such as benches, setting-up priority traffic
lights for pedestrian) in this research.
Table 7 One explanation of the directional preferences over distance could
Equivalence of distance for route attributes. be cognitive, as found in earlier research, an increasing directional
Route attributes Measures changes increases the perception of distance (Jansen-Osmann and
Wiedenbauer, 2004). In other words, a route with least directional
Conditional logit model Equivalence of distance changes could be perceived as the shortest distance route despite not
coefficients (m)
being so in reality (Turner, 2009). The findings of this research also
Distance 0.003b 1.000 suggest that pedestrians tend to minimise both geographic distance and
Angular step depth 1.108b 369.199 directional changes at the same time in their route choice decision
Connectivity −1.821b 606.967 because 28% of the chosen routes are likely to satisfy both the shortest
Number of benches 0.749a 249.537
Number of bus stops 3.827b 1275.633
path distance and least directional distance criteria. Probably when
they cannot minimise both, they prefer the least directional route
a
Associated coefficients are significant at the 0.05 level. perhaps due to perceived shortness because they are more visible.
b
Associated coefficients are significant at the 0.1 level. The 53% explanatory power of distance and direction together

48
F. Shatu et al.
leaves room to explore the significance of other BE factors affecting
pedestrian route choice decision. The conditional (fixed-effects) logit
model estimates using data from the remaining students (those who did
not chose the shortest path route or the least directional route) show
that street connectivity, the number of bus stops, and the number of
benches along a route are the significant predictors of route choice in
addition to distance and direction. Given that this analysis was con-
ducted for those who did not choose the shortest path route or the least
directional route, higher odds for distance and directional change
variables were expected.
The findings show that a higher connectivity of streets reduces the
odds of choosing these as walking route. A similar finding has been
reported for school children in the Netherlands (Dessing et al., 2016),
although an opposite relation is reported for commuters in Boston (Guo,
2009). A positive effect of the number of bus stops on route choice
decision is expected given that a large number of trips were in fact
originated from bus stops, and therefore, the availability of transit stops
is a pre-requisite for their route choice decision. This finding contrasts
the findings reported for adolescent girls in San Diego and Minneapolis
(Rodríguez et al., 2015). This difference is, however, expected given
that the adolescent girls walked from their home to schools. The posi-
tive effects of walking supportive facilities, for example the benches in
this case, have been identified in various contexts such as in California
and Portland (Weinstein-Agrawal et al., 2008) and in Salt Lake City
(Brown et al., 2007).
The above findings suggest that route choice of pedestrians is a
complex decision-making process (Koh and Wong, 2013). It is neither
purely the shortest path distance nor purely the least directional dis-
tance. Rather a range of BE factors also influence pedestrian route
choice behaviour. As noted by Tsukaguchi et al. (2013), facilities that
provide the shortest path to the destination or least visual interruption
to destinations are preferred by one segment of the city population.
Another segment of the population expects planners to spend on com-
fortable paths to create a walking space having a good urban en-
vironment as they are often driven by sense of safety, attractiveness and
complexity of the environment, and emotional responses (Dewulf et al.,
2012). BE attributes identified to have a significant effect increases the
understanding of what a pedestrian considers as an attractive route
which will allow planners to build cities that are considered attractive
by the students, resulting in more active transport activities, and
creating a more liveable city in a long term (Koh and Wong, 2013). The
identification of these attributes is a pre-requisite before interventions
and experimental investigations can be undertaken (Nelson et al.,
2008).
The findings from this research have paved the way to resolving the
conflict between the two schools of thought by using route choice data
from 178 students based on an intercept survey. The sample sizes were
felt inadequate—particularly after excluding students that took the
shortest or least directional change routes. More advanced data col-
lection techniques such as GPS tracking, unobtrusive following of pe-
destrians, and video tracking can be applied to collect data from a
larger sample with relative ease and at the same time with greater ac-
curacy. Given the constraints of this research, it also opens up new
opportunities to extend knowledge base on this topic as outlined below:
Appendix A. Appendix
Table A
Predictors of changes in main mode of transport.
