About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 492307, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/492307
Research Article

Modeling the Joint Choice Decisions on Urban Shopping Destination and Travel-to-Shop Mode: A Comparative Study of Different Structures

Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Urban Planning and Decision Making Simulation, Shenzhen Graduate School, Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China

Received 5 November 2013; Revised 10 February 2014; Accepted 12 February 2014; Published 13 March 2014

Academic Editor: Huimin Niu

Copyright © 2014 Chuan Ding et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. W. W. Recker and L. P. Kostyniuk, “Factors influencing destination choice for the urban grocery shopping trip,” Transportation, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 19–33, 1978. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. C. R. Bhat and J. Guo, “A mixed spatially correlated logit model: formulation and application to residential choice modeling,” Transportation Research Part B, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 147–168, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. A. Sivakumar and C. R. Bhat, “Comprehensive, unified framework for analyzing spatial location choice,” Transportation Research Record, no. 2003, pp. 103–111, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. C. R. Bhat, “Work travel mode choice and number of non-work commute stops,” Transportation Research Part B, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 41–54, 1997. View at Scopus
  5. A. de Palma and D. Rochat, “Mode choices for trips to work in Geneva: an empirical analysis,” Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 43–51, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. C. A. Tringides, X. Ye, and R. M. Pendyala, “Departure-time choice and mode choice for nonwork trips alternative formulations of joint model systems,” Transportation Research Record, no. 1898, pp. 1–9, 2004. View at Scopus
  7. S. Bajwa, S. Bekhor, M. Kuwahara, and E. Chung, “Discrete choice modeling of combined mode and departure time,” Transportmetrica, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 155–177, 2008. View at Scopus
  8. A. Vega and A. Reynolds-Feighan, “A methodological framework for the study of residential location and travel-to-work mode choice under central and suburban employment destination patterns,” Transportation Research Part A, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 401–419, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. L. Yang, G. Zheng, and X. Zhu, “Cross-nested logit model for the joint choice of residential location, travel mode, and departure time,” Habitat International, vol. 38, pp. 157–166, 2013.
  10. J. Scheiner, “Interrelations between travel mode choice and trip distance: trends in Germany 1976–2002,” Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 75–84, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. G. de Jong, A. Daly, M. Pieters, C. Vellay, M. Bradley, and F. Hofman, “A model for time of day and mode choice using error components logit,” Transportation Research Part E, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 245–268, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. S. Hess, M. Fowler, T. Adler, and A. Bahreinian, “A joint model for vehicle type and fuel type choice: evidence from a cross-nested logit study,” Transportation, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 593–625, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. A. Papola, “Some developments on the cross-nested logit model,” Transportation Research Part B, vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 833–851, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. M. Bierlaire, “A theoretical analysis of the cross-nested logit model,” Annals of Operations Research, vol. 144, no. 1, pp. 287–300, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  15. S. Hess and J. W. Polak, “Exploring the potential for cross-nesting structures in airport-choice analysis: a case-study of the Greater London area,” Transportation Research Part E, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 63–81, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. M. D. Abkowitz, “An analysis of the commuter departure time decision,” Transportation, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 283–297, 1981. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. K. A. Small, “The scheduling of consumer activities: work trips,” American Economic Review, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 467–479, 1982. View at Scopus
  18. D. McFadden, “Modeling the choice of residential location,” in Spatial Interaction Theory and Residential Location, A. Karlqvist, Ed., pp. 75–96, North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1978.
  19. C.-H. Wen and F. S. Koppelman, “The generalized nested logit model,” Transportation Research Part B, vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 627–641, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. A. Daly and M. Bierlaire, “A general and operational representation of generalised extreme value models,” Transportation Research Part B, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 285–305, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. S. Bekhor and J. N. Prashker, “GEV-based destination choice models that account for unobserved similarities among alternatives,” Transportation Research Part B, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 243–262, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. R. Cervero, “Built environments and mode choice: toward a normative framework,” Transportation Research Part D, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 265–284, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. R. Ewing and R. Cervero, “Travel and the built environment,” Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 265–294, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. M. Bierlaire, “The network of GEV model,” in Proceeding of the 2nd Swiss Transport Research Conference, Verita, Switzerland, 2002.
  25. M. Bierlaire, “BIOGEME: a free package for the estimation of discrete choice models,” in Proceeding of the 3rd Swiss Transport Research Conference, Monte Verita, Switzerland, 2003.
  26. S. Hess, J. M. Rose, and D. A. Hensher, “Asymmetric preference formation in willingness to pay estimates in discrete choice models,” Transportation Research Part E, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 847–863, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. E. Pels, N. Njegovan, and C. Behrens, “Low-cost airlines and airport competition,” Transportation Research Part E, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 335–344, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus