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

net/publication/371206597

University Bus Services Responding to Students Travel Demands

Article in Sustainability · June 2023

DOI: 10.3390/su15118921

CITATIONS READS

0 119

3 authors:

Navid Nadimi Aliakbar Zamzam

Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman
40 PUBLICATIONS 355 CITATIONS 2 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Todd Litman
Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Canada
183 PUBLICATIONS 8,926 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Evaluation of the impact of different factors on popularity of cycling in Tehran View project

Evaluation of the impact of different factors on the parking choice of drivers in Iran View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Navid Nadimi on 01 June 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 sustainability

Article
University Bus Services: Responding to Students’
Travel Demands?
Navid Nadimi 1, * , Aliakbar Zamzam 1 and Todd Litman 2

1 Faculty of Engineering, Shahid Bahonar University, Kerman 76169-13439, Iran; aliakbarzamzam76@gmail.com

2 Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC V8V 3R7, Canada; litman@vtpi.org
* Correspondence: navidnadimi@uk.ac.ir

Abstract: University bus services provide fixed-route public transport for students to and from large
universities. They are relatively affordable and resource-efficient, but must compete against private
cars and taxis which tend to be more convenient and flexible than University bus services. Many
students, particularly those with lower incomes, depend on them. University administrators must
understand how to improve University bus service in order to treat this group fairly. The main
contribution of this paper is to examine how University bus service can help achieve social equity
and sustainability goals. It investigates this by reporting the results of a survey of 303 students
at Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman in Iran concerning their travel demands and University
bus service utilization. Grounded theory and structural equation modeling is used to analyze the
daily commute preferences of university students influenced by their characteristics, fleet condition,
fares, station condition, and time factors. This study identifies various steps that the university
administration can take to make University bus service more efficient and attractive, such as updating
the bus fleet, improving stations, increasing security, and improving pedestrian access to stations.
Survey respondents reported the highest satisfaction levels with fare levels, the security in buses, and
waiting times. Women reported feeling discriminated against in their daily commutes. Poor-quality
University bus service contributes to a negative feedback loop that increases automobile use and
reduces university travel sustainability.

Keywords: transportation equity; university bus; structural equation modeling; satisfaction

Citation: Nadimi, N.; Zamzam, A.;
Litman, T. University Bus Services:
Responding to Students’ Travel
Demands?. Sustainability 2023, 15,
1. Introduction
8921. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su15118921
Many large universities strive to provide sustainable (affordable, safe, attractive, and
resource-efficient) transportation for students [1–4]. This can help reduce costs to students
Academic Editors: Ali Ardeshiri, and their families, traffic and parking congestion, air pollution, and other undesirable
Milad Ghasri and Milad Mehdizadeh traffic impacts.
Received: 10 May 2023 To help achieve sustainability goals, universities should encourage public transit [5,6]
Revised: 27 May 2023 and active transportation (walking and cycling) [7] over private automobile travel. There
Accepted: 30 May 2023 are many negative consequences associated with using private cars, including fuel con-
Published: 1 June 2023 sumption, traffic congestion, air pollution, delay, noise pollution, and more [2,5,8–13].
These impacts threaten the economic and environmental sustainability of our planet.
Public transportation is an affordable, inclusive, and resource-efficient transport
mode [14]. Students are primarily dependent on transit to get to school, according to
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. a study in Canada [15]. Many students, particularly those with low incomes, rely on
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
public transport [16]. However, transit must compete against private automobiles and
This article is an open access article
taxi, which tend to provide more convenience and comfort. To satisfy users’ need and
distributed under the terms and
attract non-captive users away from private transport, public transit must offer high-quality
conditions of the Creative Commons
service [17]. To keep customers loyal and attract new ones, public transit needs to improve
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
its service quality in a way that meets their needs [18]. The satisfaction and service quality of
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
public transportation systems are two main factors that promote the loyalty of citizens [19].
4.0/).

Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118921 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 2 of 17

Inadequate public transit can cause financial stress, poor health, and a decrease in
quality of life for physically and economically disadvantaged groups [20–23]. Thus, improv-
ing public transportation’s benefits for low-income and socially disadvantaged people is
essential for achieving sustainability goals [24–27]. Compared to other members of society,
students are more likely to use public transportation [28,29]. Consequently, a large group
of people is less likely to be discriminated against or excluded from social activities [30].
According to a study in Canada, discounted transit passes influence youth commute deci-
sions more than active transport or private cars [31]. In addition, it has been suggested that
hourly parking tariffs and subsidies for bus services are two important policies to promote
bus use among students [32].
As a result of the determination of public transportation equity scores [33], policy-
makers, service providers, and urban planners can decide the various aspects of a project
during the planning stage [34]. Different definitions exist for equity. Equal distribution of
resources (simple equality), taking into account differences among social groups when dis-
tributing resources (formal equality), distributing resources according to people’s incomes
and payments (proportional equality, e.g., Smith), maximizing society’s welfare or reducing
poverty (utilitarian theory, e.g., Pareto and al-Sadr), distributing resources by taking into
account people’s basic needs, especially those of disadvantaged and low-income groups
(e.g., Marx, Rawls, sufficientarian theory, prioritarianism) [35]. The equity definition in this
article is closer to Marx’s and Rawls’ views, sufficientarian theory, and prioritarian theory.
Equity in transportation is influenced by socioeconomic demographic characteristics,
transport service quality, and built environment [16]. As a result, affordable and efficient
public transportation helps achieve a university’s social sustainability and social equity
goals by ensuring that all students, including those with disabilities and low incomes, have
convenient and safe access to campuses [26,36–38].

2. Shahid Bahonar University Bus Services (UBS)

This study examines the UBS at Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman in Iran. Buses
run from Saturday to Thursday from 6:50 a.m. to 6:50 p.m., approximately every hour,
depending on the time of classes. A route from the city center to the university is about
9 km, and a route from the Technical Faculty to the university is about 12 km. There are
usually one to four buses assigned to each route depending on the time of day and day of
the week. The UBS of Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman travels from the city center
to the university and vice versa. During the workday, they are available from 6:30 until
21:00. Buses arrive every 30 min at the station. Buses can carry up to 40 passengers. There
is gender separation on buses. Most UBS buses are more than 20 years old, although some
newer buses were recently added that have better amenities. For instance, older buses have
hard fiberglass seats, while the new buses have comfortable seats with fabric cushions, in
addition to better heating and cooling systems. Bus stations have few amenities. They lack
sufficient lighting, chairs and shading, and station signs, and the station’s locations near a
major highway poses a safety and security concern. Security is an important issue in each
system [39,40], especially for female passengers of public transportation systems, whose
security relates to fear of violence and harassment [41–47].

