Perceived service quality in bus transit service: A structural equation approach
planning - service quality, planning - service level, mode - bus, ridership - perceptions, planning - surveys
Bus transit service, Overall Service Quality, Passengers’ perceptions, Structural Equation Modelling
This paper proposes a methodology for evaluating the quality of service perceived by users of a bus transit service. A Structural Equation Model (SEM) approach is used to reveal the unobserved latent aspects describing the service and the relationships between these aspects with the Overall Service Quality. Data from a Customer Satisfaction Survey conducted by the Transport Consortium of Granada (Spain) are analyzed. A total of 1200 surveys were collected, and two passengers’ statements about the Overall Service Quality were gathered: the first one when passengers have not reflected on the attributes describing the service, and the second one after they have thought about them. This is the first time that the Overall Service Quality of a public transport system has been jointly explained by these two overall evaluations when a SEM approach is adopted.
Some interesting results have been obtained. Three latent variables were identified representing the main characteristics of the service. The unobserved latent construct obtaining the highest weight on Overall Service Quality is Service, while Comfort and Personnel have little influence. The passengers’ evaluation better explaining the Overall Service Quality is the evaluation made when passengers have reflected on the service.
The findings of this research can provide operating companies and transport managers valuable information for designing appropriate transport policies attracting new passengers and retaining the current ones.
Permission to publish the abstract has been given by Elsevier, copyright remains with them.
de Oña, J., de Oña, R., Eboli, L., & Mazzulla, G. (2013). Perceived service quality in bus transit service: A structural equation approach. Transport Policy, Vol. 29, pp. 219-226.