Traveler Use of and Response to Real-Time Traffic and Traveler Information

Abstract

This paper presents baseline findings from a panel survey of regular peak hour travelers of the US-75 corridor in Dallas, Texas, and the I-15 corridor in San Diego, California. This survey was conducted as part of the evaluation of the Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Initiative. The baseline survey, conducted before the deployment of the ICM Initiative, collected data on travelers’ typical travel in the corridor, their satisfaction with their peak hour trips, their awareness and use of real-time traffic information, and their satisfaction with the information. In addition, recruited respondents were asked to complete brief pulse surveys administered immediately following incidents in the corridor to measure the use of information and its impact on travel during incident conditions. The surveys provide insights on travelers’ use of real-time traffic and travel information and its impact on their travel decisions in two major metropolitan corridors. Through a comparison of the two sites, the findings illuminate how the use of traveler information is conditioned, at least in part, by regional and situational context. In Dallas, respondents were faced with greater traffic congestion and delay, and they were more likely to consult information for their peak hour trips in the corridor. Their use of radio and electronic message signs, two of the most common sources of information, was significantly higher compared with the San Diego sample. In addition, the availability of alternate routes may affect how travelers use real-time traffic information. In Dallas, where respondents reported greater use of alternate routes, both under typical circumstances as well as in the face of severe congestion, significantly more respondents used real-time information to make routing decisions.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.