Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Transportation Research Part A

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tra

Mobility-impaired people’s preferences for a specialized

paratransit service as BRT’s feeder: The role of autonomy,
relatedness, and competence
Luis Márquez *, Laura X. Pineda , Juan C. Poveda
Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia, Avenida Central del Norte 39-115, Tunja, Colombia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Transportation is a very important element in the well-being of mobility-impaired people.

Self-determination theory However, people with disabilities often struggle to access transportation services at all, especially
Autonomy if they live in mountain areas. This study is aimed at better understanding the main factors that
Hybrid discrete choice model
affect the preferences for a new specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder to serve the portion
Mobility-impaired people
Transportation feeder services
of the trip that mobility-impaired people cannot manage. We hypothesized that in addition to
some observable attributes of the transportation services, such as time and travel cost, mobility-
impaired people’s preferences for a specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder could be better
explained by using a hybrid discrete choice model based on the Self-Determination Theory (SDT).
We gathered responses through a stated-preference survey (N = 350), in which respondents faced
a series of choice situations among three BRT feeder alternatives: bus, cable car and a new
specialized service. We also obtained indicator ratings through a basic psychological needs
satisfaction scale to identify the latent variables in relation to the SDT. Modeling results supported
our hypothesis that the preferences of mobility-impaired people are better explained by consid­
ering the three innate psychological needs. We found empirical evidence linking the components
of the SDT, i.e. Autonomy, Relatedness, and Competence, with preferences for the specialized
transportation service as BRT’s feeder in the study context. The multipliers of values of time
savings derived from the model showed that mobility-impaired people place access time four
times more important than travel time. We accounted for the heterogeneity in value of travel time
savings and found that the greater the autonomy in mobility-impaired people the greater their
sensitivity to the specialized transportation service’s fare. We concluded that Autonomy, Relat­
edness, and Competence play an important role in the preferences of mobility-impaired people.
Autonomy is a determining factor in perception of alternative fares. Competence motivates
mobility-impaired people to use the specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder, while
Relatedness motivates mobility-impaired people to use the same transportation alternatives used
by others.

1. Introduction

Transportation is a very important element in the well-being of mobility-impaired people, who typically have to travel in order to

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: luis.marquez@uptc.edu.co (L. Márquez), laura.pineda02@uptc.edu.co (L.X. Pineda), juan.poveda@uptc.edu.co (J.C. Poveda).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2022.09.008
Received 9 December 2020; Received in revised form 18 September 2022; Accepted 20 September 2022
Available online 27 September 2022
0965-8564/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

satisfy their needs to perform activities at different locations (Deka & Gonzales, 2014). Maintaining everyday mobility is important for
health (Boniface et al., 2015; Mackett & Thoreau, 2015), unfortunately, the experience of people with disabilities has been largely
negative, as it has been shown from some studies in which people with disabilities usually report more mobility problems than those
without disabilities (Park et al, 2020; Rosenbloom, 2007). Overall, people with disabilities travel less (Rosenbloom, 2007) and often
they struggle to access transportation services at all, especially in developing countries (Márquez, Poveda, & Vega, 2019).
Mobility impairment is a specific category of disability that includes people with varying types of physical disabilities caused by
illness, physical injury, and age-related conditions, among other causes. Mobility-impairment people often use assistive devices or
mobility aids such as canes, crutches, wheelchairs, and artificial limbs to obtain mobility, which makes it difficult for them to access
conventional transportation forms, especially in areas with high slopes. Therefore, with the aim of improving access conditions for
mobility-impaired people, but taking into account the construction and financial challenges associated with infrastructure projects
(Grisé et al., 2019), authorities could consider providing specialized paratransit services to exclusively or partly serve them (Access
Exchange International, 2012).
Specialized paratransit services provide a useful function (Nguyen-Hoang & Yeung, 2010) although they obviously cannot fulfill
the role of making mobility-impaired people full and equal participants in all aspects of social life (Sammer et al., 2012). As a result, a
vast number of people with disabilities resist using door-to-door specialized paratransit services because they fear being stigmatized or
they do not believe that the services meet their needs (Rosenbloom, 2007). However, as it has been seen in some cases, mobility-
impaired people could be provided with a specialized paratransit service as a trunk services feeder. In this way, authorities could
ensure that mobility-impaired people access the whole transportation system through a specialized paratransit service for only that
portion of their trips that they cannot manage (BARTA, 2014).
In this context, this study is aimed at better understanding the main factors that affect the preferences for a new specialized
paratransit service as BRT’s feeder to serve the portion of the trip that mobility-impaired people cannot manage. Specifically, we are
interested in demonstrating whether the Self-Determination Theory’s three innate psychological needs –Competence, Autonomy, and
Relatedness– (Ryan & Deci, 2019) play an important role in the preferences of mobility-impaired people and whether they are
determining factors in perceptions of transportation fares. Self-Determination Theory (SDT) posits three universal psychological needs:
autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and suggests that they must be continuously satisfied for people to maintain optimal per­
formance and well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2000). This is in line with the behavioral model proposed in this research.
On this basis, we hypothesized that in addition to some observable attributes of the feeder transportation services, such as time and
travel cost, mobility-impaired people’s preferences for a specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder could be better explained by
using a Hybrid Discrete Choice (HDC) model based on the Self-Determination Theory (SDT), which is a widely applied theory of
motivation, personality development, and wellness (Ryan & Deci, 2019), which considers three innate psychological needs
–Competence, Autonomy, and Relatedness–.
The importance of SDT has been considered within several domains –education (Nalipay et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2019), envi­
ronmental sustainability (Legault et al., 2020; Tagkaloglou & Kasser, 2018), marketing (Adachi et al., 2018; Sweeney, 2014), tech­
nology (Peters et al., 2018; Weinstein & Przybylski, 2019), physical activity (Hancox et al., 2018: Standage et al., 2019), elderly
(Houlfort et al., 2015; Kasser & Ryan, 1999), and health care (Gillison et al., 2019), among others. Recently the SDT has been
incorporated into the analysis of psychological, social cognitive and perceived environmental influences on children’s active trans­
portation to school (Zaragoza et al., 2020). However, to the best of our knowledge, this theory has not yet been considered in the
transportation domain to explain the preferences of mobility-impaired people. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that our study is
based on a broad and widely applied theory (Ryan & Deci, 2019) that we integrated into a robust modeling approach (Ben-Akiva et al.,
2002).
The balance of the paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, we review some studies concerning mobility-impaired people and
transportation; in Section 3, we explain the study methodology, including study context, participants, stated-preference choice survey,
indicators of psychological needs, and modeling approach. In Section 4, the modeling results are presented. Section 5 provides a
discussion of our results, emphasizing the main findings and implications of the study, and Section 6 presents the conclusions,
highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the study, and future research.