3. Public Transportation Demands

“Travel demand” refers to how and how much people travel, and the factors that affect
this, including demographic factors, such as age, employment and income; geographic
factors, such as where they live, study and work; and transportation system factors, such
as the relative price, comfort, and speed of various travel modes (walking, bicycling, public
transit, taxi, and automobile).
To attract non-captive users and satisfy captive users, it is essential to identify factors
that influence their decisions to use public transportation. By doing so, the university
transportation system can encourage more sustainable travel. Table 1 summarizes the
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 3 of 17

variables that affect the decision of students to use public transportation for daily commutes
to universities.

Table 1. Summary of research papers in relation to using UBS.

Variables Case Study Reference

Waiting time, fare, and safety SBUK in Kerman, Iran [6]
Travel characteristics (weather, day of week, car
Ruhr University in
ownership, weakness of public transit services, [48]
Bochum, Germany
purpose of trip) and psychological variables
Subsidy availability, proximity to the bus station,
UCLA in Los Angeles,
short distance to university, gender, and [49]
CA, USA
educational status (graduate or undergraduate)
Gender, year of student, school location,
residence status (rent or with family) distance, Six universities in
[50]
motorcycle license ownership, motorcycle Danang, Vietnam
ownership, and bicycle ownership
Cost, personal attitudes, environmental factors, McMaster University, in
[51]
and travel time Hamilton, ON, Canada
Income, cost, travel time, car ownership, gender,
AUB in Beirut, Lebanon [52]
residence location, and cost of parking
Distance, gender, educational status (graduate or
undergraduate), age, feasibility of travel with UCLA in Los Angeles,
[53]
friends, feasibility of using multimodal modes, CA, USA
transit passes and discounts for students
Travel characteristics, personal behavior,
Four major universities
socio-economic characteristics, and type of [54]
in Virginia
residence (on-campus or off-campus)
Grade, household income, public transit Eight universities in the
coverage rate, bicycle ownership, university three typical higher [55]
location, distance, and gender education cities in China
Travel time, job status, and type of residence
(on-campus, off campus, with friends, with Arizona State University [56]
family, or alone)
Convenience, accessibility, reliability, flexibility,
University of Bologna, Italy [57]
distance, safety, travel time, cost, and car access
Status of bicycle lanes, on-campus security, bus
ULE, Spain [11]
costs, and frequency of busses
Two largest university
Socio-economic characteristics, situational campuses in Trondheim,
[58]
characteristics, and beliefs Norway (Dragvoll
and Gløshaugen)
Car ownership, walking distance, prioritizing University campuses in
physical activity, care about convenience, being Trondheim, Norway [59]
aware of negative effects of using private cars (Dragvoll and Gløshaugen)
Socio-demographic characteristics, car
Iran [60]
ownership, access to public transport
Access to bus service, subsidized transit, and
Los Angeles, CA, USA [61]
short travel times
Bike sharing reduces bus ridership among North Dakota
[62]
students State University
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 4 of 17

Table 1. Cont.

Variables Case Study Reference

Ease of use, shade, cleanliness, safety, and level
Qatar [63]
of crowding at bus stops
Punctuality and reliability of bus service, the
Malaysia [64]
shelters at bus stops, and seating capacity
University of Wollongong,
Travel time [65]
Wollongong, Australia

This paper uses this information to consider the following questions:

RQ1: What factors and variables are most crucial for students to be able to use
UBS effectively?
RQ2: To what extent are students satisfied with UBS specifications?
RQ3: What is the distribution of students using UBS in terms of frequency?
RQ4: What factors contribute to UBS popularity among students?
RQ5: In light of different factors, do UBS conditions seem fair to students?

4. Materials and Methods

To answer the research question and determine whether UBS effectively serves stu-
dents’ travel demands, five steps are taken into account. A grounded theory (GT) is
employed in the first step to determine which variables are effective for using UBS. The
second step is to compare the satisfaction of students with different specifications of UBS. In
the third phase, we compare the characteristics of students with the frequency with which
they use UBS. Using structural equation modeling (SEM), the fourth step examines the
impact of students’ characteristics and UBS specifications (determined in the first step) on
popularity of UBS. Based on the results of the previous steps, we propose countermeasures
to promote UBS and make captive users’ conditions fair. Steps 1 to 4 are described in the
following sections.

4.1. Step 1: Grounded Theory

Grounded theory refers to a systematic method for conducting qualitative research
that applies flexible methodological strategies. It is used when there are no predetermined
theories or assumptions regarding a phenomenon [66,67]. Using real-world data, GT
develops a theory based on the collected data [67]. Qualitative data is collected using
non-numerical methods, including text, audio, and video [68]. It is possible to collect data
regarding users’ experiences with GT systems [69].
This study uses GT to help understand how students value various UBS features and
how this could affect their travel decisions. Twenty students were interviewed. Students’
voices were recorded during the interview with their permission. Transcripts were broken
down into excerpts and reviewed in order to gain a better understanding of the responses.
Four steps were taken to determine the variables that influence students’ opinions of UBS:
open coding, axial coding, selective coding, and enfolding [66]. Using an open coding
approach, context was extracted from excerpts [68]. In axial coding, codes are connected
by finding connections between them [70]. Finding categories and subcategories through
axial coding requires trial and error [71]. Following the identification of a core category
that connects all codes, a theoretical framework based on selective coding is developed [71].
In order to identify the factors that influence students’ decision to use UBS, the GT outputs
were analyzed.
 Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 5 of 17

4.2. Step 2: Students’ Satisfaction

The survey form asked students about their satisfaction with each parameter of UBS,
as determined by GT. A five-point scale was used to rate each parameter: “very low”,
“low”, “medium”, “high”, and “very high”.

4.3. Step 3: Comparing Students Based on Their Frequent Transport Mode

We divided students into four groups based on how frequently they used the service
for university trips. “Students who frequently use UBS for their trips to/from the university
(more than 60 percent of trips), “Students who occasionally use UBS for their trips to/from
the universities (30 to 60 percent), “Students who rarely use UBS for their trips to/from the
universities (1 to 30)” and “Students who never use UBS”. The distribution of students in
each category was determined and compared based on their age, gender, income, education
level, and frequency of private car use on a weekly basis.

