effectiveness of different approaches to … · 2019-02-19 · shrp2 l14 effectiveness of different...
Post on 26-Dec-2019
4 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
SHRP2 L14
EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT
APPROACHES TO
DISSEMINATING TRAVELER
INFORMATION
ON TRAVEL TIME RELIABILITY
SHRP2 L14 Closeout Meeting – September 26, 2012
Meeting Agenda
Welcome
Part 1: Introduction
Part 2: Assessment of the Project
Part 3: Discussion and Comments on Deliverables
Part 4: Next Steps
Conclusion
2
Beverly Kuhn, TTI
Part 1: Introduction
Introductions
4
Meeting Objectives
REVIEW context, history, and main outcomes of
the SHRP2 L14 project.
DISCUSS comments on Guidebook/Lexicon and
Final Report.
CONCUR on completion timeline, review process
for deliverables, publication issues, and
implementation.
5
Bias / Conflict of Interest Policies
6
Beverly Kuhn, TTI
Karl Wunderlich, Noblis
Part 2: Assessment of the Project
The Elevator Speech
This project seeks to develop a
lexicon of terms that
transportation agencies can
use in messages to users
concerning the reliability of
travel times and facilities in
their systems.
8
Context
9
Uses of reliability information by transportation
profession.
Mobility performance measures.
Planning and project prioritization.
Transit system performance monitoring.
Context
10
Use of reliability information by system users.
Trip planning for habitual trips when new to an area.
Pre-trip planning information immediately prior to
departure.
En route prior to a route or mode choice point.
L-14 Project Objectives
11
Provide agencies with tools to expand the uses of
reliability information to.
Communicate with policy makers.
Communicate with system users.
Develop lexicon of terms or “phrase book”.
Update Valuation ($$) of Reliability information in
Utility Functions.
Develop Guidebook and Deployment Advisory.
Document research results.
Guidebook / Lexicon
• What is reliability information?
• How does it differ from real-time traveler information?
• How can reliability information be conveyed?
• How can the impacts of reliability information be valued?
• What forms of reliability information are most effective?
Innovation Scan, State of Practice Report, Expert Interviews
Pha
se 1
:
Foun
da
tiona
l Rese
arc
h
Pha
se 2
:
Focu
sed
Exp
eri
ment
s
Focus Groups/ Surveys Precursor Experiment
Field Operational Test
SHRP2 L14: GUIDEBOOK DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
5
Guidebook / Lexicon
• What is reliability information?
• How does it differ from real-time traveler information?
• How can reliability information be conveyed?
• How can the impacts of reliability information be valued?
• What forms of reliability information are most effective?
Innovation Scan, State of Practice Report, Expert Interviews
Focus Groups/ Surveys Precursor Experiment
Field Operational Test
Definition of travel time reliability information
Current forms and media for reliability information
Pha
se 1
:
Foun
da
tiona
l Rese
arc
h
Pha
se 2
:
Focu
sed
Exp
eri
ment
s
SHRP2 L14: CONTRIBUTIONS OF INITIAL FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH PRODUCTS
6
Guidebook / Lexicon
• What is reliability information?
• How does it differ from real-time traveler information?
• How can reliability information be conveyed?
• How can the impacts of reliability information be valued?
• What forms of reliability information are most effective?
Innovation Scan, State of Practice Report, Expert Interviews
Focus Groups/ Surveys Precursor Experiment
Field Operational Test
Definition of travel time reliability information
Current forms and media for reliability information
Evaluation methodology
Serenity-sensitive utility function
Preferred terms
Alternative media
Pha
se 1
:
Foun
da
tiona
l Rese
arc
h
Pha
se 2
:
Focu
sed
Exp
eri
ment
s
SHRP2 L14: CONTIBUTIONS OF SURVEYS AND PRECURSOR EXPERIMENT
7
Guidebook / Lexicon
• What is reliability information?
• How does it differ from real-time traveler information?
• How can reliability information be conveyed?
• How can the impacts of reliability information be valued?
• What forms of reliability information are most effective?
Innovation Scan, State of Practice Report, Expert Interviews
Focus Groups/ Surveys Precursor Experiment
Field Operational Test
Definition of travel time reliability information
Current forms and media for reliability information
Evaluation methodology
Serenity-sensitive utility function
Preferred terms
Alternative media
Pha
se 1
:
Foun
da
tiona
l Rese
arc
h
Pha
se 2
:
Focu
sed
Exp
eri
ment
s
SHRP2 L14: CONTIBUTIONS OF SURVEYS AND PRECURSOR EXPERIMENT
7
• Web interface outside control
of research team
• Inability to vary information
displays to test multiple
scenarios
• What is reliability information?
