Transportation Users’ 

Views Of Quality

Transportation Users’

Views Of Quality

U.S. Department

of Transportation

Federal Highway

Administration

December 1997
Source and Accuracy of Sample Data

The data for this report came from the 1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation

Survey (NPTS) pretest. This was a national telephone survey that used random digit dialing

sampling methodology to obtain a stratified random sample of U.S. households. Interviews

were attempted with all adult household members. A final household interview rate of 78.7

percent was achieved. General questions about this analysis should be directed to the

Federal Highway Administration. Questions about statistical procedures used in this analysis

should be directed to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.

Sampling Variability—Sampling variability is variation that occurred by chance because a

sample was surveyed rather than the entire household population. 

We used a technique called “Jackknife repeated replication” to estimate the sampling

error in this analysis. We could not use regular textbook formulas to estimate the sampling

error because the sample was more complex than a simple random sample. The Jackknife

technique takes the complexities of the sample design into account to produce more accurate

estimates of the sampling error. Using the sample estimate and its sampling error (or

standard error), confidence intervals were constructed around each estimate and estimates of

the statistically significant differences between estimates in the tables. The “90 percent

confidence interval” means that if the NPTS pretest were repeated for all possible samples

conducted under the same conditions, 90 percent of the estimates obtained would be within

the interval of 1.645 standard errors below and above the estimate. Sampling errors shown in

this report are primarily measures of sampling variability, although they may include some

nonsampling error.

Nonsampling Variability—Nonsampling errors can be attributed to several sources

including the following:

• The inability to obtain information about all cases in the sample 

(unit and item nonresponse)

• The inability to obtain correct information from respondents

• Errors made in data collection such as recording and coding errors

• Errors made in data processing

• Failure to represent all units with the sample (noncoverage)

Since the sample excluded households without telephones, care should be taken in

interpreting results of characteristics that are known to be related to telephone ownership,

such as family income and age. For example, estimates of survey data grouped by family

income could underestimate the impact of low-income households and, therefore, not

represent the population as a whole.

Please Note: Information on the analysis of this data set is available from the 

Federal Highway Administration.

In some tables, due to rounding, values will not total exactly 100 percent.
1

Transportation Users’ Views Of Quality

Overall Transportation Evaluations 2

Views Of Highway Related Travel 7

Pavement Related 7 

Other Highway Related 8

Views Of Other Major Transport Elements 10

Urban Group 10

Intercity Group 11

Highway Use Values 11

The Positive Statements 13

The Negative Statements 14

Highway Travel Problems 19

Levels Of Transit Use 23

Transit Issues 25 

Summary 27
2

Overall Transportation Evaluations

In order to begin to understand the public’s views

regarding the transportation services it receives, as part of

the pre-test of the 1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation

Survey, a national sample of over 4,000 adults were asked a

series of questions about their reactions to many aspects of

travel, with emphasis on elements of the road system, where

most of their travel occurs. The survey was conducted by

telephone and, therefore, did not include adults without

telephones where they live. The reader should keep this in

mind when interpreting survey results that may be related to

telephone ownership, such as income and age. 

0

20

40

60

80

100

POV Walk Transit Other Bike

Main Modes By Person Miles Of Travel

Figure 1A

90% Confidence Interval

Percent

64444447444448
3

Detail Of POV As Driver Or Passenger

Figure 1B

90% Confidence Interval

Percent

0

20

40

60

80

100

POV Driver POV Passenger

Detail Of Non-POV Modes Of Travel

Figure 1C

90% Confidence Interval

0

2

4

6

Walk Transit Other Bike

Percent
4

A background question established that approximately 

91 percent (±3%)1 of adults identify driving a car, or traveling

as a passenger in a car, as their main mode of travel; 

3 percent (±0.6%) indicated walking; and 5 percent (±0.8%)

indicated transit use. Figure 1A shows the share of responses

by main mode used. Figure 1B provides a comparison of

persons who use privately owned vehicles (POVs) as a

driver or as a passenger. Figure 1C shows non-POV modes

in greater detail than Figure 1A.