2. Literature review

Much of the research in the area has been concerned with analyzing the effect of some tangible attributes on mobility-impaired
people’s accessibility to transport services. For example, Pena Cepeda et al. (2018) studied mobility-impaired people’s preferences
to obtain valuations for accessibility elements. The main barriers for mobility-impaired people related to the urban environment,
terminals and stops, services, and quality of footpaths were also studied in order to provide recommendations for policymakers (Park &
Chowdhury, 2018). In the same vein, Verbich and El-Geneidy (2016) showed how improving waiting area conditions and providing
information at the stop can increase the satisfaction of riders with disabilities.
Some studies focused on the relationship between disability and geography have found that the spatial needs of people with
reduced mobility have not been met, which calls for some short-term actions in order to incorporate modern perspectives needs of
mobility-impairment people (Owusu-Ansah et al, 2019). Other studies have demonstrated that there are difficulties that go beyond the
physical barriers, identifying latent variables such as perceptions of insufficient welfare systems, gender relations issues, and inap­
propriate behavior of other transportation users (Sammer et al., 2012).
A growing number of studies in the transportation arena have been incorporating latent variables to better explain the discrete
choice process in several contexts. Some studies have used empirical latent variables (MacLeod et al., 2015; Cantillo et al., 2015; Soto

173
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

et al., 2018) while others have been based on well-established psychological models of individual decision-making, such as the Theory
of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991), which has been used to study the intention of using transportation alternatives (Frater et al., 2017;
Zhang et al., 2019).
Recently, several researchers have increased the knowledge basis regarding the important effect of latent variables on the travel
experience of people with mobility impairments as well as on their choices (Lättman et al., 2019; Márquez, Poveda & Vega, 2019).
Likewise, research has been developed to better represent the diverse travel behavior of people with disabilities in order to improve
decision-making and avoid exacerbating transportation disadvantages (Park et al., 2022), as well as to improve transportation

Fig. 1. General view of the BRT’s feeder services in Ciudad Bolívar.

174
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

planning and policy that better supports the transportation needs of persons with disabilities (Park et al., 2022).

3. Methodology

We collected the following data through a face-to-face questionnaire, in October 2019, targeted at mobility-impaired people who
currently use public transportation services in Ciudad Bolívar, the 19th locality in the capital city of Bogotá, Colombia.

1) Information about the typical trips of each respondent: main purpose, if the person has access to the cable car, usual feeder
transportation mode, traveling frequency, and if the person travels alone or requires a companion.
2) Responses to a series of choice situations posed to respondents in a stated-preference survey to identify and model the effect of some
tangible attributes on the choices of mobility-impairment people among a set of transportation feeder modes.
3) Indicator ratings through a basic psychological needs satisfaction scale to identify the latent variables in relation to the SDT and
model their effect on the people’s choices.
4) Information on disability characteristics: cause of disability, years lived with disability, if the disability is temporary or permanent,
and use of assistive device or mobility aids.
5) Socioeconomic characteristics: gender, age, education level, household size, sources of income, and average monthly income.

The information about typical trips, disabilities, and socioeconomic characteristics of the people was used to characterize the
sample. Part of this information was also used to generate explanatory variables to account for the heterogeneity of people through the
latent variables in the HDC modeling approach.

3.1. Study context

Ciudad Bolívar is located in the south of Bogotá, where the poorest neighborhoods in the city are placed, it has a total area of 229.14
square kilometers, of which 20.88 square kilometers are urban, representing 27 % of the total area of Bogotá. The locality is
approximately 90 % mountainous, making it difficult to provide public domiciliary services and transportation, as well as access to
public transportation services for mobility-impairment people. The altitude of the urban area in the locality ranges from 2,400 to
3,100 m above sea level.
In Ciudad Bolívar, the total projected population as of 2020 is 776,351 inhabitants, which represents approximately 9.3 % of the
total projected population in Bogotá. In terms of gender distribution, 48.8 % of the population is female and 51.2 % is male, which is
very similar to the gender distribution of the city. The population of Ciudad Bolívar is predominantly young, more than 60 % of the
population is under 35, with an average age of 30 years. Ciudad Bolívar is one of the five localities in Bogotá with the largest set­
tlements of the population displaced by violence, although it has not been possible to determine exactly how many people are being
affected by this phenomenon in the locality. The illiteracy rate in the locality is 4.8 %, a little more than double the city rate (Secretaría
Distrital de Planeación, 2014).
According to official information from the National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE, 2010), in 2010 there were
12,164 people with disabilities in Ciudad Bolívar, among which, 4,379 were mobility-impaired people. Nevertheless, more recent data
from the Bogotá Health Observatory show that there are 19,470 people with disabilities in the locality (SALUDATA, 2019), repre­
senting a growth of 14 % over 2010. Due to the difficulty in accessing specific information for mobility-impaired people in Ciudad
Bolívar, we were unable to identify the distribution of the main socioeconomic variables for the population we study. We only had
access to aggregate data for all disabilities in the locality’s population, according to which 36 % are mobility-impaired people, that is,
about 7,106 people in 2019.
In 2019, the trunk service fare, which included the access to feeder service, was 2,400 Colombian pesos (COP), i.e. USD 0.72
according to the official rate of exchange of that year. The inhabitants of the locality have access to the trunk lines of the city’s BRT
service, better known as TransMilenio, through the Portal del Tunal station. To connect to this station, users regularly take feeder
buses, cable cars (Transmicable), or a variety of informal transportation services for which users must pay an extra fee. The feeder bus
service is made up of 13 lines of the Integrated Public Transport System (SITP) that cover a large part of the locality’s territory. The
cable car service, on the other hand, has limited access: a single line with a length of 3.34 km and only four stations, including the
Portal del Tunal station. Many people of the locality do not have access to cable cars as a result. Fig. 1 shows a General view of the
TransMilenio feeder services in Ciudad Bolívar.

