Choice set variability and contextual heterogeneity in work trip mode choice in Chennai city

References

• Balasubramaniam, C., and K. Goulias. 1999. “Exploratory Longitudinal Analysis of Solo and Joint Trip Making.” In the 78th Annual Meeting of Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Beimborn, E., M. Greenwald, and X. Jin. 2003. “Accessibility, Connectivity, and Captivity: Impacts on Transit Choice.” Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1835: 1–9.10.3141/1835-01
   Google Scholar
• Ben Akiva, M., and B. Boccara. 1995. “Discrete Choice Models with Latent Choice Sets.” International Journal of Research in Marketing 12 (1): 9–24.10.1016/0167-8116(95)00002-J
   Google Scholar
• Bhat, C. R. 1998. “Accomodating Varaiations in Responsiveness to Level-of-Service Measures in Travel Mode Choice Modeling.” Transportation Research Part a: Policy and Practice 32 (7): 495–507.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bierlaire, M., R. Hurtubia, and G. Flotterod. 2010. “Analysis of Implicit Choice Set Generation Using Constrained Multinomial Logit Model.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2175: 92–97.10.3141/2175-11
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cantillo, V., and J. D. Ortuzar. 2005. “A Semi-compensatory Discrete Choice Model with Explicit Attribute Thresholds of Perception.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 39: 641–657.10.1016/j.trb.2004.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cascetta, E., and A. Papola. 2001. “Random Utility Models with Implicit Availability/Perception of Choice Alternatives for the Simulation of Travel Demand.” Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 9: 249–263.10.1016/S0968-090X(00)00036-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castro, M., F. Martinez, and M. A. Munizaga. 2013. “Estimation of a Constrained Multinomial Logit Model.” Transportation 40: 563–581.10.1007/s11116-012-9435-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Census. 2001. “Directorate of Census Operation Tamil Nadu – Primary Census Abstract – Census 2001.” Accessed March 2, 2016. http://www.census.tn.nic.in/pca2001.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Chee, W. L., and J. L. Fernandez. 2013. “Factors That Influence the Choice of Mode of Transport in Penang: A Preliminary Analysis.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 91, 120–127.10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.409
   Google Scholar
• Chorus, C. G., T. A. Arentze, and H. J. P. Timmermans. 2008. “A Random Regret-minimization Model of Travel Choice.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 42 (1): 1–18.10.1016/j.trb.2007.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeLoach, S. B., and T. K. Tiemann. 2010. Not Driving Alone: Commuting in Twenty-first Century. Working paper, Elon University, North Carolina, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Diana, M., and P. L. Mokhtarian. 2009. “Grouping Travelers on the Basis of Their Different Car and Transit Levels of Use.” Transportation 36 (4): 455–467.10.1007/s11116-009-9207-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuji, S., R. Kitamura, and K. Kishizawa. 1999. “An Analysis of Individual’s Joint Activity Engagement Using a Model System of Activity Travel Behavior and Time Use.” In the 78th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Gaudry, M. J. I., and M. G. Dagenais. 1979. “The Dogit Model.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 13B (2): 105–111.10.1016/0191-2615(79)90028-6
   Google Scholar
• Giuliano, G. 2005. “Low Income, Public Transit, and Mobility.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1927 (1): 63–70.10.3141/1927-08
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habib, K. N. 2014. “Household Level Commuting Mode Choices, Car Allocation and Car Ownership Level Choices of Two-worker Households: The Case of the City of Toronto.” Transportation 41 (3): 651–672.10.1007/s11116-014-9518-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habib, K. N., and A. Weiss. 2014. “Evolution of Latent Modal Captivity and Mode Choice Patterns for Commuting Trips: A Longitudinal Analysis Using Repeated Cross-sectional Datasets.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 66: 39–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacques, C., K. Manaugh, and A. M. El-geneidy. 2013. “Rescuing the Captive Mode User: An Alternative App Roach to Transport Market Segmentation.” Transportation, 40 (2013): 625–645.
   Google Scholar
• Juutinen, A., R. Svento, Y. Mitani, E. Mantymaa, Y. Shojie, and P. Siikamaki. 2012. “Modeling Observed and Unobserved Heterogeneity in Choice Experiments.” Environmental Economics 3 (2): 57–65.