Respondents rated thirteen travel elements of the

transportation system on a four-point scale. Overall, almost

all elements were rated positively, typically with above 

60 percent giving each of the elements a combined rating of

excellent or good. Passenger Air Travel received the highest

ratings with 74 percent (±2.7%) rating it excellent or good; 

it also had one of the lowest poor ratings at only 7 percent

(±2%). The element with the lowest proportion indicating 

a good or excellent rating was Bicycle Lanes And Routes at 

48 percent (±4%). Two other elements with a relatively low

proportion of respondents rating them as good or excellent

were Local Street Pavement Quality at 51 percent (±3%) and

Intercity Rail Service at 52 percent (±5%). Intercity Rail

Service also had one of the largest poor ratings with 

27 percent (±4%) rating it poor. The 13 elements and the

estimated proportions of adults in each rating category are

shown in Table 1 and in Figure 2. Note that differences

between elements (within rating categories) of less than 

4 percent are not statistically significant.

1 A 90% confidence interval is provided after sample estimates in parentheses

in this report. The interval means that 90% of possible samples, conducted under

identical conditions, would produce an estimate within the range shown.
5

Elements Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Obs.2 %Pos

Highway Travel Elements

Freeway Pavement Quality 12% 54% 26% 8% 100% 1,144 66%

Connections To Other Modes 13 51 23 13 100 966 64

Safety Of Highway Travel 9 54 29 8 100 1,111 63

Lack Of Major Highway Delay 15 45 28 12 100 1,154 60

Local Street Pavement Quality 7 44 30 19 100 1,151 51

Urban Travel Elements

Local Rail Transit 24 40 20 17 100 212 64

Local Bus Service 13 51 23 13 100 476 64

Elderly/Handicapped Services 14 52 23 11 100 608 66

Sidewalks 13 49 25 13 100 900 62

Bicycle Lanes And Routes 13 35 28 24 100 601 48

Intercity Travel Elements

Passenger Air Travel 18 56 20 7 100 827 74

Intercity Bus Use 8 52 23 17 100 453 60

Intercity Rail Service 9 43 21 27 100 442 52

2 Total respondent observations—respondents were randomly divided into three

groups of about 1,350 for these questions. Respondents who did not provide an

opinion were either unfamiliar with the category or otherwise chose not to respond.

TABLE 1

Would you evaluate this as excellent, good, fair, or poor in your area?
6

Highway Travel Elements

Figure 2

Percent Rating Excellent Or Good

HIGHWAY TRAVEL ELEMENTS

Freeway Pavement Quality

Connections To Other Modes

Safety Of Highway Travel

Lack Of Major Highway Delay

Local Street Pavement Quality

URBAN TRAVEL ELEMENTS

Local Rail Transit

Local Bus Service

Elderly/Handicapped Services

Sidewalks

Bicycle Lanes And Routes

INTERCITY TRAVEL ELEMENTS

Passenger Air Travel

Intercity Bus Use

Intercity Rail Service

0 20 40 60 80 100

90% Confidence Interval
7

Views Of Highway Related Travel

There are five highway-related elements in Table 1. This

includes Connections To Other Modes, because it is most

often the highway that provides the interconnections to the

other modes of transport. Most elements were rated

excellent or good by a majority of adults, with Local Street

Pavement Quality having the most negative ratings.

Pavement Related—Freeway Pavement Quality ratings are

almost uniformly superior to Local Street Pavement Quality

ratings across all age categories, while older adults tend to

be more positive in their ratings than younger adults.

Freeway Pavement Quality ratings did not vary significantly

by metro class (see Table 2 for metro class descriptions). All

show about 12 percent (±1.5%) of adults with excellent

ratings. Local Street Pavement Quality was rated excellent or

good by a higher proportion in the two largest metro classes

(urbanized areas of over one million population with or

without rail or subway service). Also, a greater proportion of

those with higher than the median family income3 rated

Local Street Pavement Quality as good or excellent. This

suggests, not surprisingly, that streets in higher income areas

may be better maintained than in poorer areas.