Variables Adjusted model
OR
b a
Distance (m) 1.002
Angular step depth 3.261b
49
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
a) Testing the validity of the results in diverse settings: This research
was conducted in an Australian CBD setting, where streets are
mostly of a grid pattern. Also, the findings of this research show that
little variation exists among the street segments in many of the BE
attributes analysed. Moreover, the topography is relatively flat.
These necessitate to conduct further validity test of the results in
diverse case study settings both within Australia and internationally
for wider applicability of the SWATCH tool as well as acceptability
of the results (Ozbil et al., 2016).
b) Conducting inter-rater reliability of the SWATCH tool: The SWATCH
tool proved useful in this study but the audit was deliberately un-
dertaken by only one trained auditor. The tool requires additional
testing, including for inter-rater reliability, to be sure it obtains
consistent results across multiple trained auditors and produces
consistent results across study contexts. This research categorised
the BE items into three groups (i.e., sidewalk, land use, and traffic
environment) within the tool. These categories are the meaningful
representation of the street environment, and the study does not aim
to develop a statistical link (e.g., weight) between items and scale/
categories as used in other research (Pikora et al., 2002;
Kamruzzaman et al., 2014). Although it was not necessary to test the
internal consistency of the items within a category, such an analysis
would ensure the items are consistent within a category or the items
need to be regrouped.
c) Testing the validity of the findings for discretionary walking: This
research assessed the BE impact on university students' walking
route choice behaviour for their mandatory activities (to attend
university). Research has shown that the BE effect differs for dif-
ferent types of walking activity (e.g., discretionary vs. non-discre-
tionary) (Cao et al., 2006). Therefore, the findings from this research
cannot be generalised in pedestrian route choice behaviour asso-
ciated with discretionary type of activity. Further research is needed
to validate the findings presented in this research for discretionary
activity type including to verify the influence of distance and di-
rectional changes. Perhaps such studies can employ contingent va-
luation method (e.g., stated choice data) from a diverse group of
sample for robustness.
d) Modelling the geographic constrained in route choice behaviour: As
shown in Fig. 2, the study area is bisected by a river with only two
feasible pedestrian bridges. As a result, respondents from one side of
the river had to choose their travel routes with the locational con-
straints of the two bridges. However, such effect was not captured in
the route choice model estimated in this research. Future research
should seek to identify whether such geographic barriers have any
significant effect on route choice decision.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Editor-in- Chief (Prof Frank
Witlox). The authors also gratefully acknowledge the contributions of
two anonymous reviewers in terms of their insightful comments, sug-
gestions, and language correction.
Unadjusted model
95% CI OR 95% CI
1.000–1.004 1.001 0.999-1.002
1.982–5.368 2.640b 1.924-3.622
(continued on next page)
F. Shatu et al. Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52

Table A (continued)

Variables Adjusted model Unadjusted model

OR 95% CI OR 95% CI

a b
Connectivity 0.220 0.043-1.278 0.179 0.082-0.386
Sidewalk width 1.183 0.104–13.455 8.283b 1.721-39.871
Sidewalk continuity 0.007 0.000–1707.023 715.155b 1.276-400,707
The other sidewalk obstruction – – 0.376 0.030–4.702
Number of shade trees – – 0.428 0.142–1.293
Number of benches 2.287a 0.948–5.521 1.970b 1.269-3.060
Number of fountains – – 13.685 0.280–667.657
Number of bus stops 51.057b 1.427–1826.224 12.21b 2.807-53.130
Presence of residential land uses – – 16.111 0.030–8601.23
Presence of office/institutional land uses 3.998 0.036–438.327 3.088b 1.014-9.392
Presence of vacant land uses – – 18.609 0.012–26,765.44
Presence of stopover activities 4.605 0.059–358.631 6.552b 1.256-34.189
Path size 0.356b 0.188–0.674 0.795b 0.636-0.995

– Not included in the adjusted model due to statistical insignificance in the unadjusted model.
a
Significant at the 0.1 level.
b
Significant at the 0.05 level.