   Google Scholar
• Khan, O., L. Ferreira, J. Bunker, and P. Parajuli. 2007. “Analyzing the Degree of Mode Captivity in a Multi-modal Travel Behavior Using Stated Preference Data.” In Proceedings of the 30th Australasian Transport Research Forum, 1–16. Melbourne.
   Google Scholar
• Manoj, M., and A. Verma. 2015. “Activity-travel Behaviour of Non-workers Belonging to Different Income Group Households in Bangalore, India.” Journal of Transport Geography 49: 99–109.10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.10.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manski, C. F. 1977. “The Structure and Theory of Random Utility Models.” Theory and Decision 8: 229–254.10.1007/BF00133443
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martínez, F., F. Aguila, and R. Hurtubia. 2009. “The Constrained Multinomial Logit: A Semi-compensatory Choice Model.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 43: 365–377.10.1016/j.trb.2008.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Council of A lied Economic Research Report. 2006. Accessed March 2, 2016. http://www.ncaer.org/Lbrry.asp
   Google Scholar
• Ortuzar, D., and L. G. Willumsen. 2011. Modelling Transport. 4th ed.  Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. Internet resource.10.1002/9781119993308
   Google Scholar
• Paleti, R. 2015. “Implicit Choice Set Generation in Discrete Choice Models: A Lication to Household Auto Ownership Decisions.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 80: 132–149.10.1016/j.trb.2015.06.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polzin, S., X. Chu, and J. Rey. 2000. “Density and Captivity in Public Transit Success: Observations from the 1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation Study.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1735 (1): 10–18.10.3141/1735-02
   Google Scholar
• Prabhu, D. B. A., S. Madhu, L. Ramamurthy, and D. Dhanuraj. 2011. Study on Paratransit Sector in Chennai, City Connect Foundation Chennai (CCCF) Report.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, D. M., and P. S. Kanaroglou. 2002. “An Activity-episode Generation Model That Captures Interactions between Household Heads: Development and Empirical Analysis.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 36: 875–896.10.1016/S0191-2615(01)00039-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, K. K., and P. Bhargavi. 2007. “Longer-term Changes in Mode Choice Decisions in Chennai: A Comparison between Cross-sectional and Dynamic Models.” Transportation 34 (3): 355–374.10.1007/s11116-007-9116-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, S., and C. R. Bhat. 2005. “Modeling Household Interactions in Daily In-home and Out-of-Home Maintenance Activity Participation.” Journal of Transportation 32: 523–544.10.1007/s11116-005-5329-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, K. K., G. M. Naidu, and T. Sutrala. 2009. “Heterogeneous Decision Rule Model of Mode Choice Incorporating Utility Maximization and Disutility Minimization.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of Transportation Research Board, No. 2132: 59–68.10.3141/2132-07
   Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, K. K., G. N. Pradhan, and G. M. Naidu. 2007. “Role of Subjective Factors, and Variations in Responsiveness across Captive, Semi-captive and Choice Segments in Commute Mode Choice in a Developing Country.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2038 (1): 53–61.10.3141/2038-07
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stopher, P. 1980. “Captivity and Choice in Travel Behavior Model.” Journal of Transportation Engineering 106 (4): 427–435.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swait, J. 1984. “Probabilistic choice set generation in Transportation demand models”. Thesis (Ph.D), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Civil Engineering.
   Google Scholar
• Swait, J. 2001a. “Choice Set Generation within the Generalized Extreme Value Family of Discrete Choice Models.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 35: 643–666.10.1016/S0191-2615(00)00029-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swait, J. 2001b. “A Non-compensatory Choice Model Incorporating Attribute Cut-offs.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 35: 903–928.10.1016/S0191-2615(00)00030-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swait, J., and M. Ben Akiva. 1987. “Incorporating Random Constraints in Discrete Choice Models.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 21B: 91–102.10.1016/0191-2615(87)90009-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Train, K. E. 2009. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511805271
   Google Scholar
• Vovsha, P., E. Peterson, and R. Donnelly. 2004. “A Model for Allocation of Maintenance Activities to the Household Members.” In the 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, H., and J. D. Ortuzar. 1982. “Behavioral Theories of Dispersion and Mis-specification of Travel Demand Models.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 16 (3): 167–219.10.1016/0191-2615(82)90024-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, F., A. Stevens, and J. Robinson. 1984. “Identifying Mode Choice Constrained Urban Travel Market Segments.” Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 11 (4): 924–932.10.1139/l84-107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar