Transit
Frequency and real-time info help transit riders most
How can transit agencies and app developers best help people use transit, at a lower cost than adding new transit service? Two new studies suggest that real-time information, for simple trips, and service frequencies, for complex trips, can best help riders.
Photo by DCMatt on Flickr.
A study of Seattle's OneBusAway mobile app, just released at the Transportation Research Board meeting, shows that real-time information decreases wait time by almost 20%, and decreases the amount of time riders think they are waiting by about 30%.
However, for trips involving one or more transfers, real-time information is less useful because riders don't know exactly when they will get to the transfer point. For these trips, another study found that both novice and experienced riders benefit most from having data on the frequency of service for each line they can take.
In the DC region, travelers often can choose among many transit routes and modes. To help travelers, maps and apps display a variety of information, like the routes in a geographically accurate or diagram form, vehicle arrival times or positions, and more.
It would be extremely useful to transit users, transit agencies, and app designers to understand exactly what displayed information is really helping travelers make better choices. Fortunately, Hartwig Hochmair, now a professor at the University of Florida, designed a clever web experiment (PDF) that helps answer this very question.
For simplicity, let's assume that travelers want to find the fastest route. Not all do; some prefer a trip where they can get a seat, or prefer the smooth ride of rails over a bus. But many do want to minimize overall travel time.
However, it's not always simple to figure out the fastest route. Maps can't contain all the information to decide this perfectly, and the rider usually has limited time to make a choice. So travelers quickly pick a subset of information, one of several "proxy variables," and use it to choose a route, such as:
- Shortest total distance
- Fewest number of stops traveled
- Most linear route, heading straight toward the destination
- Fewest transfers, for less total waiting time
- Most transfer options at each station, allowing a switch to the first train in the direction of the destination
Do people choose different proxy criteria depending on how a map displays the information? Hochmair asked experiment participants to plan trips on the metro system in Vienna, Austria. That system has many interconnected lines, giving riders many choices among complex routes.
The geographic map of the Vienna U- and S-Bahn used in the experiment.
Hochmair's participants saw 5 different displays:
- A geographically accurate map
- A diagrammatic map based on the official map
- A map showing the real-time positions of vehicles
- A map with service frequencies, showing the time between arrivals per line
- A map showing the next departure time for all lines from the starting point
He tested 35 people with varying levels of Vienna metro experience by giving them 40 route-finding problems apiece. Based on the routes chosen, he was able to use a statistical model to conclude that while people used distance information in every map, the different maps also caused people to use different proxy criteria for planning their route:
- The geographically accurate map led people to pay attention to the number of stops traveled.
- The diagrammatic map, and the map showing next departures, led people to pay more attention to the total number of transfers.
- The map showing service frequencies caused people to pay more attention to the number of transfer options at each stop.
Which of these maps is the best to help people minimize travel time? For the complex trips in Hochmair's study, inexperienced users benefited most from having service frequencies. Meanwhile, for experienced users, service frequencies also turned out to be best, with vehicle positions second.
The study still concludes that a map with real-time information is better than a plain map. But the usefulness of real-time information decreases as the number of transfers increases, because a traveler doesn't know exactly when they will arrive at each transfer point. For trips with more transfers, most travelers would be better off following a route where service is most frequent.
Most transit maps do not contain this information. Bus maps like WMATA's standard map (PDF), for instance, show every line the same size and weight whether it runs once an hour or every 3-5 minutes. WMATA's planning department did put together a map of routes with buses more frequent than 4 times per hour, and the agency should actively promote this clear and helpful tool.
Central DC section of 15-minute Metrobus map. Click for full map. Image from WMATA.
A final lesson of this study is that, between different traveler preferences and the different ways travelers use information, agencies and app designers must keep the needs of different users in mind. But all can take fairly low-cost steps to help riders by making service frequency information more prominent.
Matt Caywood is a DC resident working in Tysons Corner. He is a neuroscience and computer science researcher, and a volunteer advisor and collaborator to Arlington’s Mobility Lab Transit Tech Initiative.
  |
Comments
- Young kids try to assault me while biking
- Focus transportation on downtown or neighborhoods?
- Metro bag searches aren't always optional
- Endless zoning update delay hurts homeowners
- DDOT agrees to repave 15th Street cycle track
- Redeveloping McMillan is the only way to save it
- Vienna Metro town center won't have a town center
I've long suspected that transit agencies don't want NEW customers or NEW trips. given that they lose money -- according to them - on every trip, getting more peple to travel has a backwards incentive.
Circulator is a great example. What started off simple (one line) has merged into a confusing morass of 5-6 lines. Stops change on an arbitrary basis. Tourits in Georgetown are constanly confused by the R-Dupoint line vs the Union station line.
Rail is for tourists. Bus is for pros.
by charlie on Jan 25, 2012 11:54 am • link • report
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=marginal+cost+vs+average+cost&gbv=2&oq=marginal+cost+vs+aver&aq=0&aqi=g3g-b2&aql=&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=1031l6281l0l7797l33l28l4l1l1l0l313l3937l3.11.7.1l22l0
by AWalkerInTheCity on Jan 25, 2012 12:03 pm • link • report
I use real-time data in my morning commute to determine where I should transfer. Do I get off the X2 at 13th & H to get on the D6, or do I get off the X2 at 15th & I to get on a 32/36... If you have the right app (myTransit is my personal favorite, but it hasn't been updated in a while...) and the right experience to make an informed decision...
by @SamuelMoore on Jan 25, 2012 12:03 pm • link • report
I've long suspected that transit agencies don't want NEW customers or NEW trips. given that they lose money -- according to them - on every trip, getting more peple to travel has a backwards incentive.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Transit agencies would not say they "lose money on every trip" in the way you are describing. It costs an agency nothing to provide a trip as long as they don't have to increase service to do it. Each extra trip carried on existing service is a revenue increase for the agency and is beneficial.