References Planning B 25, 507–538.

Arbolino, R., Carlucci, F., Cirà, A., Ioppolo, G., Yigitcanlar, T., 2017. Efficiency of the EU
regulation on greenhouse gas emissions in Italy: the hierarchical cluster analysis
approach. Ecol. Indic. 81, 115–123.
Azevedo, J., Santos Costa, M.E., Silvestre Madeira, J.J., Vieira Martins, E.Q., 1993. An
algorithm for the ranking of shortest paths. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 69, 97–106.
Badland, H.M., Opit, S., Witten, K., Kearns, R.A., Mavoa, S., 2010. Can Virtual Streetscape
Audits Reliably Replace Physical Streetscape Audits? J. Urban Health 87, 1007–1016.
Baran, P.K., Rodríed, Guez, D.A., Khattak, A.J., 2008. Space syntax and walking in a New
Urbanist and suburban neighbourhoods. J. Urban Des. 13, 5–28.
Barton, K.R., Valtchanov, D., Ellard, C., 2014. Seeing beyond your visual field: the in-
fluence of spatial topology and visual field on navigation performance. Environ.
Behav. 46, 507–529.
Batty, M., 2004a. Distance in Space Syntax. In: Working Papers Series: Paper 80. Centre
for Advanced Spatial Analysis University College London. www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/
casa/pdf/paper80.pdf (01/03/2018).
Batty, M., 2004b. A new theory of space syntax. In: WP75. Centre for Advanced Spatial
Analysis, University College, London. www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/publications 01/03/2018.
Ben-Akiva, M.E., Bergman, M.J., Daly, A.J., Ramaswamy, R., 1984. Modeling inter-urban
route choice behaviour. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium on
Transportation and Traffic Theory, Utrecht.
Bliemer, M., Bovy, P., 2008. Impact of Route Choice Set on Route Choice Probabilities.
Transp. Res. Rec. 2076, 10–19.
Bonsall, P., 1997. Issues in survey planning and design. In: O'Flaherty, C. (Ed.), Transport
Planning and Traffic Engineering. Arnold, London.
Borgers, A.W., Timmermans, H.J., 1986. A model of pedestrian route choice and demand
for retail facilities within inner-city shopping areas. Geogr. Anal. 18, 115–128.
Borgers, A., Timmermans, H., 2014. Indices of pedestrian behavior in shopping areas.
Procedia Environ. Sci. 22, 366–379.
Borst, H.C., de Vries, S.I., Graham, J.M., van Dongen, J.E., Bakker, I., Miedema, H.M.,
2009. Influence of environmental street characteristics on walking route choice of
elderly people. J. Environ. Psychol. 29, 477–484.
Bovy, P.H., 2009. On modelling route choice sets in transportation networks: a synthesis.
Transp. Rev. 29, 43–68.
Bovy, P., Bekhor, S., Prato, C., 2008. The factor of revisited path size: Alternative deri-
vation. Transp. Res. Rec. 132–140.
Broach, J., Dill, J., 2016. Using predicted bicyclist and pedestrian route choice to enhance
mode choice models. Transp. Res. Rec. 2564, 52–59.
Broach, J., Gliebe, J., Dill, J., 2010. Calibrated labeling method for generating bicyclist
route choice sets incorporating unbiased attribute variation. Transp. Res. Rec. 2197,
89–97.
Brown, B.B., Werner, C.M., Amburgey, J.W., Szalay, C., 2007. Walkable route perceptions
and physical features: converging evidence for en route walking experiences.
Environ. Behav. 39, 34–61.