• How does it differ from real-time traveler information?
• How can reliability information be conveyed?
• How can the impacts of reliability information be valued?
• What forms of reliability information are most effective?
Innovation Scan, State of Practice Report, Expert Interviews
Focus Groups/ Surveys Precursor Experiment
Expanded Experimentation
Definition of travel time reliability information
Current forms and media for reliability information
Evaluation methodology
Serenity-sensitive utility function
Preferred terms
Alternative media
Pha
se 1
:
Foun
da
tiona
l Rese
arc
h
Pha
se 2
:
Focu
sed
Exp
eri
ment
s
SHRP2 L14: CONTRIBUTIONS OF EXPANDED EXPERIMENTATION
8
Guidebook / Lexicon
• What is reliability information?
• How does it differ from real-time traveler information?
• How can reliability information be conveyed?
• How can the impacts of reliability information be valued?
• What forms of reliability information are most effective?
Innovation Scan, State of Practice Report, Expert Interviews
Focus Groups/ Surveys Precursor Experiment
Expanded Experimentation
Definition of travel time reliability information
Current forms and media for reliability information
Evaluation methodology
Serenity-sensitive utility function
Preferred terms
Alternative media
Evaluated forms and terms
Valuation of reliability info
Pha
se 1
:
Foun
da
tiona
l Rese
arc
h
Pha
se 2
:
Focu
sed
Exp
eri
ment
s
SHRP2 L14: CONTRIBUTIONS OF EXPANDED EXPERIMENTATION
8
Guidebook / Lexicon
Guidebook / Lexicon
• What is reliability information?
• How does it differ from real-time traveler information?
• How can reliability information be conveyed?
• How can the impacts of reliability information be valued?
• What forms of reliability information are most effective?
Innovation Scan, State of Practice Report, Expert Interviews
Focus Groups/ Surveys Precursor Experiment
Expanded Experimentation
Definition of travel time reliability information
Current forms and media for reliability information
Evaluation methodology
Serenity-sensitive utility function
Preferred terms
Alternative media
Evaluated forms and terms
Valuation of reliability info
Pha
se 1
:
Foun
da
tiona
l Rese
arc
h
Pha
se 2
:
Focu
sed
Exp
eri
ment
s
SHRP2 L14: RELIABILITY INFORMAITON GUIDEBOOK DEVELOPMENT
9
Reliability Information
19
Reliability information describes underlying trip
variability and includes other contextual data
travelers use to manage on-time performance, e.g.:
Information describing the statistical variation in travel time
dependent on departure time choice.
Data describing on-time performance and lateness risk by
route, mode and destination.
Contextual information to interpret cueing throughout the
travel experience allowing travelers to better assess travel
time and lateness risk both pre-trip and en route.
Examples of Reliability Information
as communicated “person-to-person”
20
Statistical variation in travel times.
To get to the airport at 3 PM, normally it will take 45 minutes, but you’d
better plan for 75 minutes just in case.
If you wait until 4 PM to leave, then plan for at least 2 hours.
Lateness risk descriptions.
Budgeting only 60 minutes between these two meetings? You’ve got a 50-
50 chance of arriving before we start without you.
Contextual information to interpret real-time cueing.
If you find traffic backed up to Exit 4, then you know you’ve got at least
another 30 minutes to go.
Interplay between Reliability and Real-
Time Information in Decision Making
21
My last trip was
about an hour
MY
EXPERIENCE
REAL-TIME
INFO/CUEING
The last traffic report
didn’t mention the
freeway I use
HOW LONG SHOULD I EXPECT THIS TRIP TO TAKE?
RELIABILITY
INFORMATION
Great Day: 35 min
Good Day: 40 min
Bad Day: 75 min
*XDOT 6mo archive
Reliability Information has Highest
Influence When Trip Experience is Low
22
I have never taken
this trip before
MY
EXPERIENCE
REAL-TIME
INFO/CUEING
What radio station
carries traffic
information?
HOW LONG SHOULD I EXPECT THIS TRIP TO TAKE?
RELIABILITY
INFORMATION
Great Day: 35 min
Good Day: 40 min
Bad Day: 75 min
*XDOT 6mo archive
(weak)
(weak) (strong)
Beverly Kuhn (TTI)
Phase 1: Foundational Research
Beverly Kuhn (TTI)
Literature Review
Literature Review
25
Travel time reliability metrics.
Importance of travel time reliability for highway travel, transit, and freight.
State of the practice.
Real-time travel information.
Language used by lay people to talk about range, standard deviation, confidence intervals.