4.4. Step 4: Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)

This step determines the impact of students’ characteristics and other factors (deter-
mined by GT in step 1) on the popularity of UBS (UBP factor). UBS popularity is a latent
variable in the SEM, and its observed variables are frequency of use (UBF) and relative
frequency (UBR) of use when compared to other transport services for university trips.
SEM is a popular method in social science which has been used in different trans-
portation studies [12,72–77]. In order to solve the models, users need to use user-friendly
software that is based on its theoretical foundation, can answer predefined questions,
and can be generated using a variety of data sources [78–80]. Using SEM, predetermined
hypotheses can be tested as well as interactions between variables [81]. We used a combi-
nation of regression analysis and confirmatory analysis with SEM [82]. CFA was used to
test how well our data matched or fit a priori hypotheses about which items or variables
are manifests of an underlying construct. CFA is used to determine whether measures of a
construct are consistent with the researcher’s understanding of it. Consequently, CFA aims
to confirm a hypothesized structural model by testing the data [83].
In this paper, the theoretical model was evaluated by taking into account the impact
of characteristics of students, the specifications of the fleet, the characteristics of the station,
the time factor, and the fare factor on the popularity of using UBS (Figure 1). These factors
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17
and their related observed variables were obtained based on the literature review and
GT outputs.

Students’
Fare factor
characteristics

Popularity of
UBS

UBS fleet
Time factor
Specifications

UBS station
condition

Figure 1. Theoretical SEM.

Figure 1. Theoretical SEM.

5. Data
Students at Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman (SBUK) were surveyed for steps 2
to 4. SBUK is one of the largest universities in Iran. The university is located southeast of
Kerman city (Figure 2). There are approximately 230 thousand square meters of educa-
tional space for more than 14 thousand students. There are 11 faculties and 64 educational
 UBS station
condition

Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 6 of 17

Figure 1. Theoretical SEM.

5. Data5. Data
Students at Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman (SBUK) were surveyed for steps 2
Students at Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman (SBUK) were surveyed for steps 2
to 4. SBUK is one of the largest universities in Iran. The university is located southeast of
to 4. SBUK is one of the largest universities in Iran. The university is located southeast of
Kerman city (Figure 2). There are approximately 230 thousand square meters of educa-
Kerman city (Figure 2). There are approximately 230 thousand square meters of educational
tional space for more than 14 thousand students. There are 11 faculties and 64 educational
space for more than 14 thousand students. There are 11 faculties and 64 educational groups
groups at the university, and students study in more than 300 fields. Approximately 99
at the university, and students study in more than 300 fields. Approximately 99 professors,
professors, 188 associate professors, 272 assistant professors, 46 instructors, and 555 staff
188 associate professors, 272 assistant professors, 46 instructors, and 555 staff and employees
and employees work at this university.
work at this university.

Figure
Figure 2. 2. The location
The location of SBUK.of SBUK.

To determine
To determine the appropriate
the appropriate sample
sample size size 2for
for steps andsteps 2 and 3,(1)
3, Equation Equation (1) is used [84]:
is used [84]:
1
 "  # −1
 N  1 dN − 21 d 2
n  Nn ≥
1 N 1 +
( ) ( ) (1) (1)
 pq Z  pq Z α2
 2 
where n: sample size, number of students for data collection; N: population size, number
of total students in the University campus (14,000); Z: 1.96 for 95% confidence level, p, q:
the quality characteristics which are to be measured. Where no previous experience exists,
the value of p is taken as 0.5 and q =1 – p = 0.5; d: the desired level of precision and is
considered 6.5%.
Equation (1) indicates that the number of students participating in the survey must be
more than 223.
For step 4, which involves using SEM, the sample size was determined by the “ten
times rule”. According to this rule, the sufficient sample size for SEM is 10 times the total
number of links that connect the latent variables. In the proposed SEM, there are 5 links, as
shown in Figure 1. In order to conduct the survey, at least 50 students must participate.
In SBUK, 330 students were interviewed, of whom 303 completed and returned
acceptable forms. This indicates the sufficiency of the sample size.
Table 2 indicates the distribution of characteristics of the surveyed students.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 7 of 17

Table 2. Distribution of the characteristics of surveyed students.

Students’
Variable Abbreviation Categories Frequency (%)
Characteristic Factors
Men 34.5
Gender GEN
Women 65.5
18–20 21.4
20–22 47.7
22–24 22
Age AGE
24–26 5.6
26–28 2
>28 1.3
B. S. 83.9
Education M.Sc. 13.8
EDU
level
Ph.D. 2.3
No Job 77
Job status JOS Part-time Job 17.1
SCF Full-time Job 5.9
<10 26
10–25 30.6
Income 25–50 17.4
INC
(USD) 50–100 13.8
100–250 6.6
>250 5.6
No access
31.2
(0 days a week)
Rarely
Access to 37.5
(1 to 2 days a week)
private car in APC
a week Occasionally
18.1
(3 to 4 days a week)
All workdays
13.2
(5 days a week)

6. Results
The order of the results in this section is based on the steps introduced in the method.

6.1. Step 1
Table 3 summarizes the four main categories found using the procedure illustrated for
GT. In addition, related subcategories for each main category are presented in this table.

Table 3. Categories and subcategories determined by GT.

Main Category Acronym Sub-Category Acronym

Comfort COM
Safety FSA
Fleet characteristics FLC
Security FSE
Age FAG
 6.1. Step 1
Table 3 summarizes the four main categories found using the procedure illustrated
for GT. In addition, related subcategories for each main category are presented in this
table.

Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 Table 3. Categories and subcategories determined by GT. 8 of 17

Main Category Acronym Sub‐Category Acronym

Comfort COM
Table 3. Cont.
Safety FSA
Fleet characteristics FLC
Main Category Acronym Security
Sub-Category FSE
Acronym
Age
Facilities/Amenities FAG
FAM
Facilities/Amenities
Security
FAM
SSE
Station characteristics STC
Station characteristics STC Security SSE
Safety SSA
Safety SSA
Travel time
Travel time TRT
TRT
TimeTime TIM TIM Walking
Walkingtimetime WLT
WLT
Waiting
Waiting timetime WAT
WAT
Fare Fare FRE FRE FareFare amount
amount FRA
FRA

6.2. Step 2
6.2. Step 2
The satisfaction of students from the variables outlined in Table 3 is presented in Fig-
The satisfaction of students from the variables outlined in Table 3 is presented in
ures 3–5.
Figures 3–5.

