Search results

Purpose — The paper is analysing the effect of adding a web survey to a traditional telephone-based national travel survey by asking the respondents to check in on the web and answer the questions there (Computer Assisted Web Interview, CAWI). If they are not participating by web they are as usual called by telephone (Computer Assisted Telephone Interview, CATI).

Design/methodology/approach — Multivariate regression analyses are used to analyse the difference in response rates by the two media and to analyse if respondents' answering by the two media have different travel patterns.

Findings — The analyses show that web interviews are saving money, even though a more intensive post-processing is necessary. The analyses seem to show that the CAWI is resulting in a more careful answering which results in more trips reported. A CAWI is increasing the participation of children in the survey and of highly educated. And it is offering a higher flexibility to answer after a couple of days off. The CATI is on the other hand more useful for the elderly. In addition, the CATI survey proved to be more useful for busy people and people not willing to participate in a survey at all. Young people and people with low resources who are difficult to reach by telephone are neither met on the web. Most of the differences in the response shares can be compensated by a weighting procedure. However, not all seems to be possible to compensate for. An effort to increase the number participating in the CAWI survey might increase the quality of the survey in general.

Originality/value of paper — In many countries authorities are considering how to reduce the cost of their national travel surveys. The value of the paper is to show that a combination of a CAWI and a CATI could be a good solution. Furthermore, it shows that the mixed mode could improve a CATI and therefore be the reason in itself to change methodology.

Purpose — The Department for Transport's 2011 GPS National Travel Survey (NTS) pilot study investigated whether personal GPS devices and automated data processing could be used in place of the 7-day paper diary. Using GPS technology could reduce the relatively high burden that the diary places upon respondents, reduce costs and improve data quality.

Design/methodology/approach — Data was collected from c.900 respondents. Practical changes were made to the existing methodology where necessary, including the collection of information to support data processing. Processing was undertaken using the University of Eindhoven's Trace Annotator. Results from the GPS pilot were then compared to those from the main NTS diaries for the same period.

Findings — There were no insurmountable problems using GPS devices to collect data; however, the processed GPS data did not resemble the diary outputs, making GPS unsuitable for the NTS. The GPS data produced fewer and longer trips than the diary data. The purpose of a quarter of the GPS trips was unclear, and a disproportionate share started and ended at home.

Research limitations — Further work to manually inspect trips identified via validation as unfeasible and subsequently refine the processing algorithms would have been desirable had time permitted. GPS data processing may have been hindered by missing GPS data, particularly in the case of rail travel.

Originality/value — This research used an accelerometer-equipped GPS device to better predict the method of travel. It also combined addresses that respondents reported having visited during the travel week with GIS data to code the purpose of trips without using a post-processing prompted-recall survey.

Across Europe, on average more than 95% of all passenger cars and half of all light commercial vehicles are permanently available to a household. This includes both privately owned vehicles and company cars. The profiles of vehicle use can be specified as average annual distance driven per vehicle and for the fleet as a total, purpose of travel (trip destination), infrastructure use (urban, interurban or motorway road transport) and also fuel consumption together with data on CO₂ emissions. Indicators on vehicle use can be tracked in various ways:

• self-administered panels of households, which permit their vehicles to be followed for several years;

• national or local household travel surveys (with a seven-day trip diary);

• official vehicle inspection and vehicle registration files;

• ‘vehicle surveys’ based on vehicle registry data;

• traffic counts;

• data collected for road-charging purposes.

self-administered panels of households, which permit their vehicles to be followed for several years;

national or local household travel surveys (with a seven-day trip diary);

official vehicle inspection and vehicle registration files;

‘vehicle surveys’ based on vehicle registry data;

traffic counts;

data collected for road-charging purposes.

The paper will present a review of mainly vehicle-based survey methods used in France, Germany, Finland, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada, describing existing sampling frames to their scope, advantages and limitations, as well as their costs. Issues addressed in this context will be further examined in terms of their methodological challenges as well as their purpose.