Language from other fields.
Washington State DOT
26
San Francisco Bay 511.org
27
FlightStats.com
28
Beverly Kuhn (TTI)
Expert Interviews
Interview Topics
30
Current methods and experiences related to use of travel reliability information.
State DOTs.
Private sector.
Value of reliability information.
The public.
Transportation operations staff
Public officials.
Potential impacts, goals, challenges.
Little dissemination of reliability information currently.
Key Findings
31
Value to the public.
Believe has value to the public.
Gives an idea of “riskiness”.
Value to operations staff and public officials.
Used to assess performance of the system.
Help determine where improvements are needed.
Used to manage networks and justify programs to improve performance.
Help understand the impact of non-recurring congestion on system performance.
Potential Impacts
32
Highly dependent upon whether or not the public
understands the information provided.
Information accuracy important.
Dependent upon the actual number of travelers who
will use the information for trip planning.
Inrix Traffic!
33
Challenges to Dissemination
34
Inability to quickly collect and analyze data.
Limited staffing.
Determining a format that will be accepted and
understood by users.
Need for quality data.
Implementations in multi-jurisdictional areas.
Short and Long-term Goals
35
Most agencies beginning to discuss the idea of providing reliability information to the public.
Potential media.
Internet.
511 systems.
Mobile phone applications.
Agencies already providing information.
Improve data quality.
Expand coverage.
Provide customizable reports and statistics.
Provide new media options.
Beverly Kuhn (TTI)
Technology and Innovation Scan
Technology and Innovation Scan
37
Innovations in the marketplace.
In-vehicle systems changing and
expanding.
Safety implications.
Market forces.
Crowdsourcing, web-based
innovations.
Consolidation and integration.
Better Data to Come
38
Innovative Media
39
Navigon 5100 3.5-Inch
Portable GPS Navigator with Text-to-Speech and Lifetime Traffic
Magellan Maestro 4050
4.3-Inch Widescreen Bluetooth Portable GPS
Navigator
Garmin nüvi 650 4.3-
Inch Widescreen Portable GPS
Navigator
TomTom GO 920
Portable GPS Vehicle Navigator
Beverly Kuhn (TTI)
Develop Avenues of Investigation
Develop Avenues of Investigation
41
Assessment of results.
Literature review.
Expert interviews.
Technology scan.
Identified key research issues.
Direct the remaining activities.
Key Research Issues
42
Do travelers want this information?
Do they understand reliability separate from real-time information?
Do they understand concepts of average and variability?
What terms can be used to communicate these concepts?
Can travelers assign a dollar cost value to reliability information?
Is there a role for reliability information in real-time systems?
Key Research Issues
43
Do travelers want this info pre-trip or en route?
Does their desire for info change as function of trip
purpose, route, constraints?
Can travelers safely use an en route in-vehicle
system?
Do they want push or pull information systems?
How can multiple data source be displayed?
Will travelers change their habitual travel patterns
based on reliability info?
Key Research Issues
44
Do travelers want this info pre-trip or en route?
Does their desire for info change as function of trip
purpose, route, constraints?
Can travelers safely use an en route in-vehicle
system?
Do they want push or pull information systems?
How can multiple data source be displayed?
Will travelers change their habitual travel patterns
based on reliability info?
Beverly Kuhn (TTI)
Focus Groups
Focus Groups – Purpose
46
Assess understanding of reliability concepts.
Identify terms / determine desire for travel
time reliability information.
Assess desired system features.
Assess willingness to pay.
116 people.
Seattle, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Houston,
Washington DC.
Focus Groups – Script Development
47
Initial scripts contained more analog cases to elicit
discussion of reliability concepts.
E.g. Online Order Shipping Time.
Initial scripts contained more examples of web
graphs.
Much confusion among reliability and real-time
systems.
Examples of Graphics Used in Initial
Focus Groups to Elicit Reliability Terms
48
Example Web Graphic Used in Initial
Focus Groups
49
Final Focus Group Discussion Guide
Topics
50
Constrained
Arrival Time
Constrained
Departure Time
Unconstrained
Unfamiliar
Destination
Appointment
with new
doctor
Weekend evening party
Weekend getaway 3 hours away
Familiar
Destination
Regular
commute
Choosing Day of
the Week for
Class After Work
Pick up produce from farm co-op
anytime Saturday
Task Insertion Stop by neighbors to feed cat
Focus Groups – Findings
51
General interest in using information and felt it could be helpful.
Route options and mobile alerts.
Pre-trip tool, not en route.
Occasional use, especially for unfamiliar trips, cities.
Not seen as beneficial for unconstrained trips.