Figure 3. Satisfaction of students from UBS specifications—FLC.

Figure 3. Satisfaction of students from UBS specifications—FLC.
6.3. Step 3
According to how often students use UBS, Table 4 shows distributions of age, gender,
income, education level, and days using private cars among students. Tables 5 and 6 display
the distribution of income and access to private cars between male and female students.

6.4. Step 4
SEM outputs include the following:
- Path coefficients and t-values to demonstrate the relationship between factors (Figure 6).
- Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability coefficient (CRC) to determine latent
variable reliability (Table 7).
- Latent variable average variance (AVE) to prove validity (Table 7).
- Factor loadings and t-values for each observed variable (Table 8).
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 9 of 17

Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER-REVIEW

Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Cross-loadings 9 of 17
and Fornell–Larcker criterion to demonstrate discriminant validity
9 of 17
(Table 9).
- Goodness-of-fit index for the overall model.

Figure 4. Satisfaction of students from UBS specifications—STC.

Figure
Figure 4.4.Satisfaction
Satisfactionofofstudents
studentsfrom
fromUBS
UBS specifications—STC.
specifications—STC.

Figure 5. Satisfaction of students from UBS specifications—TIM and FRA.

Figure 5. Satisfaction of students from UBS specifications—TIM and FRA.
Figure 5. Satisfaction of students from UBS specifications—TIM and FRA.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 10 of 17

Table 4. Distribution of students’ characteristics.

Frequency of Using UBS

Variable Categories
Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently
Female 32.8 15.7 31.8 19.7
GEN
Male 42.9 20.0 22.9 14.3
No access 23.4 8.6 32.8 35.2
Rarely 25.1 26.1 38.0 10.9
APC
Occasionally 51.3 32.7 16.0 2.7
All days 68.6 11.6 19.8 0.0
<10 27.9 7.6 32.9 31.7
10–25 34.8 18.5 32.6 14.1
25–50 30.2 22.6 28.3 18.9
INC
50–100 45.2 28.6 16.7 9.5
100–250 50.0 20.0 25.0 5.0
>250 64.7 5.9 23.5 5.9
18–20 36.9 15.4 32.3 15.4
20–22 33.3 16.0 27.8 22.9
22–24 34.3 22.4 28.4 14.9
AGE
24–26 70.6 17.7 5.9 5.9
26–28 16.7 16.7 66.7 0.0
>28 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0
B. Sc. 36.6 16.9 29.1 17.3
EDU
M. Sc. 34.7 18.4 26.5 20.4

Table 5. Distribution of access to private cars between male and female students.

APC
Variable Categories
No Access Rarely Occasionally All Days
Female 40.4 34.3 17.6 7.7
GEN
Male 14.2 42.8 19.1 23.9

Table 6. Distribution of income between male and female students.

INC
Variable Categories
<10 10–25 25–50 50–100 100–250 >250
Female 31.3 30.8 17.6 12.1 6 2.2
GEN
Male 16.2 29.6 17.1 17.1 7.6 12.4

Figure 6 shows the proposed SEM for evaluating the impact of SCF, FLC, STC, and
TIM on UBSP. This figure shows t-values in parentheses and path coefficients in other
numbers. If the t value is greater than 1.96, then the path coefficients are acceptable at 0.05
significance, and if it is greater than 1.64, then the results are acceptable at 0.1 significance.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 11 of 17

Table 7. Results of SEM reliability and validity.

Factors Cronbach’s Alpha CRC AVE

UBP 0.89 0.95 0.9
STC 0.83 0.89 0.75
TIM 0.71 0.83 0.63
SCF 0.65 0.78 0.48
FLC 0.8 0.87 0.62

Table 8. Discriminant validity (Fornell–Larcker).

Factors FRE UBP STC TIM SCF FLC

FRE 1.000
UBP 0.177 0.942
STC 0.014 −0.130 0.866
TIM 0.233 −0.174 0.368 0.799
SCF −0.010 −0.326 0.016 0.194 0.697
FLC 0.045 −0.086 0.846 0.382 0.075 0.791

Table 9. Discriminant validity by cross-loadings.

FRE UBP STC TIM SCF FLC

AGE 0.038 −0.074 0.474 0.256 0.152 0.762
UBR 0.172 0.986 −0.133 −0.173 −0.311 −0.092
UBF 0.164 0.897 −0.104 −0.152 −0.321 −0.060
APC −0.024 −0.304 0.082 0.141 0.749 0.100
COM 0.004 −0.064 0.668 0.262 0.079 0.848
WLT 0.117 −0.112 0.301 0.701 0.181 0.302
FAM 0.070 −0.100 0.784 0.347 0.070 0.750
FRA 1.000 0.177 0.014 0.233 −0.010 0.045
INC −0.106 −0.236 0.051 0.189 0.768 0.071
JOS 0.100 −0.192 −0.033 0.182 0.727 0.040
SSA −0.016 −0.143 0.928 0.327 0.017 0.737
SSE −0.012 −0.075 0.881 0.274 −0.068 0.721
TRT 0.221 −0.150 0.293 0.826 0.125 0.299
FSA 0.060 −0.081 0.807 0.395 0.012 0.825
FSE 0.033 −0.041 0.785 0.278 −0.046 0.722
WAT 0.206 −0.151 0.296 0.860 0.167 0.320
GEN 0.062 −0.115 −0.183 −0.040 0.516 −0.081
 Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

Figure 6 shows the proposed SEM for evaluating the impact of SCF, FLC, STC, and
TIM on UBSP. This figure shows t-values in parentheses and path coefficients in other
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921
numbers. If the t value is greater than 1.96, then the path coefficients are acceptable at120.05 of 17

significance, and if it is greater than 1.64, then the results are acceptable at 0.1 significance.

GEN APC INC JOS

COM

FSA
FLC SCF
FSE

FAG

UBF
FAM
UBP
0.886
SSE STC
UBR

SSA

TIM

FRE
0.684

1
TRT WLT WAT
FRA

Figure 6. The path coefficients and t-values of SEM.

Figure 6. The path coefficients and t-values of SEM.

