Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Volume 2015, Article ID 236216, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/236216
Research Article

Choice Model and Influencing Factor Analysis of Travel Mode for Migrant Workers: Case Study in Xi’an, China

School of Highway, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China

Received 17 July 2014; Accepted 22 September 2014

Academic Editor: Geert Wets

Copyright © 2015 Hong Chen 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. A. A. Ahern and N. Tapley, “The use of stated preference techniques to model modal choices on interurban trips in Ireland,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 15–27, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. F. Bastin, C. Cirillo, and P. L. Toint, “Application of an adaptive Monte Carlo algorithm to mixed logit estimation,” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 40, no. 7, pp. 577–593, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. M. Beuthe and C. Bouffioux, “Analysing qualitative attributes of freight transport from stated orders of preference experiment,” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 105–128, 2008. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. M. C. J. Bliemer, J. M. Rose, and D. A. Hensher, “Efficient stated choice experiments for estimating nested logit models,” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 19–35, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. M. C. J. Bliemer and J. M. Rose, “Construction of experimental designs for mixed logit models allowing for correlation across choice observations,” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 720–734, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. O. A. Nielsen, “A stochastic transit assignment model considering differences in passengers utility functions,” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 377–402, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. J. L. Bowman and M. E. Ben-Akiva, “Activity-based disaggregate travel demand model system with activity schedules,” Transportation Research A: Policy and Practice, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 1–28, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. D. A. Hensher and W. H. Greene, “Specification and estimation of the nested logit model: alternative normalisations,” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 1–17, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. D. A. Hensher and J. M. Rose, “Development of commuter and non-commuter mode choice models for the assessment of new public transport infrastructure projects: a case study,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 428–443, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. O. Ivanova, “A note on the consistent aggregation of nested logit demand functions,” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 890–895, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. W. Saleh and S. Farrell, “Implications of congestion charging for departure time choice: work and non-work schedule flexibility,” Transportation Research A: Policy and Practice, vol. 39, no. 7–9, pp. 773–791, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. S. Hess, T. Adler, and J. W. Polak, “Modelling airport and airline choice behaviour with the use of stated preference survey data,” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 221–233, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. V. Kwigizie, D. Chimba, and T. Sando, “A cross-nested logit model for trip type-mode choice: an application,” Advances in Transportation Studies, vol. 2011, no. 23, p. 29, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  14. G. Bel, “Changes in travel time across modes and its impact on the demand for inter-urban rail travel,” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 43–52, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. 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: Policy and Practice, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 401–419, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. S. Hess, A. Daly, C. Rohr, and G. Hyman, “On the development of time period and mode choice models for use in large scale modelling forecasting systems,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 802–826, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. N. Limtanakool, M. Dijst, and T. Schwanen, “The influence of socioeconomic characteristics, land use and travel time considerations on mode choice for medium- and longer-distance trips,” Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 327–341, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. D. McFadden, “Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior,” in Frontiers of Econometrics, P. Zarembka, Ed., pp. 105–142, Academic Press, New York, NY, USA, 1973. View at Google Scholar