Difficult to convey reliability concept.
Generally unwilling to pay.
How Focus Group Results Affected
Subsequent Work
52
Inclusion of additional questions to elicit more
lexicon terms.
Addition of open-ended survey.
Addition of Noblis precursor experiment.
Reduced emphasis on graphical displays.
Beverly Kuhn (TTI)
Karl Wunderlich (Noblis)
Usability Testing, Survey, Experiment
Scope & Purpose
54
Determine comprehension and preference of
reliability terms.
Elicit additional terms for Lexicon.
Test user acceptance of reliability terms.
Determine information use, serenity benefits,
willingness to pay, swiftness of personal historical
framework.
Beverly Kuhn (TTI)
Computer Survey
Computer Survey – Purpose
56
More multiple choice questions on concepts and terms.
Preference for departure or arrival time input.
Hypothetical website
Term preferences
Input
Output
Screen titles and labels
N=300: San Jose, Dallas, Hartford, Denver, Miami.
Sites selected based on mobility report rankings, presence of transit and HOV/HOT lanes.
Survey Website
57
Key Findings
58
Most have a desire for information that a planned trip has a chance of taking longer than average.
“Average” and “95th percentile” not clearly understood by many participants.
Most participants will add time to a total trip time estimate, even if it already includes a buffer time.
Mode reliability information needs to be provided to have any effect on mode choice.
Showed preference for various terms for website interface (future trip, predict/plan trip, best route, recommended departure time, etc.).
Beverly Kuhn (TTI)
Open-ended Survey
Open-ended Questions
60
Comprehension of reliability and associated terms.
Preference of terms and reliability information.
Presented trip planning situations for an arrival time-
constrained motorist that included either.
The normal trip time and an uncertainty component.
The normal trip time and the overall trip time to plan for.
Normal Trip Time + Uncertainty of Conditions During Trip
= Trip Time to Plan For
Open-ended Survey
Open-ended Survey Terms
62
Normal Trip Time Uncertainty Component Trip Time to Plan for
Average Travel Time Added Time 95th Percentile Travel Time
Expected Travel Time Extra Time Travel Time for Planning
Typical Travel Time Cushion Time Most of the Time Less Than
Estimated Travel Time Recommended Cushion Time Majority of the Time Less Than
Open-ended Survey
63
Testing conducted in January in Hartford, San Jose,
and Dallas.
N = 190
Manual data entry and scoring required.
Key Findings
64
Buffer Time
No clear preference when assessing how participants determined trip time.
Terms “recommended cushion time” and “cushion time” selected most frequently.
May be difficult to get people to accept trip uncertainty less than they are used to experiencing.
Total Trip Time
“Majority of the time” yielded the best selection of a time to represent the 95th percentile time.
“Most of the time” also fared well.
Lower the uncertainty time, the less trusted by participants.
Decreases workload of driver – don’t have to calculate.
Key Findings
65
Comparison of Travel Time Uncertainty.
Most recognize “buffer time” or “total trip time” as an
upper limit.
Slight preference for “total trip time” over the use of
buffer terms.
Normal Travel Time
No clear preference among various terms tested –
estimated, expected, average, typical.
Any may be use to convey normal travel time.
Karl Wunderlich (Noblis)
Precursor Experiment – Utility Function
Precursor Experiment Hypotheses
67
1. Provision of accurate reliability information will result in improved on-time performance and lower generalized travel disutility
2. The perceived value of the reliability information will lag realized benefit.
3. Benefits of reliability information will decline as subjects become familiar with travel time variability
4. There is a “serenity benefit” to traveler information
Precursor Experiment Parameters
68
80 participants in 5 cities
Conducted in conjunction with computer surveys
3 levels of additive information: DMS, real-time, reliability
Each participant uses one level of traveler information throughout experiment
10 commute days, each with 3 departure times
Two decision points for route diversion
Report completed Sep 2011
RELIABILITY, REAL-TIME, AND DMS INFORMATION
SCREEN SHOT OF PRECURSOR EXPERIMENT
Participants with reliability
information on average left
earlier more often than those
without it.
Implication:
Reliability information
does influence departure
time decisions.
70
Experiment Outcomes
Findings – Hypothesis #1
Provision of reliability info results in on-time performance
improvement, and lower generalized travel disutility
Implication: Reliability information quantitatively benefits
unfamiliar time-constrained travelers
71
*schedule offset costs defined within the experiment
Findings – Hypothesis #2
72
Perceptions of benefit as measured through value of
information and trip stress do not differ statistically by
level of information whereas trip outcomes do.