3.2. Participants

The target population of our study was mobility-impaired people, adults (over 18 years), who regularly use public transportation
services in Ciudad Bolívar. It is appropriate to clarify that Ciudad Bolívar is one of the localities most affected by drug trafficking,
extortion, the recruitment of minors, and other criminal economies in Bogotá that hinder the collection of information. For this reason,
after obtaining consent from those in charge, two students in their senior year of Transportation Engineering collected the data (N =
350) contacting individuals at the meetings organized by the Ciudad Bolívar Local Mayor’s Office in the Health Service Units of the
locality. Due to the impossibility of obtaining the sampling frame for the survey and the difficulty of accessing people’s households, we
surveyed all the people who attended the meetings organized during the month and were part of the target population. Participation
was voluntary and we provided participants with information about the purpose of the study and the handling of personal data, after

175
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

which they signed an informed consent form. None of the people contacted refused to answer the survey.
Table 1 shows the main socioeconomic characteristics of the sample, which also exhibits, as a reference, the data from the Pop­
ulation Registered to Locate and Characterize People with Disabilities in Ciudad Bolívar (DANE, 2010). The distributions by gender
and age among all people with disabilities in the locality and sample are similar. The other distributions show that respondents have a
low education level and that they belong to low-income households, which corresponds to the profile of the locality inhabitants.
However, compared to all people with disabilities in the locality, the sample is characterized by having a higher educational level,
which is considered reasonable since mobility-impaired people can achieve higher levels of education than people with other types of
disabilities (WHO, 2011). In 2019, the monthly minimum wage in Colombia was COP 925,148 and the national monetary poverty line
for the same year was COP 257,433. This means that about 47 % of those surveyed are poor, a proportion higher than the national
average according to which 34.2 % of the population is below the poverty line.
Table 2 shows information on disability characteristics of people in the sample. Most people have disabilities caused by illness, age-
related conditions are the second cause and physical injuries also have an important role, which may be connected with the large
portion of the population displaced by violence in the locality. Three-quarters of respondents suffer from permanent disabilities. Just
over 10 % of respondents do not require mobility aids, however, most of the mobility-impaired people use canes, and a quarter of them
must use crutches as mobility aids. These people possibly have easier access to buses and cable cars, compared to those that require the
use of wheelchairs, who represent about 3 % of the sample.
Concerning the information about the typical trips of respondents, Table 3 shows that most of them mainly travel for medical
purposes, which are trips that normally take large amounts of time for people with disabilities (Brucker & Rollins, 2016). Relatively
few travel for education or work purposes, reflecting the precarious economic conditions of the households that they belong to. The
table also shows that only 18 % of respondents had access to the cable car. In this regard, the modal split of the sample indicates that
almost every-one who had access to the cable car used it (83.9 %), however, overall most people used the feeder bus, and 16.6 % of
people used informal services. More than half of the people reported that they required a companion during their most recent trip,
which possibly negatively affects their identity as self-sufficient adults (Agmon et al., 2016). Approximately half of the respondents
stated traveling daily and only 5 % of them reported traveling less than once a week. This means that most respondents are very
familiar with the transportation system.

3.3. Stated-preference choice survey

The high slopes of the study area make feeder bus and cable car stations hard to reach for mobility-impaired people on their own
efforts, which makes a paratransit-based BRT service feeding strategy reasonable. Therefore, we expect that from the users’
perspective, this BRT service feeding strategy possibly results in greater individual well-being of some mobility-impaired people.
We designed a stated-preference experiment in which the respondents stated which of the competing feeder transportation services
they would use. The experiment assumed that overall the choice set was made up of three alternatives: bus, cable car, and specialized
paratransit service, on-call shared-ride public service, in which the user would have to pay an extra fee, similar to the informal service
that currently operates in the locality. However, those respondents who did not have access to the cable car faced only two alternatives.
Based on the information yielded in focus groups and after the proper changes we made to the pilot test, we selected the attributes and
levels shown in Table 4 and obtained a fractional factorial design by using Ngene software (ChoiceMetrics, 2018). We generated a
simultaneous orthogonal design, in which orthogonality also holds across alternatives. In order to create the fractional factorial design,
we specified 36 as the desired number of rows for the design. Because the number of treatments was too large to give all these choice
situations to a single respondent, we also assigned six blocks consisting of six choice games per respondent.

Table 1
Socioeconomic characteristics of the sample.
Variable Category Sample (%) All people with disabilities in the locality (%)

Gender Male 40.9 46.7

Female 59.1 53.3
Age < 18 n/a 16.9
18 – 24 14.3 11.3
25 – 44 20.9 19.2
45 – 64 32.9 27.5
64 > 31.9 25.1
Education level Primary or less 40.3 45.1
Secondary 37.1 47.1
Technology 18.0 5.5
Higher education 4.6 2.3
Monthly household income level (Thousand COP) < 250 47.1 n/a
250 – 500 32.9 n/a
500 – 1,500 13.7 n/a
1,500 > 6.3 n/a

n/a: not available.

176
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

Table 2
Information on disability characteristics of the sample.
Variable Category Sample (%)

Cause Disability caused by illness 50.6

Disability caused by physical injury 22.3
Aged-related conditions 25.4
Other 1.7
Degree Temporary 25.1
Permanent 74.9
Mobility aids Canes 62.0
Crutches 24.9
Wheelchair 2.9
None 10.2

Table 3
Information about the typical trips of respondents.
Variable Category Sample (%)

Main purpose Medical 40.0

Household errands 26.7
Education 13.4
Work 8.3
Other 11.6
Access to the cable car Yes 18.0
No 82.0
Companion during the trip is required Yes 58.0
No 42.0
Usual feeder transportation mode Feeder bus 68.3
Cable car 15.1
Informal 16.6
Traveling frequency Daily 50.6
Weekly 44.3
Other 5.1

Table 4
Attributes, levels and values of the experimental design.
Alternatives Attributes Values

Bus Access time (min) 10

15
20
Waiting time (min) 10
15
Travel time (min) 20
25
30
Specialized paratransit service Access time (min) 5
10
15
Waiting time (min) 5
10
Travel time (min) 15
20
25
Extra fare (Thousand COP) 1.0
1.5
2.0
Cable car Access time (min) 15
20
25
Waiting time (min) 0
5
Travel time (min) 10
15
20

Notes: When the experiment was conducted, the exchange rate was 1 USD = 3.3 thousand COP. The cost of traveling
in TransMilenio was 2.4 thousand COP including the first ride on bus or cable car as feeder modes. The specialized
paratransit service fare was supposed to be an extra fare.

177
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

3.4. Indicators of psychological needs

We used the basic psychological needs satisfaction scale proposed by Chen et al., 2015 to assess the degree to which people feel the
satisfaction of these three needs. We specifically used the scale available in Spanish, which had been formally validated in four
culturally diverse samples located across the world. The scale was presented to respondents in the third part of the survey, as follows:
“Below, we are going to ask about your actual experiences of certain feelings in your life. Please read each of the following items
carefully. You can choose from 1 to 5 to indicate the degree to which the statement is true for you at this point in your life.” (Chen et al.,
2015)
Although we captured both the satisfaction and the frustration component, in modeling we only use the satisfaction component,
which is the one related primarily to life satisfaction and vitality (Chen et al., 2015). Table 5 shows the items scored by respondents and
the mean and the standard deviation of the ratings.

