Cited by 30

Transit Stop environments and waiting time perception: impacts of trees, traffic exposure, and polluted air

Lagune-Reutler, Marina, Guthrie, Andrew, Fan, Yingling, Levinson, David·2016·Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board

Abstract

Reducing the burden of waiting in transit travel is critical to increasing the attractiveness of public transportation. Waiting time perceptions are highly subjective and vary according to mode, availability of schedule information, and stop amenities. The research on pedestrian design finds that high-quality and natural environments reduce stress and encourage walking and bicycling. It seems reasonable that similar effects would apply for transit users on the basis of the environments around transit stops, but little research directly explores the issue. This paper responds to this knowledge gap by examining how perceptions of waiting time vary in relation to stop environments. The research compared transit users’ actual and estimated wait time at 36 stops and stations in a mix of environmental situations in the region of the Twin Cities, Minnesota. Regression analysis explained the variation in riders’ self-reported waiting time as a function of their externally observed waiting times as well as characteristics of the environment surrounding the stop and station. For waits longer than 5 min, perceptible pollution and exposure to traffic led to significant overestimates of waiting time. Riders waiting at stops with dense, mature tree cover, however, significantly underestimated their waiting times. The effect of dense, mature tree cover is strong enough to compensate for the effects of both air pollution and traffic awareness. Policy implications and further research needs are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3141/2543-09

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lagune-Reutler, M., Guthrie, A., Fan, Y., & Levinson, D.
Affiliations
  • Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, 301 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55455
  • Department of Civil, Environmental, and Geo-Engineering, College of Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota, 500 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455
Venue
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board
Published
2016-01
Volume
2543
Issue
1
Pages
82-90
ISSN
  • 0361-1981
  • 2169-4052
Cited by
30
References
1
Language
en

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