Implication: Providers of reliability information may
face an uphill battle in measuring perceptional
impacts of reliability information impacts even when
such information is useful in improving trip outcomes.
Findings – Hypothesis #3 & #4
73
Decline in reliability information benefits not
observed while participants’ willingness to pay for
reliability information declined over time
Traveler do place a value on knowing they will be
late even if the trip outcome cannot be changed.
Implication-It may be that 2 weeks is insufficient for
travelers without reliability information to internalize
trip variability and perform at par with counterparts
Karl Wunderlich (Noblis)
Vaishali Shah (Noblis)
Phase 2: Focused Experiment
Experiment Hypotheses
1. Provision of reliability information improves on-time performance versus a control group that receives no reliability information
a. Some forms will be more effective than others
b. Perceived benefit will trail actual benefit
2. The provision of reliability signposts in real-time information will improve on-time performance
3. Benefits of reliability information will decrease over time as participants build a larger experience base
Expanded Experiment Changes…
Only qualitative real-time info provided, previously
quantitative & qualitative real-time info provided
Seven rather than 3 departure options
Eliminate alternate route option
Seven ‘types’ of reliability info instead of one
4-5 weeks instead of 2 weeks of simulated commute
240 participants rather than 80 participants
Two distinct sets of experiments
76
Two Distinct Experiments
Experiment #1 –Compare different forms and content of data to unfamiliar travelers
5 sets of reliability information tested by each participant through 5 weeks of simulated commuting, each week in a different city.
Experiment #2 – Compare the learning curve for unfamiliar travelers with or without reliability information
Half of participants receive simulated reliability information over a 4 week period in one city
Other half do not receive any reliability information.
Experiment #1: Test 7 Reliability Terms (based on terminology document)
78
A. Baseline radio information presented textually
B. Text-based 95th percentile
C. Text-based average plus 95th percentile
D. Text-based 20th, average, and 95th percentile
E. Reliability Signposting
F. Graphical “C” G. Graphical “D”
H. Auditory “B”
Experiment Implementation
Pre-experiment survey, commuting game, and mini
post-experiment survey for Exp#1 users
Often experiment completed within 60-70 minutes
in Washington DC, while we ‘had’ participants for
90 minutes.
Consequently, paper survey added in Chicago and
Houston requests participants rank six of seven
types of info (auditory was excluded)
Expanded Experiment Design
80
1 2 3 4 5 6
90 30 30 30 30 30
98 29 25 33 30 30
A. Control (no reliability info) P P P P P
B. Textual 95TH
P P
C. Textual Avg + 95TH
P P P P
D. Textual 20TH
+ Avg + 95TH
P P P
E. Visual and Textual signposting P
F. Graphical presentation of "C" P P
G. Graphical presentation of "D" P P P
H. Auditory presentation of "B" P P
*city refers to travel in simulated city for participants and not city of experiment implementation
Re
liab
ility
Da
ta C
on
ten
t
#1
5 cities, 1 week each city*
#2
1 city*, 4 wks.
Implementation Version
Planned Participant Count
Two Distinct Experiments:
Valid "good" Participant Count
Participant Characteristics
81
More educated sample than population at large
Older sample population than population at large
Definition of Late Arrival
Exp#1 Schedule Offset Costs
82
Schedule offset savings are statistically and practically
significant for simpler forms of reliability information
No Reliability Info
Reliability Info
*lighter shades are not statistically significant
Exp#1 Late Arrival Frequency
83
When offered simpler forms of reliability information,
participants were late less often
*lighter shades are not statistically significant No Reliability Info
Reliability Info
Exp#1 Perceived Benefits
End-of-week difference in willingness to pay often
not statistically significant between trips with and
without reliability information
End-of-week usefulness higher for ‘simple’ reliability
information but not for ‘complex’ reliability data.
Post-trip usefulness and stressfulness levels often not
statistically significant or lower for reliability terms
84
Exp#1 Comparing Delivery Media
85
Text v. Auditory 95th Percentile Info
Generally no statistically significant differences for trip
outcomes or valuation
Text rated slightly more difficult to understand compard
to auditory
Text v. Graphic Average + 95th Percentile Info
Generally no statistically significant differences for trip
outcomes and valuation with the exception of reducing
stress
Exp#1 Comparing Delivery Media
86
Text versus Graphic 20th, Average and 95th Percentile
Text data resulted in lower schedule offset costs
Text data allowed participants to better manage their
trip decisions.
Exp#2 Late Arrival Frequency
87
Benefits of reliability info decrease over time
Participants using reliability info perform on week 1
as well as their counterparts at week 4
Exp#1 Post Survey
88
Survey replies on
reliability info
usefulness and
complexity mirrors
what is observed in
the experiment.