3.5. Modeling approach

We specified an HDC model in which, in addition to the tangible attributes, namely access time, waiting time, travel time, and extra
fare. We added the three universal psychological needs, i.e. competence, relatedness, and autonomy, to test whether the preferences of
mobility-impaired people for a specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder, are better explained by integrating these latent vari­
ables. In the HDC modeling framework, two sub-models are distinguished: a discrete choice sub-model and a latent variable sub-model.
In our case study, the choice sub-model consisted of three utility functions, one for each alternative, as can be seen in equations (1), (2),
and (3).
∑
Upqt = ASCp + k
θk Xkpqt + θF Fqt + βC ηCq + βR ηRq + βA ηAq Fqt + εpq (1)
∑
Ubqt = ASCb + k
θk Xkbqt + εbq (2)
∑
Ucqt = ASCc + k
θk Xkcqt + εcq (3)

Where,
Uiqt : is the utility function of the alternative i, namely specialized paratransit service (p), feeder bus (b), or cable car (c), for in­
dividual q, and situation t (six choice games per respondent).
ASCi : is the specific constant of the alternative i.
θk : are the generic parameters of the tangible attributes to be estimated.
Xkiqt : are the tangible attributes for the alternative i, individual q, and situation t.
θF : is the specific parameter of the special paratransit service’s fare.
Fqt : is the special paratransit service’s fare for individual q, and situation t.
βl : are the parameters of the latent variables l to be estimated, namely competence (C), relatedness (R), and autonomy (A).
ηlq : are the latent variables for individual q.
εpq : are error terms with mean zero, which are assumed to be independent and identically distributed extreme value type I.
The answers to the choice situations of respondents in the stated-preference survey were used as indicators of the perceived utilities
through the indicator function shown in equation (4).
{
1if Uiqt ≥ Ujqt ∀j ∈ Aq
yiqt = (4)
0otherwise

Where,
yiqt : is the choice indicator.
Aq : is the set of available alternatives for individual q.
Regarding the latent variable sub-model, we included the three universal psychological needs into a Multiple Indicators Multiple
Causes (MIMIC) model that consists of two parts: a structural component, which specifies the casual relationships among latent
variables and explains the causal effects; and a measurement component, which defines the relationships between a latent variable and
its indicators. Explicitly, we defined a set of three structural equations (5) in which every latent variable is a function of individual
variables related to socioeconomic characteristics, information on disability, and information on typical traveling, plus an error term.
∑
ηlq = r
αlr • Srq + υlq (5)

Where,
ηlq : is the latent variable l for individual q.
Srq : is the variable r for individual q.
αlr : are the parameters of structural equations to be estimated.
υlq : are the error terms assumed to be normally distributed with mean zero.
The measurement equations were specified as ordered logit models (Daly et al., 2012), in which each response observed is obtained

178
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

Table 5
Indicators of psychological needs for satisfaction component.
Psychological Indicators Statements Ratings (%) M SD
needs
1 2 3 4 5

Autonomy IA1 I feel a sense of choice and freedom in the things I undertake 0.0 5.7 4.9 47.7 41.7 4.25 0.794
IA2 I feel that my decisions reflect what I really want 3.1 2.6 4.9 48.0 41.4 4.22 0.895
IA3 I feel my choices express who I really am 3.4 2.3 4.9 38.6 50.9 4.31 0.928
IA4 I feel I have been doing what really interests me 2.9 2.9 5.1 41.1 48.0 4.29 0.906
Relatedness IR1 I feel that the people I care about also care about me 0.0 0.9 7.7 45.1 46.3 4.37 0.662
IR2 I feel connected with people who care for me, and for whom I care 0.9 0.0 7.7 46.3 45.1 4.35 0.696
IR3 I feel close and connected with other people who are important to 0.3 0.6 7.7 46.3 45.1 4.35 0.672
me
IR4 I experience a warm feeling with the people I spend time with 0.3 0.6 8.0 44.0 47.1 4.37 0.680
Competence IC1 I feel confident that I can do things well 1.7 4.6 6.9 41.7 45.1 4.24 0.894
IC2 I feel capable at what I do 2.6 3.4 7.1 42.0 44.9 4.23 0.914
IC3 I feel competent to achieve my goals 2.9 3.1 7.1 49.1 37.7 4.16 0.898
IC4 I feel I can successfully complete difficult tasks 2.9 3.1 7.1 39.7 47.1 4.25 0.929

M: Mean, SD: Standard deviation.

from the latent variables plus an error term through a censoring mechanism according to (6) and (7).
⎧
⎪
⎪ *
⎪
⎪ 1if ( − ∞) < Cpq ≤ τp1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ 2if τ < C* ≤ τ
(6)
p1 pq p2
Cpq =
⎪
⎪ ⋮
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ *
⎪ Kif τp(K− 1) < Cpq
⎩ ≤∞

∑
*
Cpq = l
γ lp • ηlq + ζpq (7)

Where,
Cpq : is the categorical response in the indicator p for individual q.
τpk : is the threshold k in the indicator p to be estimated.
γlp : are parameters to be estimated.
ζpq : are the error terms assumed to follow a logistic distribution.
The joint probability of observing the answers to choice situations and indicator ratings was built as seen in (8).
( ) ∫ ( ) ( ) ( )
P yiqt , Cpq |Xiqt , Fqt , Sq , θ, β, α, τ, γ, Σε , Σζ , Συ = p yiqt |Xqt , Fqt , ηq , θ, β, Σε f Cq |ηq , γ, τ, Σζ g ηq |Sq , α, Συ dηq (8)
η

Where,
p(•): are the choice probabilities.
f(•): are the density functions of the indicators.
g(•): are the density functions of the latent variables.
The assumptions we made relating to the error terms of the utility functions and the measurement equations lead us corre­
spondingly to the closed-form of multinomial logit and ordinal logit models making the estimation procedure relatively easier.
The joint likelihood function was coded in OxMetrics 7.1 (Doornik, 2013), specialized software for econometric analysis, to get the
estimation by the maximum simulated likelihood method, using 500 draws of Modified Latin Hypercube Sampling type (Hess et al.,
2006). The model was estimated using all the information simultaneously since the sequential approach tends to slightly overestimate
the weight of the latent variables. After testing several specifications considering different combinations of socioeconomic charac­
teristics and latent variables, the final proposed model was structured as follows: 3 structural equations, one for each latent variable, 11
measurement equations, 3 utility functions, and 1 indicator function.
The estimated coefficient of cost and the various time components provide information on the value of time. After estimating the
coefficients, we obtained the valuations for the travel, access, and waiting time components. We also found the multipliers for the
access and waiting time components, taking the value obtained for the travel time as a reference.
Fig. 2 shows the proposed model, in which, as usual, the latent variables are shown in ovals, tangible variables in rectangles, causal
relationships by solid arrows, and measurement relationships by dashed arrows. In addition, dotted line rounded rectangles wrap the
relationships that are part of the equations. The parameter γ of the measurement equation of indicator IA1 was not statistically sig­
nificant in any of the specifications tested, and for that reason, only 11 measurement equations remained in the final model.

