Transport risk evaluations associated with past exposure to adverse security events in public transport
place - europe, place - urban, ridership - perceptions, planning - personal safety/crime, planning - surveys
Risk perception, Experience, Worry, Public transport, Demand
The current study aims to examine differences in risk evaluations according to whether individuals have been exposed to adverse security events in transport during the last five years. In addition, a path model is tested where risk evaluations predict intentions to use public transport and use of such transport in these groups. The results are based on a survey conducted in a randomly obtained representative sample of the Norwegian urban public (n = 1043). The results showed that individuals who had been exposed to adverse security events in public transport reported substantially higher risk perception of experiencing security issues in such transport than those who were not exposed. Exposed individuals also reported higher probability judgements and more worry of experiencing injury in public transport. The path model showed that high probability judgements of experiencing injury in public transport were related to a lower intention of using such transport, whereas corresponding worry in the private motorized sector predicted a stronger intention to use public transport. Demand for risk mitigation in the public transport sector was found to be more relevant for intentions to use public transport than similar demands in the private motorized sector. The path model and coefficients were not found to differ significantly according to exposure to security events in public transport. The findings are discussed in relation to the role of negative risk experiences for risk evaluations in transport.
Permission to publish the abstract has been given by Elsevier, copyright remains with them.
Nordfjærn, T., & Rundmo, T. (2018). Transport risk evaluations associated with past exposure to adverse security events in public transport. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol.53, pp.14-23.