Benefits reflects
difference between
usefulness and
complexity.
Paper Post-Experiment Survey
89
Different ratings from paper survey on the usefulness of reliability information compared to the quantified valuation observed in the first experiment.
Complex graphic rated equivalent to text 95th with regard to usefulness.
Findings – Hypothesis #1
1. Provision of reliability information does improves on-
time performance versus a control group that
receives no reliability information
a. Some forms are more effective than others
Provision of simple forms of reliability information had similar
results whether provided in text, graphic or auditory forms.
More complex graphical & signposting concepts not effective.
b. Perceived benefit do trail actual benefit
Perceived benefits unclear in presence of quantitative benefits.
Findings – Hypothesis #2
Benefits of reliability information do decrease over time
as participants build a larger experience base
The decrease is not as “quick” as expected
The gap between reliability info users and others
does not narrow.
Findings – Hypothesis #3
92
The provision of reliability signposts in real-time
information does not improve on-time performance
The signposting concept was not successful for
participants in the management of trip outcomes and
stress reduction.
To some degree, this was because of the complexity of
the presentation and the brevity with which participants
were required to learn and interpret information
content.
Potential Future Research Directions
93
Reliability information in the context of more complex
multi-modal trip, trip chain and tour planning.
Impact of reliability information on broader range of
travel-related choices.
Mechanisms of reliability information under-valuation
by users.
Beverly Kuhn, TTI
Part 3: Discussion and Comments on
Deliverables
Lexicon
95
Phrase book to be used across platforms.
Potential uses.
Public outreach.
Performance measure reports.
TMC pre-trip planning websites.
Commercial traffic routing systems.
Guidebook Chapters
96
1 – Introduction
2 – The Concept of Travel Time Reliability
3 – Key Messages
4 – Relevant Travel Time Reliability Terms
5 – Methods of Communicating Travel Time Reliability
6 – Measuring Information Effectiveness
7 – Emerging Trends
8 – Final Remarks
9 – References
Lexicon Terminology
97
95th Percentile
Arrival Time
Average Travel Time
Buffer Time
Departure Time
Recommended Departure Time
Recommended Route
Reliability
Lexicon – 95th Percentile
98
Technical Term 95th Percentile Definition The point on a travel time frequency distribution at which 95% of the trips made would be at or less than the identified time.
Usage To describe the longest time a driver can expect a trip to take.
Recommendation Alternate Phrase Wording Context / Additional
Information
Information Technology Platforms
Web Mobile
Web
Dynamic Message
Sign
Text Mobile
Application
Best
Majority of the time
“The majority of the time, your trip will take X minutes or less.”
√ √ X √+ √+
MAJORITY OF TIME TRIP TO [DESTINATION]
X MIN OR LESS
√ √ √> √ √
Graphical representation of the average + 95th percentile. √ √ X X √
Adequate
Most of the time
“Most of the time, your trip will take X minutes or less.”
√ √ X √+ √+
MOST OF THE TIME TRIP TO [DESTINATION]
X MIN OR LESS
√ √ √> √ √
Travel time for planning
“Travel time for planning is X minutes or less.”
√ √ X √+ √+
95th percentile trip time
“The 95th percentile trip time is X minutes or less.” Provide description such as “19 out of 20 days”.
√ √ X √+ √+
Avoid
Maximum trip time Agency concerns regarding liability and credibility.
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Most common trip time
Worst case trip time
Lexicon – Arrival Time
99
Technical Term Arrival Time Definition The time at which a traveler would arrive after a trip.
Usage To tell the driver when they can expect to arrive at their destination.
Recommendation Alternate Phrase Wording Context / Additional
Information
Information Technology Platforms
Web Mobile
Web
Dynamic
Message Sign
Text Mobile Applica
tion
Best Arrive by “Arrive by X:XX am / pm.” √ √ X √ √
ARRIVE BY X:XX AM/PM √ √ √>% √ √
Adequate
Arrive at “Arrive at X:XX am / pm.” √ √ X √ √
ARRIVE AT X:XX AM/PM √ √ √>% √ √
What time do you want to get there?
This question would be used by a traveler to enter a preferred arrival time into a travel time calculator to receive a recommended departure time.
√ √ X X √
What’s the earliest you can arrive
This question would be used by a traveler to enter a preferred arrival time into a travel time calculator to receive a recommended departure time.
√ √ X X √
What’s the latest you can arrive?
This question would be used by a traveler to enter a preferred arrival time into a travel time calculator to receive a recommended departure time.