4. Results

In addition to the HDC model, we estimated a Mixed Logit (ML) model that also accounted for the panel effect of the observations,

179
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

Fig. 2. HDC model specification.

considering that unobserved factors vary over people but are constant over choice situations for each individual. The results of the two
models are presented in Table 6, which additionally shows, in parentheses, the t-values. The numbers in curly brackets provide in­
formation about the specification of utility functions. With the exception of fare, which according to our choice context applied only to
the special paratransit service, the other tangible variables were specified as generic variables in the three utility functions. We tested
several specifications even considering specific parameters for access, waiting, and travel times. Although in all cases the estimated
coefficients were statistically significant, we found that the estimated parameters were not significantly different and were, thus, we
specified them as generic in the final models.
The three basic psychological needs, i.e. Autonomy, Relatedness, and Competence, were specified in the utility function of the
special paratransit service. Relatedness and Competence were specified directly in the utility function, while Autonomy entered the
utility function in interaction with fare.

180
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

Table 6
Estimated parameters of the choice model.
Variable HDC ML

Specific constant of the specialized transportation service {1} 0.5354 (1.20) 0.9025 (2.57)
Specific constant of the feeder bus {2} 0.5341 (1.86) 0.9124 (3.46)
Specific constant of the cable car {3} 0.0000 (fixed) 0.0000 (fixed)
Access time {1, 2, 3} − 0.3991 (-15.44) − 0.3796 (-17.87)
Waiting time {1, 2, 3} − 0.3149 (-11.38) − 0.2996 (-11.99)
Travel time {1, 2, 3} − 0.0985 (-7.28) − 0.0935 (-7.37)
Fare {1} − 2.2066 (-8.95) − 2.1084 (-11.09)
Panel effect {1, 2, 3} 0.0392 (0.44) 0.3751 (3.05)
Fare * Autonomy {1} − 1.1494 (-3.88)
Relatedness {1} − 2.8260 (-2.20)
Competence {1} 4.1248 (3.10)
Log-likelihood − 4097.19
Log-likelihood for choice component − 853.07 − 878.18
Likelihood ratio test with respect to ML 25.11

Table 7
Estimated parameters of the structural equations model.
Variable Autonomy Relatedness Competence

Male 0.1174 (1.97)

18–24 years old 0.2982 (1.65) 0.2167 (1.89)
45–64 years old − 0.3311 (-2.48)
Disability caused by illness 0.3929 (2.04) − 0.3309 (-2.59)
Disability caused by physical injury 0.5982 (3.23) − 0.4302 (-2.14)
Person travels daily − 0.2398 (-1.98) − 0.2019 (-2.74)
Feeder bus user − 0.0866 (-1.96)
Cable car user 0.2784 (1.97)

The two models exhibited consistent results, which are in line with the utility-maximizing behavior (Train, 2009). By having three
more parameters, the log-likelihood for choice component of the HDC model is greater. Furthermore, as the likelihood ratio test with
respect to ML is greater than 7.81 (Chi-squared value at 0.05 and 3 degrees of freedom), we can conclude that the HDC model exhibits a
better fit, which supports our hypothesis that mobility-impaired people’s preferences for specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder
are better explained by considering the three innate psychological needs. The alternatives’ specific constants, which capture the
average effect on utility of all factors that are not included in the model, indicate that, ceteris paribus, among the three BRT’s feeder
modes, mobility-impaired people have a lower preference for the cable car. The estimates of times and fare were obtained with
negative signs as expected.
The signs in the utility function for the specialized transportation service indicate that Relatedness and Competence point in the
opposite direction. Mobility-impaired people who feel a greater connection to others perceive less utility from the specialized
transportation service, possibly because they desire to use the same BRT feeder services as others. In contrast, mobility-impaired
people who feel a greater Competence perceive a greater utility from the specialized transportation service. The interaction be­
tween Autonomy and fare was obtained with negative sign, indicating that the greater Autonomy of mobility-impaired people the
greater their sensitivity to the specialized transportation service’s fare, which is in line with the findings of Márquez, Poveda, and Vega
(2019). Furthermore, structural equation coefficients shown in Table 7 suggest the presence of heterogeneity among mobility-impaired
people with respect to the three basic psychological needs.
The estimated coefficients of fare and the three time components provide information on the value of time. Table 8 shows the
people’s willingness to pay for access, waiting and travel time reductions. In contrast to the HDC model, given the specification of the
ML model, it was not possible to determine the value or importance that different classes of individuals place on each attribute of the
alternatives. Consequently, the willingness to pay for reducing travel time was derived homogeneously for all individuals without
considering any systematic tastes variation.1
For the sake of facilitating the analysis, it also presents the multipliers of the value of time for access and waiting with respect to the
value of travel time savings. Although the values of time savings vary slightly depending on the model used, the multipliers are the
same for both models and indicate that, in the context of choice studied, mobility-impaired people place much more importance on
access time. The value of travel time savings is lower than the values previously reported in the literature for the overall Bogotá context
(Márquez, Alfonso & Poveda, 2019), but it is considered reasonable given the socioeconomic characteristics of the study area, where
living conditions are worse than in the other localities in the city. Compared to the 2019 legal minimum wage in Colombia, the value of

1
An alternative way to compute WTP from mixed logit models is by simulation, which allows not only to obtain the mean values but also their
standard deviations (Sillano & Ortuzar, 2005).

