## 4 Results  
### Results of [PERSON]'s Model  
[PERSON]'s model is a model that describes the satisfaction or desire of a customer regarding the attributes of the product or service. In this study, the questionnaire was designed to present each service item in two narrative forms: when the quality performance was good and when the quality performance was poor. The results of [PERSON]'s model are shown in Tables 3 and 4. There were nine attributes classified as one-dimensional quality (O). These attributes mostly came from the interaction with passengers and tangible service equipment dimensions. If the bus company could not fulfill these nine attributes for the commuters sufficiently, it would decrease the commuters' satisfaction; on the other hand, it would increase commuters' satisfaction if these attributes were provided sufficiently--the higher the quality, the higher the satisfaction. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c} \hline \hline
**Classification** & **CSI** \\ \hline One-dimensional & 0.73 \\
1. Drivers prioritize the safety of passengers during boarding and alighting. & 0.65 \\
2. Drivers provide good service by displaying friendly, polite, and caring behavior toward passengers. & 0.59 \\
3. The drivers exhibit proficient driving skills and operate the buses smoothly. & 0.66 \\
4. Bus attendants can quickly respond to passengers’ complaints or opinions. & 0.66 \\
5. Vehicles are clean inside. & 0.59 \\
6. The bus companies offer contemporary and secure buses. & 0.67 \\
7. The bus service ensures security against criminal activities on buses and at bus stops. & 0.59 \\
8. Provided with schedule and route information on the bus and at the bus stop. & 0.50 \\
12. The bus company informs customers of changes in the timetable and prices in advance. & 0.73 \\ \hline Attractive & \\
9. Availability of online bus schedules on the internet or a mobile application. & 0.62 \\
10. Convenience of a fare payment system. & 0.64 \\
11. Buses operated punctually according to the schedule. & 0.50 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Kano quality attributes listed according to classification. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Attributes** & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Kano Quality Attribute Classification Percentages (\%)**} & **Result** & **SII** & **DDI** & **CSI** \\ \cline{2-10}  & **A** & **O** & **M** & **I** & **R** & **Q** & & \\ \hline Item 1 & 9.79\% & 56.18\% & 24.01\% & 10.02\% & 0.00\% & 0.00\% & O & 0.66 & \(-\)0.80 & 0.73 \\ Item 2 & 24.48\% & 45.45\% & 13.52\% & 16.08\% & 0.23\% & 0.23\% & O & 0.70 & \(-\)0.59 & 0.65 \\ Item 3 & 8.16\% & 40.79\% & 26.57\% & 24.01\% & 0.47\% & 0.00\% & O & 0.49 & \(-\)0.68 & 0.59 \\ Item 4 & 11.42\% & 47.79\% & 22.84\% & 17.25\% & 0.23\% & 0.47\% & O & 0.60 & \(-\)0.71 & 0.66 \\ Item 5 & 18.41\% & 47.09\% & 19.35\% & 15.15\% & 0.00\% & 0.00\% & O & 0.66 & \(-\)0.66 & 0.66 \\ Item 6 & 20.28\% & 39.86\% & 17.48\% & 21.91\% & 0.23\% & 0.23\% & O & 0.60 & \(-\)0.58 & 0.59 \\ Item 7 & 11.42\% & 48.95\% & 22.84\% & 16.08\% & 0.47\% & 0.23\% & O & 0.61 & \(-\)0.72 & 0.67 \\ Item 8 & 12.59\% & 41.49\% & 21.68\% & 23.78\% & 0.23\% & 0.23\% & O & 0.54 & \(-\)0.63 & 0.59 \\ Item 9 & 16.08\% & 31.47\% & 18.18\% & 32.17\% & 1.40\% & 0.70\% & A & 0.49 & \(-\)0.51 & 0.50 \\ Item 10 & 14.45\% & 44.76\% & 19.11\% & 21.21\% & 0.23\% & 0.23\% & A & 0.59 & \(-\)0.64 & 0.62 \\ Item 11 & 15.62\% & 34.03\% & 16.08\% & 33.80\% & 0.23\% & 0.23\% & A & 0.63 & \(-\)0.65 & 0.64 \\ Item 12 & 15.62\% & 34.03\% & 16.08\% & 33.80\% & 0.23\% & 0.23\% & O & 0.50 & \(-\)0.50 & 0.50 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Results of [PERSON]’s model. There were three attributes classified as attractive quality (A)--availability of online bus schedules on the internet or a mobile application (9), convenience of a fare payment system (10), and punctuality of buses according to schedule (11). These quality attributes not only greatly satisfied the commuters but also created a good impression of the attributes.