Buliung, R.N., Larsen, K., Faulkner, G.E., Stone, M.R., 2013. The “path” not taken:
Exploring structural differences in mapped-versus shortest-network-path school
travel routes. Am. J. Public Health 103, 1589–1596.
Bursac, Z., Gauss, C.H., Williams, D.K., Hosmer, D.W., 2008. Purposeful selection of
variables in logistic regression. Source Code for Biol. Med. 3, 17.
Cao, X., Handy, S.L., Mokhtarian, P.L., 2006. The influences of the built environment and
residential self-selection on pedestrian behavior: evidence from Austin, TX.
Transportation 33, 1–20.
Cascetta, E., 2009. Random Utility Theory, Transportation Systems Analysis: Models and
Applications. Springer, Boston, MA.
Chang, D., Penn, A., 1998. Integrated multilevel circulation in dense urban areas: the
effect of multiple interacting constraints on the use of complex urban areas. Envir.
Chen, Y.J., Matsuoka, R.H., Tsai, K.C., 2015. Spatial measurement of mobility barriers:
improving the environment of community-dwelling older adults in Taiwan. J. Aging
Phys. Act. 23, 286–297.
Cutini, V., 2016. Motorways in metropolitan areas: the northwestern growth of Florence
and the urban use of motorway A1. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Information 5.
Dalton, A.M., Jones, A.P., Panter, J., Ogilvie, D., 2015. Are GIS-modelled routes a useful
proxy for the actual routes followed by commuters? J. Transp. Health 2, 219–229.
Davison, L., Ahern, A., Hine, J., 2015. Travel, transport and energy implications of uni-
versity-related student travel: a case study approach. Transp. Res. Part D: Transp.
Environ. 38, 27–40.
De la Barra, T., Perez, B., Anez, J., 1993. Multidimensional path search and assignment.
In: 21st PTRC Summer Annual Meeting. Manchester.
Dessing, D., Vries, S.I., Hegeman, G., Verhagen, E., Mechelen, W.V., Pierik, F.H., 2016.
Children's route choice during active transportation to school: difference between
shortest and actual route. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 13, 48.
Dewulf, B., Neutens, T., Van Dyck, D., de Bourdeaudhuij, I., Van de Weghe, N., 2012.
Correspondence between objective and perceived walking times to urban destina-
tions: Influence of physical activity, neighbourhood walkability, and socio-demo-
graphics. Int. J. Health Geogr. 11, 43.
Dizdaroglu, D., Yigitcanlar, T., Dawes, L., 2012. A micro-level indexing model for as-
sessing urban ecosystem sustainability. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 1, 291–315.
Duncan, M.J., Mummery, W.K., 2007. GIS or GPS? A comparison of two methods for
assessing route taken during active transport. Am. J. Prev. Med. 33, 51–53.
Edgü, E., Taluğ, M., Özgece, N., 2015. Divided shopping: a syntactic approach to con-
sumer behaviour. A/Z ITU J. Faculty Architect. 12, 175–188.
Edwards, D., Griffin, T., 2013. Understanding tourists' spatial behaviour: GPS tracking as
an aid to sustainable destination management. J. Sustain. Tour. 21, 580–595.
Foltête, J.C., Piombini, A., 2007. Urban layout, landscape features and pedestrian usage.
Landsc. Urban Plan. 81, 225–234.
Foltête, J.C., Piombini, A., 2010. Deviations in pedestrian itineraries in urban areas: a
method to assess the role of environmental factors. Envir. Planning B 37, 723–739.
Foltete, J.C., Genre-Grandpierre, C., Josselin, D., 2013. Impacts of road networks on
urban mobility. In: Theriault, M., Des Rosiers, F. (Eds.), Modelling Urban Dynamics.
Wiley, Hoboken.
Frejinger, E., Bierlaire, M., Ben-Akiva, M., 2009. Sampling of alternatives for route choice
modeling. Transp. Res. B 43, 984–994.