181
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

Table 8
Value of time savings and multipliers.
Model Individual Value of time savings Multipliers
(Thousand COP/min)

Access time Waiting time Travel time Access time Waiting time

ML Homogeneous 180.04 142.10 44.35 4.1 3.2

HDC Average 173.66 137.02 42.86 4.1 3.2
For different values of the latent variable autonomy
Higher value (Disability caused by physical injury) 139.52 108.90 34.03
Disability caused by illness 151.95 118.59 37.06
Disability caused by physical injury & Person travels daily 154.24 120.38 37.62
Disability caused by physical injury & 45–64 years old 160.68 125.41 39.19
Disability caused by illness & Person travels daily 169.49 132.29 41.34
Disability caused by illness & 45–64 years old 177.33 138.40 43.25
Disability caused by physical injury & 45–64 years old & Person travels daily 180.44 140.83 44.01
Disability caused by illness & 45–64 years old & Person travels daily 201.72 157.44 49.20
Person travels daily 209.14 162.23 51.01
45–64 years old 221.15 172.61 53.94
Lower value (45–64 years old & Person travels daily) 260.47 203.30 63.53
Other people 183.02 142.85 44.64

travel time savings is close to 80 %.

By using the sample enumeration approach, we accounted for the heterogeneity in value of travel time savings. Compared to the
average value of travel time savings, the range found corresponds to a variation between 80 % and 150 %. People with disabilities
caused by age and other causes, in the age range between 45 and 64, and who travel daily place the higher value on travel time. In
contrast, people with disability caused by physical injury, which are in other age ranges, and who do not travel daily place a lower
value on travel time.

5. Discussion

Our study adds to the existing knowledge base on mobility-impaired people’s preferences for urban transportation services, by
documenting empirical evidence linking the components of the SDT, i.e. Autonomy, Relatedness, and Competence, with preferences
for a specialized transportation service as BRT’s feeder.
In line with the findings of Márquez, Poveda, and Vega (2019), we found that autonomy is a determining factor in perception of
alternatives’ fares. The fact that people who feel a higher autonomy are more sensitive to the new proposed service’s fare implies that
they feel higher motivation in using the same transportation alternatives that are available to every-one, rather than using an exclusive
feeder mode for mobility-impaired people. This should draw the attention of transportation authorities, who should make greater
efforts to provide inclusive transportation services which would give all people the possibility to reach opportunities equally. However,
given the challenging topography of the study area, it is necessary to offer some specialized transportation alternatives that allow
mobility-impaired people to get to the trunk services, which are universally accessible (Bitterman & Hess, 2008).
We found that the greater the competence, the greater the perceived utility of the specialized transportation service. This means
that the more confident, capable, and competent a person feels, the more their motivation is for using a transportation alternative that
improves the conditions of access to the BRT trunk services, regardless of whether this alternative is exclusive for people with dis­
abilities. Therefore, more confident, capable, and competent mobility-impaired people could feel less stigmatized or even believe that
these specialized transportation services meet their needs, contrary to the general expectations of people with disabilities (Rose­
nbloom, 2007). This evidences an individual’s inherent desire to feel effective in interacting with the environment (Deci & Ryan, 2000)
and provides an interesting insight into the preferences of mobility-impaired people for specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder
with implications for transportation policy development.
In contrast, the link between relatedness and the perceived utility of the specialized transportation service is negative, suggesting
that mobility-impaired people who feel loved and cared for are less willing to use exclusive transportation services for people with
disabilities. Therefore, the inherent propensity to feel connected to others, that is, to be a member of a group and to be loved and cared
for (Baumeister & Leary, 1995), is reflected in transportation preferences and motivates people with reduced mobility to use the same
transportation alternatives used by others, regardless of the difficult access conditions that these alternatives may offer.
Travel time savings is normally the principal benefit of a transportation project. Overall, the value of time is the extra cost that
people would be willing to pay to save time. In our study context, mobility-impaired people are willing to pay four times more to
reduce the access time to BRT’s feeder services in relation to travel time. Challenging access conditions to the existing feeder services
make mobility-impaired people more willing to pay for specialized services since people are willing to pay higher fees to use alter­
natives that provide an improved service quality (Yañez-Pagans, 2019). From another perspective, if authorities offered this
specialized service integrated into the BRT trunk service, thus avoiding the payment of an extra fee by users, the welfare effect of
mobility-impaired people’s access time savings could be accounted for in cost-benefit analysis. This benefit would be perceived much
more by mobility-impaired people whose disability is caused by aged-related conditions who travel daily. However, it is important to
recognize that decisions to provide special transportation services to mobility-impairment people is not necessarily driven by cost-

182
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

benefit analysis but by some government schemes.

6. Conclusions

This study provides a better understanding of the preferences of mobility-impaired people for a specialized paratransit service as
BRT’s feeder through the incorporation of the SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2019), an innovative perspective that has until now been granted
little attention from the transportation scientific community.
In addition to presenting new information, the context in which we carry out the study is very interesting. Ciudad Bolivar is one of
the four most populated localities of Bogota, represents 27 % of the total area, and exhibits the poorest living conditions in comparison
with all other localities in the city. The locality is approximately 90 % mountainous, representing a major challenge to mobility-
impaired people, who normally access BRT’s trunk routes using traditional feeder buses and cable cars. In this context, we studied
the preferences of mobility-impaired people for a specialized paratransit service as BRT’s feeder, integrating the SDT into an HDC
model. However, we recognize that a weakness of the study has to do with the information-gathering method. The limitations of stated-
preference data are obvious: what respondents say they will do is often not the same as what they actually do (Train, 2009).
Unlike other empirical studies/research that has that have studied the effect of attitudes and perceptions on the transport pref­
erences of mobility-impaired people, our research is based on the integration of a well-established psychological theory (Ryan & Deci,
2019) in a robust modeling approach that allows for studying the effect of tangible attributes and latent variables on preferences (Ben-
Akiva et al., 2002). In contrast to our study, much of the research in the area has been concerned with analyzing the effect of some
tangible attributes on mobility-impaired people’s accessibility to transport services (Pena Cepeda et al., 2018; Park & Chowdhury,
2018; Verbich and El-Geneidy, 2016). Several investigations along the same lines can be found in the literature, however, there are few
studies that, like ours, investigate the effect of latent variables on mobility-impaired people’s preferences among forms of
transportation.
Visually impaired people also experience transportation barriers that impede their full participation in life activities (Crudden
et al., 2015). However, the obvious greater difficulty in applying surveys to this segment of the population compared to mobility-
impaired people is reflected in less development of transportation research aimed at identifying the needs of these people. For this
reason, we consider it very important to better understand the transportation preferences of visually impaired people. Our results show
the important role that SDT plays in the transportation preferences analysis of mobility-impaired people, so we consider that this
approach could be used to study the preferences of visual impaired people in order to identify customized policies that improve their
living conditions (Crudden et al., 2017). The development of a study of this kind could follow the guidelines to design self-administered
surveys for visually impaired people within a mixed mode approach (Kaczmirek & Wolff, 2007).