When When Cronbach

Cronbach Alpha
Alpha andand
CRCCRCareare close
close to one,
to one, theythey indicate
indicate high
high reliability
reliability [85].In
[85].
In general, AVE values greater than 0.5 are considered acceptable [86]. Composite
general, AVE values greater than 0.5 are considered acceptable [86]. Composite reliability reliabil-
(CR)ity (CR) above
scores scores 0.60
above 0.60
can can make
make AVE scores
AVE scores belowbelow thresholds
thresholds validvalid
[87].[87].
According to the Fornell–Larcker criterion, Table 8 displays the results. This method
According to the Fornell–Larcker criterion, Table 8 displays the results. This method
compares latent variable correlations to AVE values squared. It is especially important that
compares latent variable correlations to AVE values squared. It is especially important that
each construct’s square root is greater than its highest correlation with any other construct.
each construct’s square root is greater than its highest correlation with any other construct.
The discriminant validity is shown in Table 8 (Fornell–Larcker criterion) [88].
The discriminant validity is shown in Table 8 (Fornell–Larcker criterion) [88].
Cross-loading can be used to test discriminant validity by comparing measures
Cross-loading can be used to test discriminant validity by comparing measures within
within each construct with those within other constructs. Measures of each construct must
eachbeconstruct with those
low-correlated within
with each other
other, andconstructs.
measures ofMeasures of each construct
different constructs must be
must be low-cor-
low-correlated
related. with each other, and measures of different constructs must be low-correlated.

7. Discussion and Conclusions

7. Discussion and Conclusions
The The
purpose
purposeof this paper
of this paperwas to to
was evaluate
evaluatethethequality
qualityand
and attractiveness
attractiveness of ofUniversity
University
bus bus
services, and to identify ways that this service can better serve students’
services, and to identify ways that this service can better serve students’ demands demands in
in order to achieve sustainability goals. This assessment focused on
order to achieve sustainability goals. This assessment focused on the UBS at Shahid the UBS at Shahid
Bah-
Bahonar
onar University
University in inIran.
Iran.Based
Basedononthe theresults
resultsof of a detailed
a detailed survey,
survey, it isit now
is now possible
possible to
to answer
answerthe theresearch
researchquestions.
questions. The
The majority
majority ofof students were dissatisfied
students were dissatisfiedwithwiththe
thebus
bus
service, station
service, facilities,
station station
facilities, security,
station security, and
andwalking
walkingtime
timetotostations. When ititcomes
stations. When comestoto
fare fare
amount, UBS’s
amount, security,
UBS’s and
security, waiting
and waiting time,
time,students
studentshadhadthe
the highest satisfactionlevels.
highest satisfaction levels.
Hence, the university
Hence, administration
the university administrationcan can
work on these
work parameters
on these to attract
parameters students
to attract who
students
are not
whoregular
are notusers of UBS.
regular users Table 9 compares
of UBS. the specifications
Table 9 compares of UBS of
the specifications withUBSother
withmodes.
other
Tablemodes.
10 compares
Table 10the specifications
compares of UBS with
the specifications other
of UBS modes.
with other modes.
The survey indicates that most students were dissatisfied with the bus service, station
facilities, station security, and walking time to stations. Students were more satisfied with
the UBS’s fare amount, security, and waiting time.
UBS is used less frequently by male students than by female students. This probably
reflects the fact that male students tend to have higher incomes and greater access to private
cars, and as a result the UBS’s inadequacies represent a form of gender discrimination,
which harms female students. Previously, in other papers in relation to developing coun-
tries, it was reported that women have more limitations in using bus services than male
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 13 of 17

passengers [12]. These limitations relate mostly to accessibility [89], feelings of safety and
security [41], and violence and harassment [43].

Table 10. A comparison of available modes for daily commutes of students to university.

Total Costs Average Walking Time to Average Waiting Average Travel

Mode Route
(Per Trip) Stations (min) Time (min) Speed (km/h)
UBS Free <15 60 25 to 30 Fixed
Public Bus USD 0.04 <15 30–60 25 to 30 Fixed
Taxi USD 0.01 to 0.024 <10 <15 35 to 40 Semi-flexible
Uber USD 0.3 to 1 0 <10 40 to 50 Flexible
Private car USD 1 to 1.5 0 0 40 to 50 Flexible

This study identified various factors that affect students’ use of UBS. As previously
discussed, gender, income, and access to private cars have the greatest impacts on UBS
usage. Previously, it was found that different characteristics of students, such as gender,
educational status, income, age, car ownership, and job status, can affect their decision to
use buses for university trips [48,50,52,54–56,58]. After students’ characteristics, station
factor, bus factor, and time factor had the highest impacts on UBS popularity. In terms
of the parameters of UBS that left students dissatisfied, bus age, station amenities, and
walking time were the most significant factors. Previously, it was indicated that the ease of
use, shade, cleanliness, safety and crowdedness level of bus stops, reliability, travel time,
and frequency are important parameters to attract students [63]. In other studies, comfort,
accessibility, safety, reliability, affordability, cleanliness, waiting time, walking duration,
facilities for female passengers, and amenities were also reported as important variables to
satisfy the passengers [90,91].
University decisions in developing countries are negatively influenced by automobiles,
leading to a decrease in the sustainability of transportation. Furthermore, captive users
of UBS are unfairly forced to use it despite dissatisfaction with some features that are
important to them. University administrations can use this information to increase user
satisfaction and attract more students to the UBS in order to achieve sustainability goals.
The theoretical and/or methodological contributions of this paper are not limited to
this case study and the steps can be applied to other problems as well. Each case study can
be adapted to the proposed method’s main idea.
The main limitation of this paper is that it ignores psychological factors of students, as
well as the impact of other modes of transportation on the SEM. Another limitation is the
lack of quantification of different variables’ effects on student satisfaction.