3 The U.S. Census Bureau reported the 1995 median family income for the

United States as $49,687. The income answer category used in the NPTS allowed

households to be divided into two groups; those making $50,000 or less and those

making more than $50,000.
8

Other Highway Related—It is surprising how well views

regarding Lack Of Major Highway Delay and Connection 

To Other Modes fare given the sense of public concern 

about congestion. Along with safety on highways, the 

ratings are uniformly positive. (The related issue of violence

against motorists as a concern of drivers and passengers is

treated later.) 

Intuitively, the most significant factor in any ratings of

highway delay would be strongly associated with the size of

the metropolitan area, and the data bear this out. Table 2

shows the ratings for Major Highway Delay by metro class.

The data show that 60 percent (±3%) of adults rate the

system as excellent or good regarding (lack of) delay.

Almost 80 percent (±5%) of rural areas give positive ratings,

but only 43 percent (±7%) of respondents in rail oriented

large metro areas do so. Note that differences between

metro classes (within rating categories) of less than 

6 percent are not statistically significant.

TABLE 2

Ratings of Major Highway Delay Characteristics 

by Metro Size Class 

Metro Class By

Urbanized Area Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Obs. %Pos

Population

1 Million Or More With Rail 6% 37% 39% 18% 100% 178 43%

Or Subway Service

1 Million Or More Without Rail 11 41 34 14 100 363 52

Or Subway Service

Less Than 1 Million 19 47 24 10 100 402 66

Not In Urbanized Area 25 54 16 5 100 211 79

Total 15 45 28 12 100 1,154 60
9

Ratings for safety on highways show a similar pattern with

the major distinction that ratings improve with decreasing area

size, but show a very marked negative shift in nonmetro

areas, as seen in Table 3. Note that differences of less than 

7.5 percent are not statistically significant.

TABLE 3

Ratings of Safety Concerns While Traveling on Highways

Table 4 documents that drivers were the most positive

regarding concerns about delay—about twice as positive 

as transit users. Differences within rating categories of less

than 14 percent are not statistically significant.

TABLE 4

Ratings of Major Highway Delay Characteristics by User Groups 

Category Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Obs. %Pos

Drivers 17% 47% 27% 10% 100% 952 64%

Auto Passengers 6 43 32 20 100 137 49

Transit Users 6 25 46 23 100 25 31

Walkers 29 22 36 13 100 33 51

Total 15 45 28 12 100 1,147 60

Metro Class Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Obs. %Pos

1 Million Or More With Rail 5% 48% 38% 8% 100% 177 53%

Or Subway Service

1 Million Or More Without Rail 6 57 28 9 100 312 63

Or Subway Service

Less Than 1 Million 12 58 23 8 100 407 70

Not In Urbanized Area 10 50 32 8 100 215 60

Total 9 54 29 8 100 1,111 63
10

Overall, the views toward the five highway travel-related

elements are positive. Younger adults are less positive about

local pavement quality. Those in larger metro areas are less

positive about safety and delay issues and more positive

about local pavement quality.

Views Of Other Major Transport Elements

The eight nonhighway travel elements that respondents

were asked to make judgments about can be further subdivided into a group of five Urban and three Intercity travel

elements. Their ratings were given in Table 1.

Urban Group—In general all elements of the urban group

have a majority of respondents rating them as excellent or

good, with the exception of Bicycle Lanes And Routes which

has the lowest rating.

As expected, the size of the metro area in which people

live has an appreciable effect on their ratings. These effects

vary from element to element:

In Areas With Rail Transit, rail transit’s rating is 

71 percent (±9%) which is about the same as the 

ratings for buses.

Sidewalks have the largest areas exhibiting the best

ratings, with a significantly smaller proportion in

nonmetro areas than metro areas rating them as excellent

or good.

Bicycle Lanes are uniformly viewed in all areas centering

on a 48 percent (±6.7%) positive rating.
11

Elderly And Handicapped Services ratings were uniformly

good across areas at about 66 percent (±6.6%). There is

some evidence that women rate transportation services

for the elderly and handicapped higher than men.