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Luis Márquez: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft. Laura X. Pineda: Data
curation, Software, Writing – original draft. Juan C. Poveda: Project administration, Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

References

Access Exchange International, 2012. Paratransit for mobility-impaired persons in developing regions: Starting up and scaling up. California, USA, San Francisco
http://www.globalride-sf.org/paratransit/Guide.pdf.
Adachi, P.J.C., Ryan, R.M., Frye, J., McClurg, D., Rigby, C.S., 2018. “I can’t wait for the next episode!” Investigating the motivational pull of television dramas through
the lens of self-determination theory. Motivation Science 4 (1), 78–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000063.
Agmon, M., Sa’ar, A., & Araten-Bergman, T. (2016). The person in the disabled body: a perspective on culture and personhood from the margins. International Journal
for Equity in Health, 15(1), 147. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-016-0437-2.
Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50 (2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)
90020-T.
Barta, 2014. Special services handbook. The Special Services Department, Reading, Pennsylvania http://bartabus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2014-ADA-
MANUAL.pdf.
Baumeister, R.F., Leary, M.R., 1995. The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin 117 (3),
497–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497.
Ben-Akiva, M., Walker, J., Bernardino, A.T., Gopinath, D.A., Morikawa, T., Polydoropoulou, A., 2002. Integration of choice and latent variable models. In:
Mahmassani, H.S. (Ed.), In Perpetual Motion: Travel Behavior Research Opportunities and Application Challenges. Emerald, Bingley, pp. 431–470.
Bitterman, A., Hess, D.B., 2008. Bus rapid transit identity meets universal design. Disability & Society 23 (5), 445–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09687590802177015.
Boniface, S., Scantlebury, R., Watkins, S.J., Mindell, J.S., 2015. Health implications of transport: evidence of effects of transport on social interactions. Journal of
Transport & Health 2, 441–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2015.05.005.
Brucker, D.L., Rollins, N.G., 2016. Trips to medical care among persons with disabilities: Evidence from the 2009 National Household Travel Survey. Disability and
Health Journal 9 (3), 539–543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2016.01.001.
Cantillo, V., Arellana, J., Rolong, M., 2015. Modelling pedestrian crossing behaviour in urban roads: A latent variable approach. Transportation Research Part F:
Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 32, 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.008.