Author Contributions: Methodology, N.N.; Software, A.Z.; Validation, A.Z.; Formal analysis, A.Z.;
Investigation, T.L.; Writing—original draft, N.N.; Writing—review & editing, T.L.; Supervision, N.N.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration
of Helsinki and did not threaten the human rights, privacy, and health.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: Data available upon request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 14 of 17

References
1. Dehghanmongabadi, A.; Hoşkara, Ş. Challenges of Promoting Sustainable Mobility on University Campuses: The Case of Eastern
Mediterranean University. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4842. [CrossRef]
2. Cherry, C.R.; Riggs, W.; Appleyard, B.; Dhakal, N.; Frost, A.; Jeffers, S.T. New and Unique Aspects of University Campus
Transportation Data to Improve Planning Methods. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2018, 2672, 742–753. [CrossRef]
3. Bouhouras, E.; Basbas, S.; Mintsis, G.; Taxiltaris, C.; Miltiadou, M.; Nikiforiadis, A.; Konstantinidou, M.N.; Mavropoulou, E. Level
of Satisfaction among University Students Using Various Transport Modes. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4001. [CrossRef]
4. Nadimi, N.; Sangdeh, A.K.; Kamkar, H. Developing sustainable transportation for university trips in low-income countries.
Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Eng. Sustain. 2021, 14, 160–173. [CrossRef]
5. Beaudoin, J.; Farzin, Y.H.; Lin Lawell, C.-Y.C. Public transit investment and sustainable transportation: A review of studies of
transit’s impact on traffic congestion and air quality. Res. Transp. Econ. 2015, 52, 15–22. [CrossRef]
6. Nadimi, N.; Sangdeh, A.K.; Berangi, M. Finding effective parameters for mitigating traffic congestion near universities. Proc. Inst.
Civ. Eng. Munic. Eng. 2023, 1–11. [CrossRef]
7. Fallah Zavareh, M.; Mehdizadeh, M.; Nordfjærn, T. Active travel as a pro-environmental behaviour: An integrated framework.
Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2020, 84, 102356. [CrossRef]
8. Shatnawi, N.; Al-Omari, A.A.; Al-Qudah, H. Optimization of Bus Stops Locations Using GIS Techniques and Artificial Intelligence.
Proc. Manuf. 2020, 44, 52–59. [CrossRef]
9. Lu, J.; Li, B.; Li, H.; Al-Barakani, A. Expansion of city scale, traffic modes, traffic congestion, and air pollution. Cities 2021,
108, 102974. [CrossRef]
10. Abdel Wahed Ahmed, M.M.; Abd El Monem, N. Sustainable and green transportation for better quality of life case study greater
Cairo—Egypt. HBRC J. 2020, 16, 17–37. [CrossRef]
11. Hidalgo-González, C.; Rodríguez-Fernández, M.P.; Pérez-Neira, D. Energy consumption in university commuting: Barriers,
policies and reduction scenarios in León (Spain). Transp. Policy 2022, 116, 48–57. [CrossRef]
12. Nadimi, N.; Sangdeh, A.K.; Amiri, A.M. Deciding about the effective factors on improving public transit popularity among
women in developing countries. Transp. Lett. 2021, 13, 707–715. [CrossRef]
13. Mehdizadeh, M.; Shariat-Mohaymany, A. Who are more likely to break the rule of congestion charging? Evidence from an active
scheme with no referendum voting. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2020, 135, 63–79. [CrossRef]
14. Ikram, S.Z.; Hu, Y.; Wang, F. Disparities in Spatial Accessibility of Pharmacies in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Geogr. Rev. 2015, 105,
492–510. [CrossRef]
15. Nash, S.; Mitra, R. University students’ transportation patterns, and the role of neighbourhood types and attitudes. J. Transp.
Geogr. 2019, 76, 200–211. [CrossRef]
16. Wang, Y.; Cao, M.; Liu, Y.; Ye, R.; Gao, X.; Ma, L. Public transport equity in Shenyang: Using structural equation modelling.
Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2022, 42, 100555. [CrossRef]
17. Ibarra-Rojas, O.J.; Delgado, F.; Giesen, R.; Muñoz, J.C. Planning, operation, and control of bus transport systems: A literature
review. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2015, 77, 38–75. [CrossRef]
18. Gholi, H.; Kermanshah, M.; Reza Mamdoohi, A. Investigating the sources of heterogeneity in passengers’ preferences for transit
service quality. J. Public Transp. 2022, 24, 100014. [CrossRef]
19. Carvalho dos Reis Silveira, T.; Romano, C.A.; Gadda, T.M.C. Loyalty and public transit: A quantitative systematic review of the
literature. Transp. Rev. 2021, 42, 362–383. [CrossRef]
20. El-Geneidy, A.; Buliung, R.; Diab, E.; van Lierop, D.; Langlois, M.; Legrain, A. Non-stop equity: Assessing daily intersections
between transit accessibility and social disparity across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). Environ. Plan. B Plan.
Des. 2015, 43, 540–560. [CrossRef]
21. Jin, C.; Cheng, J.; Lu, Y.; Huang, Z.; Cao, F. Spatial inequity in access to healthcare facilities at a county level in a developing
country: A case study of Deqing County, Zhejiang, China. Int. J. Equity Health 2015, 14, 67. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Lucas, K. Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now? Transp. Policy 2012, 20, 105–113. [CrossRef]
23. Wan, C.; Su, S. China’s social deprivation: Measurement, spatiotemporal pattern and urban applications. Habitat Int. 2017, 62,
22–42. [CrossRef]
24. Cuthill, N.; Cao, M.; Liu, Y.; Gao, X.; Zhang, Y. The Association between Urban Public Transport Infrastructure and Social Equity
and Spatial Accessibility within the Urban Environment: An Investigation of Tramlink in London. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1229.
[CrossRef]
25. Di Ciommo, F.; Shiftan, Y. Transport equity analysis. Transp. Rev. 2017, 37, 139–151. [CrossRef]
26. Litman, T. Evaluating Transportation Equity Guidance for Incorporating Distributional Impacts in Transportation Planning. ITE J.
2020, 92, 43–49.
27. Low, W.-Y.; Cao, M.; De Vos, J.; Hickman, R. The journey experience of visually impaired people on public transport in London.
Transp. Policy 2020, 97, 137–148. [CrossRef]
28. Etminani-Ghasrodashti, R.; Paydar, M.; Hamidi, S. University-related travel behavior: Young adults’ decision-making in Iran.
Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 43, 495–508. [CrossRef]
29. Haggar, P.; Whitmarsh, L.; Skippon, S.M. Habit discontinuity and student travel mode choice. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol.
Behav. 2019, 64, 1–13. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 15 of 17