Intercity Group—Ratings of air and rail are significantly

higher in larger metro areas. There is some evidence that a

smaller proportion of those in households with incomes

above the median household income rate Intercity Bus as

excellent or good compared to those in households at or

below median income.

Highway Use Values 

Concerns of motorists were addressed by asking private

vehicle users about their agreement or disagreement with 

a set of three positively worded statements and three

negatively worded statements about roadway use. The

motorists were asked to grade their agreement on a 

five-point scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree. 

The statements were as follows:

A. Traveling by private vehicle gives me the freedom to go where

I need to go.

B. Traveling by private vehicle gives me the freedom to go and

return from activities when I want to.

C. I like to travel by private vehicle.

D. Highway congestion is a major problem for me.

E. I spend too much time in a vehicle every day.

F. Traveling by private vehicle is very stressful to me.
12

Respondents were very positive in their regard for

private vehicle use. They strongly agreed with the positively

worded statements, and almost as strongly disagreed with

the negative statements. An amazing 88 percent strongly

agreed with both the statement regarding freedom to go

“where I need to go,” and, freedom to go “when I need to

go.” The statement regarding “liking to travel by private

vehicle” was also positively supported with 85 percent

(±2.1%) strongly agreeing with the statement. It is most

surprising that only 3 percent (±1%) disagreed or strongly

disagreed with the statements in each case. 

The overall statistics are as follows. Differences between

statements (within rating categories) of less than 2 percent

are not statistically significant.

TABLE 5

Percent Agreement with Positive Highway Statements

Category Strongly Agree Unknown Disagree Strongly Total Obs. Agree Disagree

Go Where I 88% 7% 2% 1% 2% 100% 1,523 Need To Go

Go When I 88 7 2 1 2 100 1,524 Need To Go

Like To Travel 85 7 5 1 2 100 1,654

In Vehicles
13

The Positive Statements

Among the pertinent variations among different groups

regarding the positive statements were the following: 

• In general, the statements regarding freedom to go when

and where desired received greater support than the

statement related to liking to travel by private vehicle.

• The greatest degree of agreement came from those in

their most active travel years, both men and women in the

age groups 35-54 and 55-64 in which levels of strong

agreement reached 95%. In no age group did disagreement

ever rise above 11 percent (±2.5%).

• The most negative groups were the age groups of 16-19,

reflecting perhaps restraints on young people’s use of vehicles.

• Not surprisingly, significantly fewer of those in

households without vehicles agreed that traveling by private

vehicle gives them the freedom to go where and when they

need to go.
14

The Negative Statements

Response to the negatively worded statements was 

not so completely emphatic, although quite strong. About 

69 percent (±4%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with 

the statement that travel by vehicle was very stressful; 

56 percent (±4%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with 

the statement that they spend too much time in their car. 

Figure 3 shows how reaction to spending too much time

varies by miles driven.

The key difference was in respect to congestion where 

43 percent (±4%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the

statement that highway congestion is a major problem. 

It also was the largest group (31±2%) stating that they had 

an unknown view on the subject. As with the preceding

question about time, Figure 4 shows that concern over

congestion seems to increase with miles driven.

The overall statistics for the group of negative statements

are as follows. Note that, like Table 5, differences of less

than 2 percent are not statistically significant.

TABLE 6

Percent Agreement with Negative Highway Statements

Category Strongly Agree Unknown Disagree Strongly Total Obs. Agree Disagree

Congestion 

A Major 15% 12% 31% 17% 26% 100% 1,511

Problem

Spend Too 

Much Time 14 8 22 16 40 100 1,656

In Vehicle

Travel By

Vehicle Is 9 7 15 17 52 100 1,652

Very Stressful
15

Spend Too Much Time In A Vehicle Each Day?

Figure 3

90% Confidence Interval

Percent

0

20

40

60

<5000 5000-14,000 >14,000 <5000 5000-14,000 >14,000

Annual Miles Driven

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

Congestion A Major Problem?