183
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Boone, L., Deci, E.L., Duriez, B., Lens, W., Matos, L., Mouratidis, A., Ryan, R.M., Sheldon, K.M., Soenens, B., Van Petegem, S.,
Van der Kaap-Deeder, J., Verstuyf, J., 2015. Basic psychological need satisfaction, need frustration, and need strength across four cultures. Motivation and
Emotion 39, 216–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-014-9450-1.
ChoiceMetrics. (2018). Ngene 1.2 User Manual & Reference Guide, Australia. http://www.choice-metrics.com/NgeneManual120.pdf.
Crudden, A., McDonnall, M.C., Hierholzer, A., 2015. Transportation: An Electronic Survey of Persons who Are Blind or Have Low Vision. Journal of Visual Impairment
& Blindness 109 (6), 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1510900603.
Crudden, A., Antonelli, K., O’Mally, J., 2017. A Customized Transportation Intervention for Persons with Visual Impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment &
Blindness 111 (4), 341–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1711100404.
Daly, A., Hess, S., Patruni, B., Potoglou, D., Rohr, C., 2012. Using ordered attitudinal indicators in a latent variable choice model: a study of the impact of security on
rail travel behavior. Transportation 39 (2), 267–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-011-9351-z.
Dane, 2010. Population Registered to Locate and Characterize People with Disabilities. National Administrative Department of Statistics, Bogotá https://www.dane.
gov.co/files/investigaciones/discapacidad/CIUDAD_BOLIVAR.xls.
Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M., 2000. The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry 11, 319–338.
https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01.
Deka, D., Gonzales, E.J., 2014. The generators of paratransit trips by persons with disabilities. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 70, 181–193.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.10.018.
Doornik, J.A., 2013. An Introduction to OxMetricsTM 7 A Software System for Data Analysis and Forecasting. Timberlake Consultants Ltd., London https://www.
timberlake.co.uk/.
Frater, J., Kuijer, R., Kingham, S., 2017. Why adolescents don’t bicycle to school: Does the prototype/willingness model augment the theory of planned behaviour to
explain intentions? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. Part A 46, 250–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2017.03.005.
Gillison, F.B., Rouse, P., Standage, M., Sebire, S.J., Ryan, R.M., 2019. A meta-analysis of techniques to promote motivation for health behaviour change from a self-
determination theory perspective. Health Psychology Review 13 (1), 110–130.
Grisé, E., Boisjoly, G., Maguire, M., El-Geneidy, A., 2019. Elevating access: Comparing accessibility to jobs by public transport for individuals with and without a
physical disability. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 125, 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.02.017.
Hancox, J.E., Quested, E., Ntoumanis, N., Thogersen-Ntoumani, C., 2018. Putting self-determination theory into practice: application of adaptive motivational
principles in the exercise domain. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 10 (1), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2017.1354059.
Hess, S., Train, K., Polak, J., 2006. On the use of a Modified Latin Hypercube Sampling (MLHS) method in the estimation of a Mixed Logit Model for vehicle choice.
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 40, 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2004.10.005.
Houlfort, N., Fernet, C., Vallerand, R.J., Laframboise, A., Guay, F., Koestner, R., 2015. The role of passion for work and need satisfaction in psychological adjustment
to retirement. Journal of Vocational Behavior 88, 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.02.005.
Kaczmirek, L., & Wolff, K. G. (2007). Survey Design for Visually Impaired and Blind People. In: Stephanidis C. (eds) Universal Acess in Human Computer Interaction.
Coping with Diversity. UAHCI 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4554. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73279-2_41.
Kasser, V.M., Ryan, R.M., 1999. The relation of psychological needs for autonomy and relatedness to health, vitality, well-being and mortality in a nursing home.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology 29, 935–954. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb00133.x.
Lättman, K., Olsson, L.E., Friman, M., Fujii, S., 2019. Perceived Accessibility, Satisfaction with Daily Travel, and Life Satisfaction among the Elderly. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16 (22), 4498. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16224498.
Legault, L., Bird, S., Powers, S.E., Sherman, A., Schay, A., Hou, D., Janoyan, K., 2020. Impact of a Motivational Intervention and Interactive Feedback on Electricity
and Water Consumption: A Smart Housing Field Experiment. Environment and Behavior 52 (6), 666–692.
Mackett, R.L., Thoreau, R., 2015. Transport, social exclusion and health. Journal of Transport & Health 2, 610–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2015.07.006.
MacLeod, K., Ragland, D., Villalobos, V., van Meijgaard, J., Kelley-Baker, T., Lacey, J., Satariano, W., 2015. P08 Consumption of alcohol outside the home: Choices for
traveling home. Journal of Transport & Health 2(2), Supplement, S67–S68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2015.04.467.
Márquez, L., Alfonso, A., Poveda, J.C., 2019a. In-vehicle crowding: Integrating tangible attributes, attitudes, and perceptions in a choice context between BRT and
metro. Transportation Research Part A 130, 452–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.09.061.
Márquez, L., Poveda, J.C., Vega, L.A., 2019b. Factors affecting personal autonomy and perceived accessibility of people with mobility impairments in an urban
transportation choice context. Journal of Transport & Health 14, 100583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2019.100583.
Nalipay, M.J.N., King, R.B., Cai, Y., 2020. Autonomy is equally important across East and West: Testing the cross-cultural universality of self-determination theory.
Journal of Adolescence 78, 67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.12.009.
Nguyen-Hoang, P., Yeung, R., 2010. What is paratransit worth? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 44 (10), 841–853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tra.2010.08.006.
Owusu-Ansah, J.K., Baisie, A., Oduro-Ofori, E., 2019. The mobility impaired and the built environment in Kumasi: structural obstacles and individual experiences.
GEOJOURNAL 84, 1003–1020. https://doi-org.ezproxy.unal.edu.co/10.1007/s10708-018-9907-y.
Park, J., Chowdhury, S., 2018. Investigating the barriers in a typical journey by public transport users with disabilities. Journal of Transport & Health 10, 361–368.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2018.05.008.
Park, J., Chowdhury, S., Wilson, D., 2020. Gap between Policymakers’ Priorities and Users’ Needs in Planning for Accessible Public Transit System. Journal of
Transportation Engineering Part A-Systems 146 (4), 04020020. https://doi.org/10.1061/JTEPBS.0000321.
Park, H., Esfahani, H.N., Novack, V.L., Sheen, J., Hadayeghi, H., Song, Z., Christensen, K., 2022. Impacts of disability on daily travel behaviour: A systematic review.
Transport Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2022.2060371.
Pena Cepeda, E., Galilea, P., Raveau, S., 2018. How much do we value improvements on the accessibility to public transport for people with reduced mobility or
disability? Research in Transportation Economics 69, 445–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2018.08.009.
Peters, D., Calvo, R.A., Ryan, R.M., 2018. Designing for motivation, engagement and wellbeing in digital experience. Frontiers in Psychology 9, 797. https://doi.org/
10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00797.
Rosenbloom, S., 2007. Transportation patterns and problems of people with disabilities. In: Field, M.J., Jette, A.M. (Eds.), The Future of Disability in America. The
National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 519–560 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11420/.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2019). Brick by Brick: The Origins, Development, and Future of Self-Determination Theory. In: A. J. Elliot (Ed.), Advances in Motivation Science,
6, 111-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adms.2019.01.001.
Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L., 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55,
68–78 https://doi.org/10.1037110003-066X.55.1.68.
SALUDATA. (2019). Population with disabilities by locality in Bogotá D.C. 2019. Bogotá Health Observatory. Bogotá. http://saludata.saludcapital.gov.co/osb/index.
php/datos-de-salud/enfermedades-cronicas/discapacidad/.
Sammer, G., Uhlmann, T., Unbehaun, W., Millonig, A., Mandl, B., Dangschat, J., Mayr, R., 2012. Identification of Mobility-Impaired Persons and Analysis of Their
Travel Behavior and Needs. Transportation Research Record 2320, 46–54. https://doi.org/10.3141/2320-06.
Secretaría Distrital de Planeación. (2014). Proyecciones de población por localidades para Bogotá 2016-2020. Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá. 117 p. http://www.sdp.gov.co/
sites/default/files/boletin69.pdf.
Soto, J.J., Márquez, L., Macea, L.F., 2018. Accounting for attitudes on parking choice: An integrated choice and latent variable approach. Transportation Research
Part A 111, 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.03.003.
Standage, M., Curran, T., & Rouse, P. C. (2019). Self-determination-based theories of sport, exercise, and physical activity motivation. In: T. S. Horn & A. L. Smith, Advances
in Sport and Exercise Psychology, 289-311. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.
Sweeney, J.C., Webb, D., Mazzarol, T., Soutar, G.N., 2014. Self-Determination Theory and Word of Mouth about Energy-Saving Behaviors: An Online Experiment.
Psychology and Marketing 31 (9), 698–716. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20729.

184
L. Márquez et al. Transportation Research Part A 165 (2022) 172–185

Tagkaloglou, S., Kasser, T., 2018. Increasing collaborative, pro-environmental activism: The roles of T Motivational Interviewing, self-determined motivation, and
self-efficacy. Journal of Environmental Psychology 58, 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.06.004.
Train, K., 2009. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Verbich, D., El-Geneidy, A., 2016. The pursuit of satisfaction: Variation in satisfaction with bus transit service among riders with encumbrances and riders with
disabilities using a large-scale survey from London, UK. Transport Policy 47, 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.12.009.
Wang, C., Hsu, H.-C.-K., Bonem, E.M., Moss, J.D., Yu, S., Nelson, D.B., Levesque-Bristol, C., 2019. Need satisfaction and need dissatisfaction: A comparative study of
online and face-to-face learning contexts. Computers in Human Behavior 95, 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.034.
Weinstein, N., Przybylski, A.K., 2019. The impacts of motivational framing of technology restrictions on adolescent concealment: Evidence from a preregistered
experimental study. Computers in Human Behavior 90, 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.053.
Who, 2011. World Report on Disability 2011. World Health Organization, Geneva https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK304079/.
Yañez-Pagans, P., Martinez, D., Mitnik, O.A., Scholl, L., Vazquez, A., 2019. Urban transport systems in Latin America and the Caribbean: lessons and challenges. Lat
Am Econ Rev 28 (1).
Zaragoza, J., Corral, A., Ikeda, E., García-Bengoechea, E., Aibar, A., 2020. Assessment of psychological, social cognitive and perceived environmental influences on
children’s active transport to school. Journal of Transport & Health 16, 100839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2020.100839.
Zhang, C.-Q., Zhang, R., Gan, Y., Li, D., Rhodes, R.E., 2019. Predicting transport-related cycling in Chinese employees using an integration of perceived physical
environment and social cognitive factors. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 64, 424–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trf.2019.06.003.

185