√ √ X X √
Avoid
99
Lexicon – Average Travel Time
10
0
100
Technical Term Average Travel Time Definition An average of historical travel times calculated over a specified time interval for a specified trip or roadway segment.
Usage To describe the typical travel time a driver can expect a trip will take.
Recommendation Alternate Phrase Wording Context / Additional
Information
Information Technology Platforms
Web Mobile
Web
Dynamic Message
Sign
Text Mobile
Application
Best
Estimated travel time
“Estimated travel time is X minutes.” √ √ X √+ √+
“It is estimated that your trip will take X minutes.”
√ √ X √+ √+
EST THAT TRIP TO [DESTINATION] WILL TAKE X MIN
√ √ √> √ √
Approximate travel time
“It will take approximately X minutes to make your trip.”
√ √ X √+ √+
APPROX X MIN
TO [DESTINATION] √ √ √> √ √
Adequate
Typical travel time “Typical travel time is X minutes.” √ √ X √+ √+
Graphical representation of the average + 95th percentile (typical day and bad day).
√ √ X X √
Graphical representation of the 20th percentile + average + 95th percentile (good, typical, and bad day).
√ √ X X √
Average travel time “Average travel time is X minutes.” √ √ X √+ √+
Expected travel time “Expected travel time is X minutes.” √ √ X √+ √+
Avoid
Historical Travel Time
Difficult to determine relevance with no comparison to real-time information.
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Lexicon – Buffer Time
10
1
101
Technical Term Buffer Time Definition The average travel time multiplied by the buffer index.
Usage To describe how much extra time a driver should plan for a trip they wish to take.
Recommendation Alternate Phrase Wording Context / Additional Information
Information Technology Platforms
Web Mobile
Web
Dynamic Message
Sign
Text Mobile
Application
Best Extra time
“Extra time for trip is X minutes.” √ √ X √+ √+ Extra time to [destination] is X min
√ √ X √ √
Adequate
Added time
“Added time for trip is X minutes.” √ √ X √+ √+
Added time to [destination] is X min √ √ X √ √
Recommended cushion
“Recommended cushion for trip is X minutes.”
√ √ √ √+ √+
Avoid Cushion
Preference shown for other terms. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Lexicon – Departure Time
10
2
102
Technical Term Departure Time
Definition The time at which a traveler would depart for a trip. Usage To indicate the time a traveler departs for a trip. For DMS applications, message would need to be set in context with other
information, such as destination, travel time, or route.
Recommendation Alternate Phrase Wording Context / Additional
Information
Information Technology Platforms
Web Mobile
Web
Dynamic Message
Sign
Text Mobile
Application
Best Departing at “Departing at X:XX am / pm.” √ √ X √ √
Leave at “Leave at X:XX am / pm.” √ √ X √ √
Adequate
What time will you start your trip?
This question would be used by a traveler to enter a start time into a travel time calculator to receive an arrival time.
√ √ X X √
Leave by “Leave by X:XX am / pm.” √ √ X √ √
Departing by “Departing by X:XX am / pm.” √ √ X √ √
What’s the earliest you can start your trip?
This question would be used by a traveler to enter a start time into a travel time calculator to receive an arrival time.
√ √ X X √
What’s the latest you can start your trip?
This question would be used by a traveler to enter a start time into a travel time calculator to receive an arrival time.
√ √ X X √
Avoid
Lexicon – Recommended Departure Time
10
3
Technical Term Recommended Departure Time
Definition A time of departure displayed to a traveler which is calculated by a traveler information system and would ensure an on-time arrival for a given level of added delay.
Usage To indicate the time a driver should depart for a trip to ensure they arrive at their destination on time. For DMS applications, would need to be set in context with other information, such as destination, travel time, or route.
Recommendation Alternate Phrase Wording Context / Additional
Information
Information Technology Platforms
Web Mobile
Web
Dynamic Message
Sign
Text Mobile
Application
Best Recommended departure
time
“Recommended departure time is X:XX am / pm.”
√ √ X √+ √+
Adequate
Suggested departure time “Suggested departure time is X:XX am / pm.”
√ √ X √+ √+
Estimated departure time>
“Estimated departure time is X:XX am / pm.” >>
√ √ X √+ √+
95th percentile departure time
“The 95th percentile departure time is X:XX am / pm.” Provide description such as “19 out of 20 days”.
√ √ X √+ √+
Avoid
103
Lexicon – Recommended Route
10
4
104
Technical Term Recommended Route
Definition A route between two points calculated by a traveler information system which would provide the best probability of on-time arrival to a specific destination.
Usage To describe the route a driver should take for a planned trip to ensure he/she arrives on time to his/her destination.