The leading questions underlying this paper as well as the corresponding workshop are: why is it necessary to have data on passenger travel or transportation; and, looking at international experience, how good are vehicle-based surveys in delivering the required information? In discussing problems experienced in the different countries with data collection and evaluation methods, emphasis will be put on potential strategies for methodological and technological improvement and problem solving. One example is the potential use, benefits and constraints of new survey technologies presented by vehicle tracking techniques.

Over the past decade, transportation researchers have leveraged global positioning system (GPS) technology to improve the accuracy and increase the depth of spatial and temporal details obtained through household travel surveys. While earlier studies used GPS as a supplement to traditional household travel survey methods, measuring the accuracy of trips reported (Wolf et al., 2006), studies are now underway to identify the methods and tools that will allow us to do away with paper diaries entirely and simply rely on GPS to obtain trip details. This paper finds that while GPS clearly helps to improve participation among some groups, it decreases participation among others. Thus, it should be considered a tool in the household travel survey toolbox and not “the” solution to non-response issues in household travel surveys.

Large-scale continuous mobility surveys have some advantages over less frequent (usually every 10 years), even larger-scale cross-sectional surveys; these advantages have been well documented in previous papers (Ampt & Ortúzar, 2004).

In this paper we first define what we mean by ‘ongoing mobility surveys’. We then describe the state of practice in this context, briefly reviewing the state of affairs in all the cases that we are aware of. We then discuss some problems encountered in practice and offer ideas for improvement. In particular, we discuss a wide range of issues that are likely to act as barriers to a high quality and sustainable implementation and suggest approaches for improvement. Issues covered include sampling frames and sampling methods, survey methods, respondent burden, weighting processes and expansion, and the increased importance of developing and maintaining field staff motivation. We also touch briefly on the practical/political issue of securing ongoing funding. Throughout, we advance some thoughts to try and explain why this method has not gained wider acceptance, particularly in the Northern Hemisphere where there are more examples of travel surveys in general.

The paper also raises some ideas and issues about the way in which ongoing mobility surveys can best collect data for the environmental accounting of travel. Finally, we raise questions about the environmental impact of the survey methods themselves as a stimulus for further consideration.

This chapter summarizes some of the results from the Working Group “National Travel Surveys” in COST Action 355. All 50 presentations could not be reviewed here; thus, we focus on three crucial topics:

• the periodicity of data collection, but also its longitudinal aspects (advantages of continuous surveying, repeated cross-sections vs. panel surveys, etc.),

• new technologies for improving the efficiency and accuracy of mobility surveys (computer-assisted telephone, Web-based, interviews, GPS, GSM, RDS, etc.),

• innovative approaches, exemplified by qualitative surveys combined with conventional quantitative ones, and by biographical approaches.

the periodicity of data collection, but also its longitudinal aspects (advantages of continuous surveying, repeated cross-sections vs. panel surveys, etc.),

new technologies for improving the efficiency and accuracy of mobility surveys (computer-assisted telephone, Web-based, interviews, GPS, GSM, RDS, etc.),

innovative approaches, exemplified by qualitative surveys combined with conventional quantitative ones, and by biographical approaches.

The purpose of this chapter is to provoke thinking about the directions in which the travel survey toolkit should move in the near future based on the author's personal experience and as an outcome of the Travel Survey Methods conference. The chapter begins with a brief historical review that attempts to show some of the major elements of change that have occurred in travel survey methods over the past 40–50 years. A more detailed review is provided about developments over the past 10–15 years. The chapter then explores a number of emerging challenges, including telephone contact of potential respondents, computer-assisted surveys, Internet surveys, mixed-mode surveys, the impacts of language and literacy and the potentials of mobile technologies. Based on this, the chapter then considers future directions that should be pursued. The chapter suggests that it has been changes in survey methodology that have, in the past, sometimes enabled and at other times led to changes in modelling paradigms, and that this may be an appropriate time for travel survey methodology again to enable changes in modelling paradigms. A speculative specification of a new household travel survey that makes use of a number of these developments is then offered. The chapter ends with some concluding remarks that issue a challenge to the travel survey community to think ‘outside the box’ and foster change and improvement in the accuracy and representativeness of travel surveys.