30. Zofia, L.; Pulawska, Z. Equity in transportation: New approach in transport planning. Transp. Probl. 2014, 9, 67–74.
31. Lachapelle, U.; Manaugh, K.; Hamelin-Pratte, S. Providing discounted transit passes to younger university students: Are there
effects on public transit, car and active transportation trips to university? Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2022, 10, 811–820. [CrossRef]
32. Rotaris, L.; Danielis, R. The impact of transportation demand management policies on commuting to college facilities: A case
study at the University of Trieste, Italy. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2014, 67, 127–140. [CrossRef]
33. Nadimi, N.; Camporeale, R.; Khaleghi, M.; Haghani, M.; Sheykhfard, A.; Shaaban, K. A Method to Determine an Equity Score for
Transportation Systems in the Cities. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5818. [CrossRef]
34. Tahmasbi, B.; Mansourianfar, M.H.; Haghshenas, H.; Kim, I. Multimodal accessibility-based equity assessment of urban public
facilities distribution. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 49, 101633. [CrossRef]
35. Martens, K.; Golub, A.; Robinson, G. A justice-theoretic approach to the distribution of transportation benefits: Implications for
transportation planning practice in the United States. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2012, 46, 684–695. [CrossRef]
36. Ahmed, Q.I.; Lu, H.; Ye, S. Urban transportation and equity: A case study of Beijing and Karachi. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract.
2008, 42, 125–139. [CrossRef]
37. Ricciardi, A.M.; Xia, J.; Currie, G. Exploring public transport equity between separate disadvantaged cohorts: A case study in
Perth, Australia. J. Transp. Geogr. 2015, 43, 111–122. [CrossRef]
38. Behbahani, H.; Nazari, S.; Jafari Kang, M.; Litman, T. A conceptual framework to formulate transportation network design
problem considering social equity criteria. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2019, 125, 171–183. [CrossRef]
39. Eckhart, M.; Ekelhart, A.; Biffl, S.; Lüder, A.; Weippl, E. QualSec: An Automated Quality-Driven Approach for Security Risk
Identification in Cyber-Physical Production Systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2023, 19, 5870–5881. [CrossRef]
40. Yang, L.; Sun, Q.; Zhang, N.; Li, Y. Indirect Multi-Energy Transactions of Energy Internet with Deep Reinforcement Learning
Approach. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2022, 37, 4067–4077. [CrossRef]
41. Loukaitou-Sideris, A.; Fink, C. Addressing Women’s Fear of Victimization in Transportation Settings: A Survey of U.S. Transit
Agencies. Urban Aff. Rev. 2008, 44, 554–587. [CrossRef]
42. Cox, A.; Prager, F.; Rose, A. Transportation security and the role of resilience: A foundation for operational metrics. Transp. Policy
2011, 18, 307–317. [CrossRef]
43. Dunckel Graglia, A. Finding mobility: Women negotiating fear and violence in Mexico City’s public transit system. Gender Place
Cult. 2016, 23, 624–640. [CrossRef]
44. Amiri, A.M.; Nadimi, N.; Yousefian, A. Comparing the efficiency of different computation intelligence techniques in predicting
accident frequency. IATSS Res. 2020, 44, 285–292. [CrossRef]
45. Quinones, L.M. Sexual harassment in public transport in Bogotá. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2020, 139, 54–69. [CrossRef]
46. García, I.; Albelson, M.; Puczkowskyj, N.; Maheruma Khan, S.; Fagundo-Ojeda, K. Harassment of low-income women on transit:
A photovoice project in Oregon and Utah. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2022, 112, 103466. [CrossRef]
47. Orozco-Fontalvo, M.; Soto, J.; Arévalo, A.; Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. Women’s perceived risk of sexual harassment in a Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) system: The case of Barranquilla, Colombia. J. Transp. Health 2019, 14, 100598. [CrossRef]
48. Klöckner, C.A.; Friedrichsmeier, T. A multi-level approach to travel mode choice—How person characteristics and situation
specific aspects determine car use in a student sample. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2011, 14, 261–277. [CrossRef]
49. Zhou, J. From better understandings to proactive actions: Housing location and commuting mode choices among university
students. Transp. Policy 2014, 33, 166–175. [CrossRef]
50. Nguyen-Phuoc, D.Q.; Amoh-Gyimah, R.; Tran, A.T.P.; Phan, C.T. Mode choice among university students to school in Danang,
Vietnam. Travel Behav. Soc. 2018, 13, 1–10. [CrossRef]
51. Whalen, K.E.; Páez, A.; Carrasco, J.A. Mode choice of university students commuting to schooland the role of active travel.
J. Transp. Geogr. 2013, 31, 132–142. [CrossRef]
52. Danaf, M.; Abou-Zeid, M.; Kaysi, I. Modeling travel choices of students at a private, urban university: Insights and policy
implications. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2014, 2, 142–152. [CrossRef]
53. Zhou, J. Sustainable commute in a car-dominant city: Factors affecting alternative mode choices among university students.
Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2012, 46, 1013–1029. [CrossRef]
54. Khattak, A.; Wang, X.; Son, S.; Agnello, P. Travel by university students in Virginia: Is this travel different from travel by the
general population? Transp. Res. Rec. 2011, 2255, 137–145. [CrossRef]
55. Zhan, G.; Yan, X.; Zhu, S.; Wang, Y. Using hierarchical tree-based regression model to examine university student travel frequency
and mode choice patterns in China. Transp. Policy 2016, 45, 55–65. [CrossRef]
56. Volosin, S.E. A Study of University Student Travel Behavior; Arizona State University: Tempe, AZ, USA, 2014.
57. De Angelis, M.; Mantecchini, L.; Pietrantoni, L. A cluster analysis of university commuters: Attitudes, personal norms and
constraints, and travel satisfaction. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4592. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
58. Mehdizadeh, M.; Zavareh, M.F.; Nordfjaern, T. Mono- and multimodal green transport use on university trips during winter and
summer: Hybrid choice models on the norm-activation theory. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2019, 130, 317–332. [CrossRef]
59. Nordfjærn, T.; Egset, K.S.; Mehdizadeh, M. “Winter is coming”: Psychological and situational factors affecting transportation
mode use among university students. Transp. Policy 2019, 81, 45–53. [CrossRef]
60. Mehdizadeh, M.; Nordfjaern, T.; Mamdoohi, A. Environmental norms and sustainable transport mode choice on children’s school
travels: The norm-activation theory. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2020, 14, 137–149. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 16 of 17