Figure 4

90% Confidence Interval

Percent

Annual Miles Driven

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

<5000 5000-14,000 >14,000 <5000 5000-14,000 >14,000
16

Some of the key findings in regard to the negative

statements are:

• There is clearly a great deal of variety in opinion in

regard to the three negative statements. While the stronger

emphasis is on disagreement with the statements, there is

certainly enough agreement or strong agreement with the

negatives to warrant further concern and analysis.

• The degree of ambivalence is also great with

unknown/uncertain scores ranging from 15 percent (±2%) to

31 percent (±2%), unlike the positive questions where only 

2 to 5 percent (±1%) indicated an unknown or uncertain

middle reaction.

• Congestion indicated the strongest uncertainty with only

26 percent (±2.4%) strongly disagreeing that it is a problem,

half the level of the statement regarding vehicle travel being

stressful. The question of spending too much time in

vehicles falls somewhere in between.

• Women have a more positive attitude toward spending time

in a vehicle, with 45 percent (±2.8%) of women saying that

they strongly disagree that they spend too much time in

vehicles versus only 34 percent (±3.2%) of men. A smaller

proportion of women aged 16-19 and 65+ strongly agree that

they spend too much time in vehicles than women aged 20-64.
17

• Finding driving stressful is the least supported of the

three negative statements with only 16 percent (±2.7%)

registering any agreement at all, roughly evenly divided

between men and women. As one might expect, there is

more strong agreement with stress concerns by those aged

20+ than those aged 16-19.

• Mileage traveled does have some impact on reactions 

to the three statements. Strong disagreement with concerns

about congestion declines significantly with increased

driving, from 35 percent (±5.9%) in strong disagreement

below 5,000 miles per year to 25 percent (±3.4%) for those

traveling over 5,000 miles per year.

• As miles driven increases strong disagreement declines,

and strong agreement increases with the proposition

regarding spending too much time in vehicles. Strong

disagreement drops from 55 percent (±4.7%) to 

35 percent (±3%) in the highest driving range and strong

agreement more than doubles from 7 percent (±2.4%) to 

18 percent (±2.9%).

• There does not seem to be a significant positive effect 

on stress reactions as a product of miles driven; strong

disagreement remains around 52 percent (±2.3%) throughout.

• In general, nonmetro residents are the least supportive of

the negative statements about private vehicle travel.
18

• About 20 percent (±4.6%) of those in areas over one

million are in strong agreement regarding congestion

problems compared to 8 percent (±2.4%) for nonmetro

areas. Similarly strong disagreement is lower in metro areas

than nonmetro areas.

• There is more disagreement with congestion problems in

areas with rail than without.

• There is greater strong disagreement with spending too

much time in vehicles in nonmetro areas.

• Stress levels seem lower in nonmetro areas with 

65 percent (±4.2%) strong disagreement.
19

Highway Travel Problems

In order to better appreciate the problems that people

may have in dealing with private vehicles, a list of

difficulties that people might have, nine in all, were

submitted to those respondents who used private vehicles

as either drivers or passengers. They were asked: “Is this a

large problem, small problem, or no problem at all for you?” 

The different groups were asked about:

• Worrying about crime against motorists

• Air pollution caused by cars, trucks and buses

• Worrying about being stranded or in danger and 

not knowing how to get help quickly

• Not knowing about traffic tie-ups or road

construction

• Worrying about traffic crashes

• Being dependent on a car for every trip I make

• Traveling in local areas or neighborhoods I am 

not familiar with

• Having others depend on me to take them places

• Having a car available to me when I need it

The actual proportions in each category are given in 

the table below using shorthand wording of the problems.

Figure 5 depicts how perception of an issue being a large

problem varies by gender. Note that differences between

questions (within rating categories) of less than 3.5 percent

are not statistically significant.
20

Perception Of Issues As Large Problem By Gender

Figure 5

Percent

CRIME AGAINST MOTORISTS Female

Male

AIR POLLUTION Female

Male

BEING STRANDED Female

Male

*TRAFFIC TIE-UPS Female

Male

TRAFFIC CRASHES Female

Male

DEPENDENT ON A CAR Female

Male

NOT FAMILIAR Female

Male

DEPEND ON ME Female

Male

HAVING A CAR AVAILABLE Female

Male

0 10 20 30 ISSUE

*Statistically Not Different By Gender

90% Confidence Interval
21

TABLE 7

Are the following a large problem, small problem, 

or no problem for you?

