2005
DOI: 10.3141/1920-03
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Driver Assessment of Service Quality on Urban Streets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Kittelson and Roess (2001) divulged that besides quantitative analysis, LOS should also be based on drivers perception on the quality of service provided by urban street segments depending on several characteristics like travel efficiency, sense of safety and aesthetics. Flannery et al (2005) developed a relationship between quantitative services to qualitative service measuring methods for urban streets. The researchers found that the LOS calculated by "Highway Capacity Manual" methodology envisages 35% of the variance in mean driver rating.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kittelson and Roess (2001) divulged that besides quantitative analysis, LOS should also be based on drivers perception on the quality of service provided by urban street segments depending on several characteristics like travel efficiency, sense of safety and aesthetics. Flannery et al (2005) developed a relationship between quantitative services to qualitative service measuring methods for urban streets. The researchers found that the LOS calculated by "Highway Capacity Manual" methodology envisages 35% of the variance in mean driver rating.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Flannery et al [12] showed that the LoS calculated as per US-HCM methodology could only explain 35 % of the variance in the mean drivers' rating of an urban street and that there were several non-operational factors such as travel efficiency, sense of safety and aesthetics that exhibited strong and statistically significant correlations with the mean drivers' rating. This latter conclusion was also confirmed by Washburn et al [13] as they found that in addition to traffic density, drivers also considered operational factors such as speed variance and mean speed as a percentage of free-flow speed along with non-traffic related factors such as pavement quality and driver etiquette for determining QoS on rural freeways.…”
Section: User-based Los Definitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kittelson and Roess (2001) have noted down that the current HCM methodologies have not been based upon user perception surveys [5]. Flannery et al (2005) while relating quantitative to qualitative service measuring methods for urban streets found that level of service calculated by HCM 2000 methodology, predicted 35% of the variance in mean driver rating. The authors have suggested that LOS does not completely represent drivers' assessments of performance of urban streets because drivers perceive the quality of urban street segments in several dimensions, including travel efficiency, sense of safety, and aesthetics [6].…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%