Gim, T.H., Ko, J., 2017. Maximum Likelihood and Firth Logistic Regression of the
Pedestrian Route Choice. Int. Reg. Sci. Rev. 40, 616–637.
Glover, P., 2011. A comparison between domestic and international students' trip char-
acteristics: evidence from an Australian university. J. Vacat. Mark. 17, 263–274.
Gudes, O., Kendall, E., Yigitcanlar, T., Pathak, V., Baum, S., 2010. Rethinking health
planning: a framework for organising information to underpin collaborative health
planning. Health Inform. Manag. J. 39, 18–29.
Gullón, P., Badland, H.M., Alfayate, S., Bilal, U., Escobar, F., Cebrecos, A., Diez, J.,
Franco, M., 2015. Assessing walking and cycling environments in the streets of ma-
drid: comparing on-field and virtual audits. J. Urban Health 92, 923–939.
Guo, Z., 2009. Does the pedestrian environment affect the utility of walking? A case of
path choice in downtown Boston. Transp. Res. D 14, 343–352.
Guo, Z., Loo, B.P., 2013. Pedestrian environment and route choice: Evidence from New
York City and Hong Kong. J. Transp. Geogr. 28, 124–136.
Hahm, Y., Yoon, H., Jung, D., Kwon, H., 2017. Do built environments affect pedestrians'
choices of walking routes in retail districts? A study with GPS experiments in
Hongdae retail district in Seoul, South Korea. Habitat Int. 70, 50–60.
Hajrasouliha, A., Yin, L., 2015. The impact of street network connectivity on pedestrian
volume. Urban Stud. 52, 2483–2497.
Handy, S., Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P.L., 2006. Self-selection in the relationship between the
built environment and walking: Empirical evidence from Northern California. J. Am.

50
F. Shatu et al.
Plan. Assoc. 72, 55–74.
Hillier, B., Hanson, J., 1984. The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Hillier, B., Iida, S., 2005. Network and psychological effects in urban movement. In:
International Conference on Spatial Information Theory, Berlin Heidelberg.
Hillier, B., Leaman, A., Stansall, P., Bedford, M., 1976. Space syntax. Envir. Planning B 3,
147–185.
Hillier, B., Hanson, J., Graham, H., 1987. Ideas are in things: an application of the space
syntax method to discovering house genotypes. Envir. Planning B 14, 363–385.
Hillier, B., Penn, A., Hanson, J., Grajewski, T., Xu, J., 1993. Natural movement: or,
configuration and attraction in urban pedestrian movement. Envir. Planning B 20,
29–66.
Hine, J., 1996. Pedestrian travel experiences Assessing the impact of traffic on behaviour
and perceptions of safety using an in-depth interview technique. J. Transp. Geogr. 4,
179–199.
Hoffman, S.D., Duncan, G.J., 1988. Multinomial and conditional logit discrete-choice
models in demography. Demography 25, 415–427.
Hoogendoorn, S.P., Bovy, P.H., 2004. Pedestrian route-choice and activity scheduling
theory and models. Transp. Res. B 38, 169–190.
Hosmer, D.W., Lemeshow, S., Sturdivant, R.X., 2013. Applied Logistic Regression. Wiley,
Hoboken, New Jersey.
Jalalian, A., Chalup, S.K., Ostwald, M.J., 2011. Architectural evaluation of simulated
pedestrian spatial behaviour. Archit. Sci. Rev. 54, 132–140.
Jansen-Osmann, P., Wiedenbauer, G., 2004. The influence of turns on distance cognition:
new experimental approaches to clarify the route-angularity effect. Environ. Behav.
36, 790–813.
Jiang, B., 2009. Ranking spaces for predicting human movement in an urban environ-
ment. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 23, 823–837.
Jiang, B., Claramunt, C., 2002. Integration of space syntax into GIS: New perspectives for
urban morphology. Trans. GIS 6, 295–309.