The primary observation is that large problems are not

very large. The biggest problem has only a 22 percent

(±2.2%) share indicating that it was a large problem. Overall,

five of the nine problems had a majority indicating that it

was no problem. The four categories with the lowest

proportions indicating no problem were Crime Against

Motorists, Air Pollution, Traffic Crashes, and Traffic Tie-Ups.

There are substantial differences in the rankings of these

problems between men and women. In every case but one,

women viewed each item as a bigger problem than did

men, in many cases by large degrees. Both men and women

rated Traffic Tie-Ups about the same. The average

percentage seeing a large problem in any item among

women was 18 percent, whereas the average for men was

less than 12 percent.

Question Large Small No Total Obs.

Crime Against Motorists 22% 37% 41% 100% 1,662

Air Pollution 21 34 45 100 1,521

Being Stranded 19 28 54 100 1,526

Traffic Tie-Ups 17 34 50 100 1,654

Traffic Crashes 17 34 49 100 1,666

Dependent On A Car 17 23 60 100 1,659

Not Familiar 9 33 58 100 1,531

Depend On Me 9 27 64 100 1,529

Having A Car Available 5 9 86 100 1,663
22

One conclusion that can be drawn is that, other than

concerns about knowing about traffic, women are more

concerned about all these issues than are men. In some

instances there are differences among younger or older

women. A higher proportion of older women rated Being

Stranded, Crime Against Motorists, Air Pollution, Traffic 

Tie-Ups and Having People Depend On Them as no problem.

A number of concerns are greatest among older motorists,

most particularly regarding Crime Against Motorists. This is

heavily affected by women’s concerns. Forty-two percent

(±10.2%) of women in the age group from 55 to 64 years of

age and 32 percent (±5.8%) of women over 65 rated crime as

a big problem.

The kind and size of metropolitan area that one lives in

affects the response to these questions. Many problems are

“big city” problems that decline as area size declines or

shifts from metropolitan to rural areas. The average

percentage with a big problem for the nine topics is

between 17 percent and 18 percent (±1%) for the metros

over a million, dropping to an average percentage of 

14 percent (±1%) for metropolitan areas under a million 

and about 11 percent (±1.4%) for nonmetro areas. 

This emphasizes the finding that there are not very strong

differences between metropolitan areas over a million with

and without a rail transit system. Concerns about Crime

Against Motorists and Air Pollution are clearly big city issues

with fewer ranking these issues as big problems in places

outside metropolitan areas over one million.
23

Levels Of Transit Use 

It is useful to pin down the levels of use that people

make of transit to better understand their interests, needs

and problems. The earlier discussion of respondent

characteristics indicated that about 5 percent (±4.8%) said

that public transportation was the way they usually get

around. This limits the group to those who use transit

exclusively or almost exclusively. In order to get a better

sense of transit users, another question was asked to

determine the frequency of use of both those who said that

they used transit to get around and those who selected other

alternatives as their Usual Mode. Table 8 gives the overall

findings. Differences of less than 18 percent between the

Other mode and the rest of the Usual Modes (within time

categories) are not statistically significant. Differences

between all the modes except the Other mode of less than 

8 percent are not significant.

TABLE 8

Frequency of Use of Transit by “Usual” Mode Used 

Usual Mode 2+ Days About Once Once or Less Than

Never Total Obs.4

A Week A Week Twice Once 

A Month A Month

Driver 2% 1% 6% 5% 86% 100% 1,585

Passenger 11 7 8 4 70 100 270

Walker 19 17 15 8 41 100 75

Transit User 90 4 5 1 0 100 136

Other 7 22 10 13 48 100 24

All 10 3 7 5 76 100 2,090

4 This excludes approximately 2,000 respondents who indicated that there was

no transit available where they lived.
24

This table is very revealing of who uses transit. As

background about half the population does not have 

transit available to them where they live, and therefore do

not use transit. In areas where transit is available about 

76 percent (±2%) of travelers say they never use it. But the

key points concern the composition of users. A significant

number of those who say they use other modes to get

around indicate that they use transit two or more days per

week or less frequently, particularly walkers and auto

passengers.

