Travel Behavior Survey Data Collection Instruments

2003

Household travel surveys continue to be a mainstay of transport planning and modelling efforts. With rising costs of many surveys, and the critical need for good quality data, questions are raised with increasing frequency on how best to obtain a quality survey that also provides comparable data to other household travel surveys. To try to provide some useful answers to these questions, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program sponsored a research project to develop and recommend standards for household travel surveys that would assist in maintaining a minimum standard of quality in such surveys and that would lead to greater comparability across surveys. In this paper, the state of practice with respect to specifying standards for surveys in general is reviewed. Standards for household travel surveys are found to be non-existent, while those for any type of social survey are found to be uncommon, and to deal with only a few aspects of surveys. In this research effort, over sixty possible areas for standards have been identified, of which more than forty are expected to be developed before the research is complete. This paper describes the results of work on about fourteen of these areas of standards and guidance. A number of proposed standards are outlined, including details of the analysis that, in some instances, has led to the proposals. These proposals have been developed in the North American context, but may also offer potential for other countries, especially in Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. The standards are also intended to be helpful to those who are responsible for developing requests for proposals to undertake household travel surveys, but who lack the level of knowledge and experience to be certain what to request. A number of potential standards are discussed in the paper. The first ones have to do with the initial design phases of a survey, including when a pilot survey or pretest should be done, how to determine a sample size for a pretest or pilot survey, and what is involved in comparing alternative designs within a pilot survey. The second area concerns the instrument design, and addresses such areas as the core set of questions that should be included in any household travel survey, standardising the categories for answers, and developing standard question wordings for certain questions, such as income. A third area includes issues such as the time of day to begin and end a survey, how to report time of day, how to handle answering machines and repeated requests for call backs, reducing incorrect reporting of non-mobility, proxy reporting, and specifications concerning mailing materials. The final area considered in this paper is that of coding of survey results, including missing values, coding complex variables like activities, and computing response rates. Illustrations are provided, where possible, of the consequences of not having standards and the difficulties and loss of quality that have arisen in

1996

^ I ^his paper focuses on how U.S. household travel surveys are executed and how they will I be executed in the future. Many cultural and contextual factors result in marked diffcrences between household travel surveys in the United States and those conducted in other countries. It is not the intent of this paper to deal with these differences nor to provide an overview of household travel surveys in other countries. However, the problems currently experienced in the United States may be a decade or two away for other countries; therefore, the information in this paper may be useful to survey developers abroad. This paper examines where we are in the development of household travel surveys, what forces have shaped travel surveys being conducted today, and what changes will affect the evolution of household travel surveys The paper is intended to raise challenges about the concepts that will transport household travel surveys into the next century.

ABSTRACT Household travel surveys remainan essential componentof transport planning and modelling efforts. However, with rising costs of many surveys, and the critical need for goodquality data,how best to obtain a quality survey that also provides comparable data to other household travel surveys,is a question that constantly arises. The National Cooperative Highway Research Program sponsored a research project to develop and recommend,standards for household travel surveys . The purpose of this research is toassist in maintaining a minimum,standard ofquality in household travel surveys and thuslead to greater comparability across surveys. This paper reviews t he state of practice with respect to specifying standards for surveys in general. Standards for household travel surveys are found to be non-existent, while those for any type of social survey are found to be uncommon, and deal with only a few aspects of surveys. In this research effort, over sixty possible areas for standard...

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2007

In this paper, we commence by reviewing the recent history of household travel surveys. We note some of the problems that contemporary surveys are encountering throughout the world. We also review the data demands of current and emerging travel demand models, concluding that there are many new demands being placed on data, both in terms of the extent of the data required and the accuracy and completeness of the data. Noting that the standard method for conducting most household travel surveys is, and has been for some years, a diary, we briefly explore the evolution of the diary survey from the late 1970s to the present. In the next section of the paper, we explore a number of facets of potential future data collection. We include in this the use of GPS devices to measure travel, the potential of panel designs and some of the alternatives within panel designs, the development of continuous household travel surveys, especially in Australia, and the emerging capabilities in data fusion. Using some of these emerging methods for data collection and data simulation, we then propose a new paradigm for data collection that places the emphasis on a paid, national panel that is designed as a rotating, split panel, with the cross-sectional component conducted as a continuing survey. The basis of the panel data collection is proposed as GPS with demographic data, and the continuing national sample would also use GPS at its core. The potential to add in such specialised surveys as stated choice and process surveys is also noted as an advantage of the panel approach. We also explore briefly the notion that a special access panel or panels could be included as part of the design.