Jiang, B., Liu, C., 2009. Street-based Topological Representations and analyses for pre-
dicting Traffic Flow in GIS. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 23, 1119–1137.
Kamruzzaman, M., Hine, J., Gunay, B., Blair, N., 2011. Using GIS to visualise and evaluate
student travel behaviour. J. Transp. Geogr. 19, 13–32.
Kamruzzaman, M., Wood, L., Hine, J., Currie, G., Giles-Corti, B., Turrell, G., 2014.
Patterns of social capital associated with transit oriented development. J. Transp.
Geogr. 35, 144–155.
Kamruzzaman, M., Hine, J., Yigitcanlar, T., 2015. Investigating the link between carbon
dioxide emissions and transport-related social exclusion in rural Northern Ireland.
Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 12, 3463–3478.
Khattak, A., Wang, X., Son, S., Agnello, P., 2011. Travel by University students in
Virginia. Transportation Res. Rec. 2255, 137–145.
Kiliç-Çalgici, P., Czerkauer-Yamu, C., Çil, E., 2013. Faculty office buildings as work en-
vironments: Spatial configuration, social interaction, collaboration and sense of
community. A/Z ITU J. Faculty Architect. 10, 178–197.
Koh, P.P., Wong, Y.D., 2013. Influence of infrastructural compatibility factors on walking
and cycling route choices. J. Environ. Psychol. 36, 202–213.
Koohsari, M.J., Sugiyama, T., Mavoa, S., Villanueva, K., Badland, H., Giles-Corti, B.,
Owen, N., 2016. Street network measures and adults' walking for transport:
Application of space syntax. Health and Place 38, 89–95.
Krenn, P.J., Oja, P., Titze, S., 2014. Route choices of transport bicyclists: a comparison of
actually used and shortest routes. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 11, 31.
Kurka, J.M., Adams, M.A., Geremia, C., Zhu, W., Cain, K.L., Conway, T.L., Sallis, J.F.,
2016. Comparison of field and online observations for measuring land uses using the
Microscale Audit of Pedestrian Streetscapes. J. Transp. Health 3, 278–286.
Lamíquiz, P.J., López-Domínguez, J., 2015. Effects of built environment on walking at the
neighbourhood scale. A new role for street networks by modelling their configura-
tional accessibility? Transp. Res. Part A74, 148–163.
Lee, I.M., Buchner, D.M., 2008. The importance of walking to public health. Med. Sci.
Sports Exerc. 40, S512–S518.
Lee, S., Lee, S., Son, H., Joo, Y., 2013. A New Approach for the Evaluation of the walking
Environment. Int. J. Sust. Transp. 7, 238–260.
Lerman, Y., Omer, I., 2016. Urban area types and spatial distribution of pedestrians:
Lessons from Tel Aviv. Comput. Environ. Urban. Syst. 55, 11–23.
Lerman, Y., Rofè, Y., Omer, I., 2014. Using space syntax to model pedestrian movement in
urban transportation planning. Geogr. Anal. 46, 392–410.
Lo, R.H., 2009. Walkability: what is it? J. Urbanism 2, 145–166.
Lo, C.H., Ko, Y.C., Ko, Y.T., 2015. Application of space syntax theory to the sustainable
development of Tunghai university campus environment. J. Interdisc. Maths. 18,
883–903.
Lu, Y., Seo, H.B., 2015. Developing visibility analysis for a retail store: a pilot study in a
bookstore. Envir. Planning B 42, 95–109.
Mansouri, M., Ujang, N., 2016. Space syntax analysis of tourists' movement patterns in the
historical district of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. J. Urbanism 1–17.
Markowski, M., Faghri, A., 2009. Simulating Relaxed Pedestrian Behavior. Transp. Res.
Rec. 2140, 137–144.
McFadden, D., 1973. Conditional logit Analysis of the qualitative choice behavior. In:
Zarembka, P. (Ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics. Academic Press, New York.