Recommendation Alternate Phrase Wording Context / Additional
Information
Information Technology Platforms
Web Mobile
Web
Dynamic Message
Sign
Text Mobile
Application
Best Best route
“Best route is via [facility].” √ √ X √+ √+
BEST ROUTE
TO [DESTINATION] TAKE [FACILITY]
√ √ √> √ √
Adequate
Forecasted trip “Forecasted trip is via [facility].” √ √ X √+ √+
FORECASTED TRIP TIME
VIA [FACILITY] X MIN
√ √ √> √ √
Most reliable trip “Most reliable trip is via [facility].” √ √ X √+ √+
MOST RELIABLE TRAVEL TIME
TO [DESTINATION] TAKE [FACILITY]
√ √ √> √ √
Most predictable trip “Most predictable trip is via [facility].” √ √ X √+ √+
MOST PREDICTABLE TRAVEL TIME
TO [DESTINATION] TAKE [FACILITY]
√ √ √> √ √
Most consistent trip “Most consistent trip is via [facility].” √ √ X √+ √+
MOST CONSISTENT TRAVEL TIME
TO [DESTINATION] TAKE [FACILITY]
√ √ √> √ √
Avoid
Historical trip conditions Difficult to determine relevance with no comparison to real-time information. Preference shown for other terms.
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Least variable time
Lexicon – Reliability
10
5
105
Technical Term Reliability
Definition A consistency or dependability in travel times between two points, as measured from day to day or across different times of day.
Usage To describe the variability of travel times to drivers so they can plan their trip with more robust information.
Recommendation Alternate Phrase Wording Context /
Additional Information
Information Technology Platforms
Web Mobile
Web
Dynamic Message
Sign
Text Mobile
Application
Best Predictable “Most predictable trip” √ √ X √ √
Adequate
Reliable “Most reliable trip.” √ √ X √ √
Consistent “Most consistent trip.” √ √ X √ √
Vary “Trip varies.” √ √ X √ √
Avoid
Differ
Preference shown for other terms.
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Fluctuate
Change
Go up or down
Increase or decrease
Deviate
Lexicon Not Provided
106
Buffer Index
Not tested in the human factors studies.
Metric unlikely to be used by roadway users.
Delay Time
Not tested in human factors studies.
Terms tested for the related concept “buffer time”.
Free Flow Travel Time
Not tested in focus groups or surveys.
Phrase “great day” used in enhanced laboratory study along with corresponding “typical” and “bad” days.
Lexicon Not Provided
107
Peak Travel Time
Not tested in the human factors studies.
Terms tested for similar concept “95th percentile travel time”.
Planning Time
Not tested in the human factors studies.
Terms tested for similar concept “95th percentile travel time”.
“Travel time for planning” was one of the alternatives tested to represent 95th percentile travel time.
Planning Time Index
Not tested in the human factors studies.
Metric unlikely to be used by roadway users.
Lexicon Not Provided
108
Total Trip Time
Not tested in human factors studies.
A commonly-used phrase and few synonyms exist.
Travel Time Savings
Not tested in human factors studies.
A commonly-used phrase and few synonyms exist.
Travel Time Range
In computer survey, subjects more often felt a single trip time (typical/avg or 95th percentile) was reliable when compared to a travel time range.
Trend Information
Not tested in human factors studies.
Final Report
1 – Introduction
2 – Literature Review
3 – Expert Interviews
4 – Technology and Innovation Scan
5 – Develop Avenues of Investigation
6 – Focus Groups
7 – Usability Surveys
8 – Travel Behavior Laboratory Experiment
9 – Enhanced Laboratory Experiment
10 – Lexicon Development
11 – Final Remarks
12 – References
109
Beverly Kuhn, TTI
Karl Wunderlich, Noblis
Part 4: Next Steps
Project Timeline
111
Project Closeout Meeting with TETG Sep 26, 2012
Discuss comments on Draft Guidebook & Deployment Advisory
Discuss comments on Final Report
Address TETG Comments & Submit Final Documents Oct 15, 2012
Draft Guidebook & Deployment Advisory
Final Report
Review Process Oct-Jan 2013
Project Conclusion Jan 31, 2013
Product Review Process
112
Publication Issues
113
Implementation
114
How can the main outcome of this project – the
Guidebook and Deployment Advisory – be used by
an operating agency?
Who are the potential first users?
Questions
Beverly Kuhn, TTI
B-Kuhn@tamu.edu
979-862-3558
Karl Wunderlich, Noblis
kwunderl@noblis.org
202-488-5707
Vaishali Shah, Noblis
vshah@noblis.org
202-488-5715
115
top related