Transportation Research Board Special Report, 1983

This paper describes the state of the art in data collection for travel behavior by using examples that represent the most recent advances in several areas of measurement. Sampling methods, the design and implementation of different survey instruments, the correction of travel data and the use of interactive measurement techniques are approached in this manner.

Transportation Research Record, 1982

Transportation Study Committee, under whose auspices this work was executed. we are responsible, however, for the facts and accuracy of the data presented here. The contents reflect our views and are not necessarily those of any of the participating agencies.

Transportation Research Record, 2002

This paper describes the results of an application of Internet survey methods to a household travel diary project. The project included a full field application of an Internet-based household travel diary instrument in a split sample design with conventional telephone/mail administration. The effects of this type of administration on survey response and on survey data are described. The work described in this paper demonstrates how Internet-based travel diary instruments can be used to complement other more traditional survey approaches. The Internet household travel diary instrument that was used here includes a number of features that take advantage of the computational power provided by modern servers and the graphical user interface provided by web browsers. Among these, the most important are detailed internal consistency checks that test the continuity and completeness of the activity/trip logs and interactive geocoding of trip ends. The response rates in the split sample conducted for the Las Cruces application indicate that providing an Internet option had a small positive effect. However, there are more pronounced effects on reported tripmaking -more trips reported in the Internet instrument, and on item nonresponse -lower rates with the Internet instrument. Overall, respondents who used the Internet instrument found it easy to use and appreciated having the option to complete the questionnaire at their convenience. There are clearly areas for further research, but it is equally clear that Internet-based household diary surveys can provide an important, cost-effective complement to CATI/mail methods.

2008

Transportation Research Record, 2011

negatively affects the quality of data collected. While standardized procedures are used for these surveys to ensure their quality and reliability and to improve comparability between surveys, much research in recent years has focused on enhancing participation in travel surveys through improved methods, procedures, and tools. As stated a decade ago in the TRB millennium paper on travel surveys, "the conflict between the need for increasingly detailed and frequent data on daily travel patterns and the growing difficulty in contacting and interviewing persons about their travel will require continued improvements in travel survey methods" (1). The authors believe not only that continued improvements in travel survey methods are needed but also that continuous improvement (CI) in travel survey methods is mandatory. The concept of the CI process derives from the Deming theory of management (2). CI is a never-ending effort to discover and eliminate the main causes of problems. It accomplishes this by making improvements in small steps rather than by implementing one huge improvement. CI is a management approach by which processes are constantly evaluated and improved in the light of their efficiency, effectiveness, and flexibility. These three characteristics are relevant to the current environment in which travel surveys must be implemented. The fact that CI can be called a management process does not mean that it needs to be executed by management. Management merely makes decisions about the implementation and design of the process. In fact, because travel surveys must be designed and implemented in a partnership between data users [e.g., metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and state departments of transportation] and data providers (e.g., consulting survey research and modeling firms), the application of CI principles will be most effective in such a partnership environment. In the case discussed in this paper, the partnership consisted of the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (NYMTC), the New Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) and its consultants (NuStats and Parsons Brinckerhoff), and the members of its Steering Committee and Technical Advisory Committee. These partners worked together on the 2010 regional travel survey and its predecessor, the 1997-1998 survey. The Steering Committee is composed of 30 members, including representatives from member agencies of both NYMTC and NJTPA. The five-member Technical Advisory Committee includes one professor (Arnim Meyburg, Cornell University), two MPO survey experts (Guy Rousseau, Atlanta Regional Council, and Neil Kilgren, Puget Sound Regional Council), one FHWA survey expert (Elaine Murakami), and one independent consultant specialized in travel behavior analysis (Nancy McGuckin).

Although an extensive literature is available concerning the design of travel surveys, fewer research initiatives have been carried out to determine the content of the survey itself. The objective of the present work is to identify such minimum set through a survey (MTSQ-Mini-Travel Survey Questionnaire) targeted to experts in this field. Moreover, it is investigated whether unanimity exists in the experts' opinions concerning the importance of various types of questions and whether regional and/or professional differences exist. The MTSQ survey was successfully completed by 81 respondents in October-November 2012, mainly from Europe and North America. The study identified the most important questions, which should form the core of any NHTS. This list is especially useful for countries which do not yet have implemented a NHTS, and for defining the set of questions in case a harmonized household travel survey spanning across different countries will be initialized. Secondly, the paper investigated whether unanimity exists in the experts' opinions. Our analyses clearly pinpointed different evaluations according to the experts' characteristics, thus it could be concluded that unanimity is certainly not complete. Thus, whenever developing standards for travel surveys these differences should be taken into account, according to both the prospective data users the intended data usages. Especially the differences with respect to the regional context (North-American versus European), and involvement with the NHTS should be acknowledged.