Nelson, N.M., Wright, A., Lowry, R.G., Mutrie, N., 2008. Where is the theoretical basis for
understanding and measuring the environment for physical activity? Environm.
Health Insights 2 EHI-S1048.
Ortúzar, J.D., Willumsen, L.G., 2011. Modelling Transport. John Wiley & Sons,
Chichester, West Sussex, UK.
Ozbil, A., Argin, G., Yesiltepe, D., 2016. Pedestrian route choice by elementary school
students: the role of street network configuration and pedestrian quality attributes in
walking to school. Int. J. Des. Creat. Innov. 4, 67–84.
51
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
Papinski, D., Scott, D.M., 2011. A GIS-based toolkit for route choice analysis. J. Transp.
Geogr. 19, 434–442.
Paul, A., 2011. An integrated approach to modeling vehicular movement networks.
Traffic Eng. Control 52, 416–420.
Paul, A., 2012. Land-use-accessibility model: a theoretical approach to capturing land-use
influence on vehicular flows through configurational measures of spatial networks.
Int. J. Urban Sci. 16, 225–241.
Penn, A., Hillier, B., Banister, D., Xu, J., 1998. Configurational modelling of urban
movement networks. Envir. Planning B 25, 59–84.
Pikora, T.J., Bull, F.C., Jamrozik, K., Knuiman, M., Giles-Corti, B., Donovan, R.J., 2002.
Developing a reliable audit instrument to measure the physical environment for
physical activity. Am. J. Prev. Med. 23, 187–194.
Piya, L., Maharjan, K.L., Joshi, N.P., 2013. Determinants of adaptation practices to cli-
mate change by Chepang households in the rural Mid-Hills of Nepal. Reg. Environ.
Chang. 13, 437–447.
Prato, C.G., 2009. Route choice modeling: past, present and future research directions. J.
Choice Model. 2, 65–100.
Prato, C.G., 2012. Meta-analysis of choice set generation effects on route choice model
estimates and predictions. Transport 27, 286–298.
Queensland Government, 2012. Travel in South-East Queensland: Analysis of travel data
from 1992 to 2009. Department of Transport and Main Roads, Brisbane.
Ramming, M., 2001. Network Knowledge and Route Choice. Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Read, S., 1999. Space syntax and the Dutch city. Envir. Planning B 26, 251–264.
Roda, C., Charreire, H., Feuillet, T., Mackenbach, J., Compernolle, S., Glonti, K., Ben
Rebah, M., Bárdos, H., Rutter, H., McKee, M., 2016. Mismatch between perceived and
objectively measured environmental obesogenic features in European neighbour-
hoods. Obes. Rev. 17, 31–41.
Rodríguez, D.A., Merlin, L., Prato, C.G., Conway, T.L., Cohen, D., Elder, J.P., Evenson,
K.R., McKenzie, T.L., Pickrel, J.L., Veblen-Mortenson, S., 2015. Influence of the built
environment on pedestrian route choices of adolescent girls. Environ. Behav. 47,
359–394.
Roe, J., Aspinall, P., 2011. The restorative benefits of walking in urban and rural settings
in adults with good and poor mental health. Health & Place 17, 103–113.
Rybarczyk, G., Wu, C., 2014. Examining the impact of urban morphology on bicycle mode
choice. Envir. Planning B 41, 272–288.
Sailer, K., 2015. The dynamics and diversity of space use in the British library. A/Z ITU J.
Faculty Architect. 12, 23–39.
Seneviratne, P.N., Morrall, J.F., 1985. Analysis of factors affecting the choice of route of
pedestrians. Transp. Plan. Technol. 10, 147–159.
Sharmin, S., Kamruzzaman, M., 2017. The impacts of syntactic measures on pedestrian
movement: A comparative meta-analytic review between developing and developed
countries. In: State of Australian Cities National Conference, Adelaide.
