The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of Vehicle-Ownership Models
Open accessAbstract
Empirical studies on household car ownership have used two types of discrete choice modeling structures: ordered and unordered. In ordered response structures, such as the ordered logit and ordered probit models, the choice of the number of household vehicles arises from a unidimensional latent variable that reflects the propensity of a household to own vehicles. Unordered response structures are based on the random utility maximization principle, which assumes a household associates a utility value across different car ownership levels and chooses the one with the maximum utility. The most common unordered response models are the multinomial logit and probit models, but only the multinomial logit has been used in practical applications because of its simple structure and low computational requirements. Consensus among researchers on unordered or ordered structures is still lacking. Empirical studies have reported various models, including the multinomial logit, ordered logit, and ordered probit. An open question remains: Which model would better reflect households’ car ownership choices? This paper compares multinomial logit, ordered logit, and ordered probit car ownership models through a number of formal evaluation measures and empirical analysis of three data sets: the 2001 National Household Travel Survey for the Baltimore [Maryland] Metropolitan Area, the 2005 Dutch National Travel Survey, and the 2000 Osaka [Japan] Metropolitan Person Trip Data. Results show the multinomial logit model should be selected for modeling the level of household car ownership.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Previous studies have done comparisons of model structures, such as MNL, ordered logit (ORL), or ordered probit (ORP), and all have treated vehicle ownership as a discrete choice (Bhat and Pulugurta, 1998; Potoglou and Susilo, 2008). These comparisons have not tested count models – either Poisson or negative binomial – as alternative model structures.”
From Key Enhancements to the WFRC/MAG Four-Step Travel Demand Model (2019) · cites this paper as Potoglou and Susilo, 2008
Citations
Cites
A comparison of two alternative behavioral choice mechanisms for household auto ownership decisions
Bhat, C. R., & Pulugurta, V. (1998) · Transportation Research Part B: Methodological · doi:10.1016/s0191-2615(97)00014-3 · Cited by 262
Research works printed but not linked: 26
- Ortuzar J. D., 2001, Modeling Transport.
- 10.1016/S1352-2310(99)00290-3 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0198-9715(02)00044-3 · DOI
- Bunch D. S., 2000, Handbook of Transport Modeling, 463
- Miller E. J., 1998, Integrated Urban Models for Simulation of Transit and Land-Use Policies.
- 10.3141/1805-08 · DOI
- Kim H. S., 2004, RURDS—The Applied Regional Science Conference, 245
- Ryan J. M., 1999, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1676, 1, 10.3141/1676-01 · DOI
- Purvis C. L., 1994, Transportation Research Record 1443, 21
- 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2007.01.006 · DOI
- 10.1108/9780080464015-003 · DOI
- Susilo Y. O., 2008, Transportation Research A, 42, 95
- Borooah V. K., 2001, Logit and Probit: Ordered and Multinomial Models.
- 10.1080/0022250X.1975.9989847 · DOI
- Greene W. H., 2000, Econometric Analysis
- McFadden D., 1973, Frontiers in Econometrics, 105
- Ben-Akiva M., 1985, Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand.
- Train K., 2002, Discrete Choice with Simulations.
- 10.1111/1467-6419.00035 · DOI
- 10.1016/0191-2615(91)90036-I · DOI
- Akaike H., 1973, Proc., 2nd International Symposium on Information Theory, 267
- 10.1093/biomet/76.2.297 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1214/aos/1176344136 · DOI · Paper page
- Hannan E., 1979, Journal of the Royal Society Series B, 190, 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1979.tb01072.x · DOI
- Greene W. H., 2002, Nlogit Version 3.
- 10.1007/s11116-007-9129-5 · DOI
Cited by
Key Enhancements to the WFRC/MAG Four-Step Travel Demand Model
University of Utah, Ewing, R., Sabouri, S., University of Utah, Park, K., University of Utah, Lyons, T., University of Utah, Tian, G., & University of Utah (2019) · doi:10.15760/trec.246 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Potoglou, D., & Susilo, Y. O.
- Affiliations
- RAND Europe (GB)
- University of the West of England (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Potoglou, Dimitris
- Venue
- Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 2076
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 97-105
- ISSN
- 0361-1981 (ISSN-L)
- 2169-4052
- OpenAlex
- W2070175169
- Cited by
- 80
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 7.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- eprints.uwe.ac.uk
- Locations
- Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board (publishedVersion)
- ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
- UWE Research Repository (UWE Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Transportation › Transportation Planning and Optimization
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
- Social Sciences › Transportation › Transportation and Mobility Innovations
- Keywords
- household car ownership, multinomial logistic regression, ordered logit model, ordered probit model, random utility maximization, model comparison, discrete choice models, National Household Travel Survey
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.