4. The Effect Of Difficult Transit Tasks On Travel Behavior And Activity Choice

Hypothesis 2: Difficulties of transit tasks will affect travel activity and behavior and reduce trips and accessibility. Subjects will estimate they would make more trips and access more places if RIAS was installed.

In the previous chapter, specific situations and locations that caused difficulty for blind navigation were examined. There is little doubt that the loss of vision adversely affects travel and independence. This chapter deals with how these difficulties directly affect activity and travel behavior. This part of the experiment dealt with how the loss of vision restricts personal mobility and action. A series of questions were asked to elicit information about these types of limitations and to ascertain if the addition of environmental cues can help mitigate these restrictions on individual behavior, thus increasing interaction with the urban environment.

In the preliminary interview, data were collected from the 30 subjects about travel behavior, mode choice, and activity choice. Subjects reported making an average of 12 trips per week. Nine subjects made five or less trips per week, and eight reported making over 20 trips per week. Subjects were asked if they made fewer trips than before they were blind. Five said they did make fewer trips after their visual impairment, three said it was about the same, and one person indicated that he did not make fewer trips because of his condition. Those that said they made fewer trips gave reasons such as “it is hard to get places without a car,” “can’t walk a lot,” “only go when need to,” “transit problems,” and “has to depend on others.” This question did not apply to 21 people, who were congenitally blind or blind at a very young age, .

For an average week, subjects reported making 4.7 bus trips, 3.8 trips using the BART subway system, and 1.6 trips using the Muni Light Rail. Only 0.7 trips per week were reported using door to door van services, 1.7 trips were made by a friend’s or family private car, 2.1 trips were made by taxi, and an average of 4.3 trips were made by walking.

On a five-point scale (1= “strongly agree” and 5= “strongly disagree”), subjects rated their opinion on the following three statements.

“My vision impairment has caused problems in transit use which restrict my range of non-job related activities.” They agreed most strongly on this statement with an average rank score of 1.8.
“My vision impairment has caused problems in transit use which restrict my range of locations for jobs.” They agreed with this statement with a rank score of 2.2.
“If transit and mode transfers were made less difficult I could find a better job.” This statement also received a rank score of 2.2.

In addition to the exhaustive field test, many data were gathered before and after the time trials. Many of the same questions were asked of the participants on both occasions in order to determine if their attitudes and beliefs about travel and trip making had changed once they experienced the RIAS. The results shed light on the travel needs faced, and problems experienced, by blind and vision-impaired people. There were dramatic changes in attitudes and perceived trip making capabilities, and these results are shown and discussed in this chapter.

4.1. Travel Confidence and Frequency of Visiting New Environments

4.1.1. Self-Reported Ratings of Confidence while Traveling

A pre-test question was asked during the phone interview that attempted to capture participants’ self-rated skills and behavior in their normal living and travel situations. The same question was asked after the test, requiring subjects to imagine their environment filled with the same types of RIAS installations that they had experienced during the field tests at the Caltrain station and its immediate surroundings. Subjects were asked to rate their confidence levels on a 1 to 5 scale in three areas (1=“very confident” and 5=“very unsure”).

Before using RIAS, subjects rated their level of confidence about “independent travel” as 1.8, and, after using the system; they said that if it were installed they would rate themselves as 1.3.
Subjects rated their “sense of direction” as 2.1 before using the system and said that confidence would increase to 1.4 if RIAS was installed.
Subjects rated their confidence when traveling in a “new environment” at only 2.8 when first asked about their travel. They said that if RIAS was available they would rate their confidence at 1.7, more than a full category level in the direction of positive confidence.

All three answers show an increase in very general categories of self-worth, when considering RIAS, with the most dramatic increase being the confidence gained in new environments. When making travel and activity decisions, increased confidence is a basic attitude that can affect a wide range of decisions.

Table 4.1 shows the number (N=30) in each category for both the pre and post-test conditions. None of the subjects perceived that they would be “Unsure” or “Very Unsure” if RIAS was installed, and there was a dramatic shift toward a perception of high confidence in daily travel with the addition of these environmental cues.

Table 4. 1 Frequency Distribution of Reported Confidence Levels

Confidence in?	Condition	Very Confident	Confident	Avg.	Unsure	Very Unsure
Independent Travel	Pre-test	13	13	1	3	0
Independent Travel	Post-test	20	10	0	0	0
Sense of Direction	Pre-test	6	18	3	2	1
Sense of Direction	Post-test	20	9	1	0	0
New Environments	Pre-test	1	13	9	6	1
New Environments	Post-test	14	12	4	0	0

4.1.2. Learning New Routes and Traveling to New Environments

How might this basic attitude adjustment affect behavior? Subjects were asked, “How often do you learn a new route or navigate around a new place?” Available choices were 1= daily, 2= several times a week, 3= weekly, 4= several times a month, 5= once a month, and 6= less than monthly.

Table 4.2 Frequency Distribution of Travel in New Environments

Choice =	#1	#2	#3	#4	#5	#6
Pre-test	1	4	7	10	6	2
Post-test	8	12	7	2	1	0

The table shows how perceptions about the frequency of accessing new routes or environments increased when people with vision impairments considered using a system that provided heretofore missing spatial cues. On average, respondents reported currently learning new routes or environments between “weekly” and “several times a month”, with a score of 3.7. They reported that if RIAS was installed they would learn new environments closer to several times a week, with an average score of 2.2. This shift of 1.5 points demonstrates a marked increase in perceived access to new environments. Since a major problem regarding access to work and other activities is the need to travel freely in new environments, the data give a very strong indication that blind people do want to travel more if additional information was available, and therefore they are held back by the lack of accessible cues.

BACK TO OVERVIEW
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
NEXT SECTION