Sharmin, S., Kamruzzaman, M., 2018. Meta-analysis of the relationships between space
syntax measures and pedestrian movement. Transp. Rev. 38, 524–550.
Shatu, F., Yigitcanlar, T., 2018. Development and validity of a virtual street walkability
audit tool for pedestrian route choice analysis—SWATCH. J. Transp. Geogr. 70,
148–160.
Steadman, P., 2004. Developments in space syntax. Envir. Planning B 31, 483–486.
Stigell, E., Schantz, P., 2011. Methods for determining route distances in active com-
muting – their validity and reproducibility. J. Transp. Geogr. 19, 563–574.
Teimouri, R., Yigitcanlar, T., 2018. An approach towards effective ecological planning:
quantitative analysis of urban green space characteristics. Global J. Environ. Sci.
Manag. 4, 195–206.
Tribby, C.P., Miller, H.J., Brown, B.B., Werner, C.M., Smith, K.R., 2017. Analyzing
walking route choice through built environments using random forests and discrete
choice techniques. Environ. Planning B-Urban Analytics City Sci. 44, 1145–1167.
Tsukaguchi, H., Vandebona, U., Tajima, Y., 2013. Analysis of changes in Pedestrian Route
Choice Priorities with Progress of stage of Life. J. Eastern Asia Soc. Transport. Stud.
10, 1396–1412.
Turner, A., 2001. Angular analysis. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium
on Space Syntax.
Turner, A., 2004. Depthmap 4: A Researcher's Handbook. Bartlett School of Graduate
Studies. UCL, London.
Turner, A., 2007. From axial to road-Centre lines: a new representation for space syntax
and a new model of route choice for transport network analysis. Envir. Planning B 34,
539–555.
Turner, A., 2009. The role of angularity in route choice an Analysis of Motorcycle Courier
GPS Traces. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci 489–504.
Vaeztavakoli, A., Lak, A., Yigitcanlar, T., 2018. Blue and green spaces as therapeutic
landscapes: health effects of urban water canal areas of Isfahan. Sustain. For. 10,
4010.
Volchenkov, D., Blanchard, P., 2008. City Space Syntax as a Complex Network. Cornell
University, Ithaca.
Weinstein Agrawal, A., Schlossberg, M., Irvin, K., 2008. How far, by which route and
why? A spatial analysis of pedestrian preference. J. Urban Des. 13, 81–98.
Whalen, K.E., Páez, A., Carrasco, J.A., 2013. Mode choice of university students com-
muting to school and the role of active travel. J. Transp. Geogr. 31, 132–142.
Wilson, W.J., Sa, P., Freund, R.J., 2006. Regression Analysis: Statistical Modeling of a
Response Variable. Academic Press.
Winters, M., Teschke, K., Grant, M., Setton, E., Brauer, M., 2010. How far out of the way
will we travel? Built environment influences on route selection for bicycle and car
travel. Transp. Res. Rec. 1–10.
Yigitcanlar, T., Dizdaroglu, D., 2015. Ecological approaches in planning for sustainable
cities: a review of the literature. Global J. Environ. Sci. Manag. 1, 159–188.
Yigitcanlar, T., Kamruzzaman, M., 2014. Investigating the interplay between transport,
F. Shatu et al.
land use and the environment: a review of the literature. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.
11, 2121–2132.
Zhu, S.J., Levinson, D., 2015. Do people use the Shortest Path? An Empirical Test of
Wardrop's first Principle. PLoS One 10, e0134322.
Zhu, W., Timmermans, H., 2009. Modelling pedestrian go-home decisions: a comparison
52
Journal of Transport Geography 74 (2019) 37–52
of linear and nonlinear compensatory, and conjunctive non-compensatory specifi-
cations. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 16, 227–231.
Zhu, W., Timmermans, H., 2011. Modeling pedestrian shopping behavior using principles
of bounded rationality: model comparison and validation. J. Geogr. Syst. 13,
101–126.