As for your circulator comments, in what way do "stops change on an arbitrary basis?" I haven't noticed them just shifting stops on the route around without telling people. I do agree that some tourists are confused by the buses in Georgetown, but if drivers and others help them and they read the signs they will be fine. It's not mystifying.
Of course, your suggestion is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If we do nothing to make buses easier to use, then they will never be easier to use and new people won't use them. You were right all along!
by MLD on Jan 25, 2012 12:05 pm • link • report
Of course, the better solution would be to structure the routes and frequencies such that these apps aren't necessary in the first place - timed transfers, simple routing, clockface scheduling, etc.
by Alex B. on Jan 25, 2012 12:06 pm • link • report
Crazy talk, people. You might even be suggesting some as insane as cutting some of the non-rush hour fares to attract more customers. But WMATA and their little minons have been very clear -- they don't want more passengers, thank you.
@MLD; you must not ride the Gerogetown circulators much and seen the recent dance of the Wisconin Ave stops (from Wisconsisn to Barnes and Noble then back again). I had a fun time counting tourists hanging out at the previous locations.
by charlie on Jan 25, 2012 12:15 pm • link • report
You wrote:
given that they lose money -- according to them - on every trip, getting more peple to travel has a backwards incentive.
Which agencies said this? Citation?
The exact wording is important. Losing money on every trip on average is completely different from your paraphrase. Your conclusion is based on specious reasoning. Hell, you even admit as much in you 12:15 post.
You might even be suggesting some as insane as cutting some of the non-rush hour fares to attract more customers. But WMATA and their little minons have been very clear -- they don't want more passengers, thank you.
Again, have a citation?
The reality is more like WMATA has several goals they are mandated with, and they are often in conflict - such as growing ridership, yet operating on as little subsidy as possible.
by Alex B. on Jan 25, 2012 12:22 pm • link • report
I've transferred using real-time information a few times too. It's tricky and requires a lot of expertise -- even for the example you give, you need to know:
1) Time until first possible transfer stop
2) Time between possible transfer stops
3) Departure time of first possible transfer
4) Departure time of second possible transfer
It's possible an app could make this decision easier for commuters and frequent users. But this might be a case where all but the most demanding transit users would prefer an app that just told you where to transfer based on real-time data. The TransitGenie app in Chicago will give you transfer plans like this, I believe.
by Matt Caywood on Jan 25, 2012 12:30 pm • link • report
by Geoffrey Hatchard on Jan 25, 2012 12:32 pm • link • report
Crazy talk, people. You might even be suggesting some as insane as cutting some of the non-rush hour fares to attract more customers. But WMATA and their little minons have been very clear -- they don't want more passengers, thank you.
I would advocate that, if there were any evidence that it would raise revenue. Do you have any?
Also, if you make statements you know to be incorrect like "they lose money on each trip" then you can expect people babying you with explanations about marginal cost.
Not sure about the circulator stops, as far as I know both of those stops are still there.
by MLD on Jan 25, 2012 12:47 pm • link • report
by Matt Caywood on Jan 25, 2012 12:50 pm • link • report
Yes, you'll get more riders, but not enough to make the fare cut revenue neutral.
by Michael Perkins on Jan 25, 2012 1:36 pm • link • report
speaking of which, it was be fascinating to compare ciruclator ridership vs. WMATA bus ridership on the same streets. I've noticed on Dupont Rosslyn that the 38B seems far less crowded than it used to in DC, but the Circualtor continues to increase ridership.
by charlie on Jan 25, 2012 1:40 pm • link • report
by Joe on Jan 25, 2012 6:24 pm • link • report
1 When the Navy Yard- Union Station Circulator use to stop at First and Mass (northside) then changed and did not stop infront of Union Station then a few months later stopped across the street First and Mass (southside).
2 The Georgetown-Union Station changed stops about every 8 months until a year ago. It stopped at the Circle, Outside the Circle, on Mass just north of 1st street, then Mass Ave and North Capitol, then North Capitol and Mass.
Did they put up a sign on the stops saying the bus does not stop here anymore or telling you where to catch it hell no.
Now you cant even transfer to Circulators at the same stop.
The biggest issue is not putting a sign up at the stops when there is a change this goes for all bus systems around the area. I have seen stops that list schedules or says a bus stops here when it has not in 5 years.
by kk on Jan 25, 2012 9:01 pm • link • report
Regardless, the point is that real-time data is valuable when it's accurate, but there seem to be hardware/software issues on the Metro side of things preventing users from actually receiving accurate data during single-tracking type situations. Anything we can do to drive improvement on that side of the house, too?
by worthing on Jan 26, 2012 10:16 am • link • report
Do the single-tracked vehicles follow the planned MetroRail timetable or has the schedule itself changed? The timetable can be useful when the real-time information is defective. We're planning a related feature for Transit Near Me.
by Matt Caywood on Jan 26, 2012 11:48 am • link • report
also, +1 on Transit Near Me. It's sweet.
by worthing on Jan 26, 2012 12:56 pm • link • report
Add a Comment