61. Zhou, J. Proactive sustainable university transportation: Marginal effects, intrinsic values, and university students’ mode choice.
Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2016, 10, 815–824. [CrossRef]
62. Godavarthy, R.; Mattson, J.; Hough, J. Impact of bike share on transit ridership in a smaller city with a university-oriented bike
share program. J. Public Transp. 2022, 24, 100015. [CrossRef]
63. Shaaban, K.; Kim, I. The influence of bus service satisfaction on university students’ mode choice. J. Adv. Transp. 2016, 50, 935–948.
[CrossRef]
64. Hashim, R.; Haron, S.; Mohamad, S.; Hassan, F. Assessment of Campus Bus Service Efficacy: An Application towards Green
Environment. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 105, 294–303. [CrossRef]
65. Anwar, A.H.M.M.; Yang, J. Examining the Effects of Transport Policy on Modal Shift from Private Car to Public Bus. Proc. Eng.
2017, 180, 1413–1422. [CrossRef]
66. Zeng, B.; He, Y. Factors influencing Chinese tourist flow in Japan—A grounded theory approach. Asia Pacific J. Tour. Res. 2019, 24,
56–69. [CrossRef]
67. Corbin, J.; Strauss, A. Basics of Qualitative Research Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 4th ed.; SAGE
Publications: San Jose, CA, USA, 2014.
68. Soltaninejad, M.; Fardhosseini, M.S.; Kim, Y.W. Safety climate and productivity improvement of construction workplaces through
the 6S system: Mixed-method analysis of 5S and safety integration. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 2022, 28, 1811–1821. [CrossRef]
69. Lewis, S. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Health Promot. Pract. 2015, 16, 473–475.
[CrossRef]
70. Mac Donald, K.; Rezania, D.; Baker, R. A grounded theory examination of project managers’ accountability. Int. J. Proj. Manag.
2020, 38, 27–35. [CrossRef]
71. Liu, F.; Kang, J. A grounded theory approach to the subjective understanding of urban soundscape in Sheffield. Cities 2016, 50,
28–39. [CrossRef]
72. Mirbaha, B.; Saffarzadeh, M.; Seyed Abrishami, S.E.; Pirdavani, A. Evaluating the Willingness to Pay for Urban Congestion Priced
Zones (Case Study of Tehran). Int. J. Transp. Eng. 2014, 1, 199–210. [CrossRef]
73. Tavakoli Kashani, A.; Jafari, M.; Azizi Bondarabadi, M. A new approach in analyzing the accident severity of pedestrian crashes
using structural equation modeling. J. Inj. Violence Res. 2021, 13, 23. [PubMed]
74. Sheykhfard, A.; Haghighi, F. Driver distraction by digital billboards? Structural equation modeling based on naturalistic driving
study data: A case study of Iran. J. Safety Res. 2020, 72, 1–8. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
75. Sheykhfard, A.; Haghighi, F.; Nordfjærn, T.; Soltaninejad, M. Structural equation modelling of potential risk factors for pedestrian
accidents in rural and urban roads. Int. J. Inj. Contr. Saf. Promot. 2021, 28, 46–57. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
76. Amiri, A.M.; Ferguson, M.R.; Razavi, S. Adoption patterns of autonomous technologies in Logistics: Evidence for Niagara Region.
Transp. Lett. 2022, 14, 685–696. [CrossRef]
77. Lee, J.Y.; Chung, J.H.; Son, B. Analysis of traffic accident size for Korean highway using structural equation models. Accid. Anal.
Prev. 2008, 40, 1955–1963. [CrossRef]
78. Peng, D.X.; Lai, F. Using partial least squares in operations management research: A practical guideline and summary of past
research. J. Oper. Manag. 2012, 30, 467–480. [CrossRef]
79. Tenenhaus, M.; Vinzi, V.E.; Chatelin, Y.M.; Lauro, C. PLS path modeling. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 2005, 48, 159–205. [CrossRef]
80. Hair, J.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Hopkins, L.; Kuppelwieser, V.G. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An
emerging tool in business research. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2014, 26, 106–121. [CrossRef]
81. Riha, C.; Güntensperger, D.; Oschwald, J.; Kleinjung, T.; Meyer, M. Chapter 6—Application of latent growth curve model-
ing to predict individual trajectories during neurofeedback treatment for tinnitus. In Tinnitus—An Interdisciplinary Approach
towards Individualized Treatment: Results from the European Graduate School for Interdisciplinary Tinnitus Research; Langguth, B.,
Kleinjung, T., De Ridder, D., Schlee, W., Vanneste, S., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; Volume 263, pp. 109–136.
ISBN 0079-6123.
82. Harrison, L.; Stephan, K.; Friston, K. Chapter 38—Effective connectivity. In Statistical Parametric Mapping; Friston, K., Ashburner, J.,
Kiebel, S., Nichols, T., Penny, W.B.T.-S.P.M., Eds.; Academic Press: London, UK, 2007; pp. 508–521. ISBN 978-0-12-372560-8.
83. Nadimi, N.; Mansourifar, F.; Shamsadini Lori, H.; Soltaninejad, M. Analyzing traffic violations among motorcyclists using
structural equation modeling. Int. J. Inj. Contr. Saf. Promot. 2021, 28, 454–467. [CrossRef]
84. Johnson, R.; Wichern, D. Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis, 6th ed.; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2002;
ISBN 978-0131877153.
85. Peterson, R.A.; Kim, Y. On the relationship between coefficient alpha and composite reliability. J. Appl. Psychol. 2013, 98, 194–198.
[CrossRef]
86. Chin, W.W. The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In Modern methods for business research; Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Publishers: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1998; pp. 295–336.
87. Lam, L.W. Impact of competitiveness on salespeople’s commitment and performance. J. Bus. Res. 2012, 65, 1328–1334. [CrossRef]
88. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res.
1981, 18, 39–50. [CrossRef]
89. Lecompte, M.C.; Juan Pablo, B.S. Transport systems and their impact con gender equity. Transp. Res. Procedia 2017, 25, 4245–4257.
[CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 15, 8921 17 of 17

90. Noor, H.M.; Nasrudin, N.; Foo, J. Determinants of Customer Satisfaction of Service Quality: City Bus Service in Kota Kinabalu,
Malaysia. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 153, 595–605. [CrossRef]
91. Shaaban, K.; Khalil, R.F. Investigating the Customer Satisfaction of the Bus Service in Qatar. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 104,
865–874. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

View publication stats