This leads to the second point which is that those who

consider themselves transit users constitute only about twothirds of the group that say that they use transit two days a

week or more. The others are those who say they usually

drive (16±3.2%) or are a passenger (15±4.9%). When all time

categories are summed, those who say that they use transit

to get around constitute about 27 percent (±5.5%) of transit

riders, with usual auto users who use transit only on an

incidental basis constituting about 62 percent (±14%);

walkers account for about 9 percent (±6%).
Transit Issues

In order to get a better understanding of transit users, a

set of questions was put to them about why they use transit

and about some of the positives and negatives of transit use.

Unfortunately, because of the limited numbers of transit

users in the pretest survey, the number of observations

made it infeasible to disaggregate these data in detailed

ways by income group, age, sex or other categories. But the

overall reporting provides useful insights nonetheless. 

A question was asked in the form: “I use Public Transit

because:” followed by nine statements with which the

respondent could agree or disagree on a five-point scale.

The nine statements are listed in Table 9 along with the

proportion in each answer category. Differences of less than

18 percent between statements (within answer categories)

are not statistically significant.

25
26

TABLE 9

I use public transit because...

It is clear that the strong agreement and strong

disagreement elements are dominant. This may in part be a

product of the fact that some of the questions have close to

a yes/no nature. 

Statement Strongly Disagree Unknown Agree Strongly Total Obs. Disagree Agree

I Can Do

Something 39% 12% 13% 8% 27% 100% 67

Else

It Is Faster 

Than A 31 20 10 8 30 100 68

Private Vehicle

I Don’t Drive

Or Don’t Like 32 4 9 12 43 100 68

To Drive

Avoids Buying 22 11 7 16 44 100 65

A Car

It Is Better For 22 2 13 14 49 100 32

The Environment

Costs Less 

14 6 10 20 50 100 65 Than Driving

It Avoids Stress

Of Driving In 15 11 1 14 59 100 34

Congested Roads

Do Not Have 

21 3 6 6 64 100 33 Access To A Car

It Is The Most 

Convenient Way 10 6 9 10 65 100 34

For Me
27

Summary 

The American public is pleased with its transportation system.

While it certainly is not without problems, the amount of strong

support for the services received is very high. 

There is strong appreciation for the mobility and flexibility

afforded by the private vehicle, with agreement above 

90 percent on such characteristics as freedom to go when 

and where needed, and simply liking to travel in a vehicle.

Concerns about supposed negatives (such as spending too

much time in cars, the stress of driving, or congestion) are

quite limited, with congestion the biggest concern.

In many cases users seem to be happy with their actual

or likely mode of choice. There seems to be a substantial

degree of self-selection going on in which users have

selected what they construe to be the best options for their

circumstances, rather than feeling that they are being forced

to accept an inferior alternative. 

Many problems are linked to large metropolitan areas

where difficulties are only rarely perceived as less serious

than elsewhere and usually perceived of as worse. This is

most strongly associated with congestion and delay

problems, transit service and fear of crime. 

There are significant differences between men’s and

women’s perceptions. In general, women have a more

positive view of most modes of transport than men.

However, when problems regarding private vehicle travel

were addressed, women uniformly saw problems as greater
28

than men. This was particularly acute in regard to concerns

about crime against motorists, being stranded or lost in a

vehicle. Age factors also figured in many concerns,

especially those associated with access to vehicles among

the young, and concerns about being lost or stranded

among older travelers. 

There is substantial support for transit among users;

among many the main reasons for use are convenience and

reduced costs and stress from driving. Perceived negatives

are not strongly held. The strongest negatives were concerns

about cleanliness and waiting. Cost does not seem to be a

major concern. 

More data collection and research in these areas can

provide a stronger sense of the needs and concerns of the

traveling public. These data can be an effective element in

guiding transportation investment and policy.