A methodological framework for measuring the level of convenience of transport ticketing systems
Public transport sustainability is becoming a major driver for public transport development. Public transport ridership represents one of the key performance indicators of sustainability in the sense of balancing the economic, social and environmental aspects of public transport. There are various methods for improving the attractiveness of public transport for passengers by reducing resistances, which discourage potential and existing passengers to use public transport. Transport ticketing is one of the methods. This article presents a methodological framework for evaluating transport ticketing technologies with the use of a transport ticketing convenience model developed by the authors as well as some survey results through the application of the developed framework on traditional smart ticketing and contactless payment card ticketing technologies. First, a methodological framework for modelling ticketing convenience based on end-to-end passenger experience is presented. Second, a ticketing convenience model for barrier-free and double-sided validation baseline ticketing systems is developed. Third, the ticketing system based on contactless bank payment cards is compared with traditional smart ticketing systems in terms of convenience. It is shown that a contactless payment cards ticketing system has greater convenience or a better, more seamless travel experience than traditional smart systems. Finally, some research perspectives on enhancing the ticketing convenience model by using mobile smartphones with NFC, BLE and GPS technology, as well as the inclusion of technologies related to ticketing such as passenger information systems into the model, are contemplated.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Annema, J. A. 2013. Transport resistance factors: time, money and effort, in B. Van Wee, J. A. Annema, D. Banister (Eds.). The Transport System and Transport Policy: an Introduction, 101–124.
Ben-Akiva, M.; Walker, J.; Bernardino, A. T.; Gopinath, D. A.; Morikawa, T.; Polydoropoulou, A. 1999. Integration of Choice and Latent Variable Models. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. US. 40 p.
Berry, L. L.; Seiders, K.; Grewal, D. 2002. Understanding service convenience, Journal of Marketing 66(3): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.18.104.22.16805
Bevan, N.; Carter, J.; Harker, S. 2015. ISO 9241-11 revised: what have we learnt about usability since 1998?, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 9169: 143–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20901-2_13
Brakewood, C. 2010. Contactless Prepaid and Bankcards in Transit Fare Collection Systems: MSc Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US. 122 p. Available from Internet: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/60796
Brakewood, C.; Kocur, G. 2011. Modeling transit rider preferences for contactless bank cards as fare media: transport for London and the Chicago, Illinois, transit authority, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2216: 100–107. https://doi.org/10.3141/2216-11
Brakewood, C.; Rojas, F.; Robin, J.; Sion, J.; Jordan, S. 2014. Forecasting mobile ticketing adoption on commuter rail, Journal of Public Transportation 17(1): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.17.1.1
Buehler, R.; Pucher, J. 2012. Demand for public transport in Germany and the USA: an analysis of rider characteristics, Transport Reviews 32(5): 541–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2012.707695
Crockett, J.; Hounsell, N. 2005. Role of the travel factor convenience in rail travel and a framework for its assessment, Transport Reviews 25(5): 535–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640500064389
Davis, F. D. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quar-terly 13(3): 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Farquhar, J. D.; Rowley, J. 2009. Convenience: a services perspective, Marketing Theory 9(4): 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593109346894
Ferreira, H.; Teixeira, A. A. C. 2013. Welcome to the experience economy: assessing the inﬂuence of customer experience literature through bibliometric analysis, FEP Working Papers 481: 1–29.
Graham, P.; Mulley, C. 2012. Public transport pre-pay tickets: Understanding passenger choice for different products, Transport Policy 19(1): 69–75. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.07.003
Hsu, C.-C.; Sandford, B. A. 2007. The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus, Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 12(10): 1–8.
ISO 9241-11:1998. Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with Visual Display Terminals (VDTs). Part 11: Guidance on Usability.Johnston, R.; Kong, X. 2011. The customer experience: a road‐map for improvement, Managing Service Quality: an International Journal 21(1): 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/09604521111100225
Joppien, J. 2013. Improving System Adoption of the OV-Chip-kaart: MSc Thesis. Delft University of Technology. Netherlands. 176 p. Available from Internet: http://studiolab.ide.tudelft.nl/studiolab/ovchipkaart/files/2014/06/OVCP-TUD-System-Adoption-Joppien.pdf
Joppien, J.; Niermeijer, G.; Niks, M. C.; Van Kuijk, J. I. 2013. Exploring New Possibilities for User-Centred E-Ticketing. Analysis Report. Delft University of Technology, Netherlands. 208 p.
Mallat, N.; Rossi, M.; Tuunainen, V. K.; Öörni, A. 2008. An empirical investigation of mobile ticketing service adoption in public transportation, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 12(1): 57–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-006-0126-z
Nielsen, J. 1993. Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann. 362 p.
Oxford English Dictionary. 2016. Available from Internet: http://www.oed.com
Pine, B. J.; Gilmore, J. H. 1998. Welcome to the experience economy, Harvard Business Review 76(4): 97–105.
Puhe, M.; Edelmann, M.; Reichenbach, M. 2014. Integrated Urban E-Ticketing for Public Transport and Touristic Sites. Final Report on Application Concepts and the Role of Involved Stakeholders. European Parliamentary Research Service. 96 p.
Rogers, E. M. 1995. Diffusion of Innovations. 4th edition. Free Press. 518 p.
Smart Card Alliance. 2008. Serving Unbanked Consumers in the Transit Industry with Prepaid Cards. A Smart Card Alliance Transportation Council White Paper. Publication No TC-08002. New Jersey, US. 31 p. Available from Internet: http://www.smartcardalliance.org/resources/lib/Serving_Unbanked_Transit_Riders_White_Paper.pdf
Smart Card Alliance. 2011. A Guide to Prepaid Cards for Transit Agencies. A Smart Card Alliance Transportation Council White Paper. Publication No TC-11001. New Jersey, US. 38 p. Available from Internet: http://www.smartcardalliance.org/resources/pdf/Prepaid_Cards_for_Transit_Agencies_20110212.pdf
The UK Cards Association Ltd. 2015. Contactless Transit. Available from Internet: http://www.theukcardsassociation.org.uk/contactless_transport/index.asp
Tirachini, A. 2013. Estimation of travel time and the benefits of upgrading the fare payment technology in urban bus services, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 30: 239–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2011.11.007
TfL. 2016. Card Clash. Transport for London (TfL), UK. Available from Internet: https://tfl.gov.uk/fares-and-payments/oyster/using-oyster/card-clash
Triantaphyllou, E.; Shu, B.; Nieto Sanchez, S.; Ray, T. 1998. Multi-criteria decision making: an operations research approach, in J. G. Webster (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Electrical and Electronics Engineering 15: 175–186.
Turner, M.; Wilson, R. 2010. Smart and integrated ticketing in the UK: Piecing together the jigsaw, Computer Law & Security Review 26(2): 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2010.01.015
Velasquez, M.; Hester, P. T. 2013. An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods, International Journal of Operations Research 10(2): 56–66.
Venkatesh, V.; Bala, H. 2008. Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions, Decision Sciences 39(2): 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
Zardari, N. H.; Ahmed, K.; Shirazi, S. M.; Yusop, Z. B. 2015. Weighting Methods and their Effects on Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model Outcomes in Water Resources Management. Springer. 166 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12586-2