Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40890-022-00177-0

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Analysis of Travel Satisfaction with Commuting in Developing

Economy: A Case of New Delhi, India
Malavika Jayakumar1 · Prasanta K. Sahu2 · Bandhan Bandhu Majumdar3 · Agnivesh Pani4

Received: 27 January 2022 / Accepted: 20 December 2022

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022

Abstract
This study presents a methodology for analyzing travel satisfaction associated with commuting based on a segmentation-
based approach and suggests segment-specific policy recommendations for improving trip quality in urban India. A survey
questionnaire was developed to collect (1) commuters’ socio-demographic, trip-specific information, (2) commuters’ per-
ceived satisfaction related to daily-, work-, and non-work-/other trips and (3) commuters’ satisfaction associated with the
performance of a set of built-environment factors (sidewalk, bus-stop), and (4) commuter’s perception towards the existing
level of safety, comfort, and time-efficiency associated with bus, walk, and private-car from 898 respondents across New
Delhi, the Indian capital. The Kruskal–Wallis H-test was used to test for heterogeneity in travel satisfaction across various
subgroups. Subsequently, a two-step clustering approach was used to classify the commuters into five segments based on
age, gender, and commuting mode. The segments are ‘captive bus commuters’, ‘young male choice commuters’, ‘private car
commuters’, ‘middle-aged choice commuters’ and ‘female choice commuters’. The user perception towards built-environment,
mode-specific characteristics and travel satisfaction levels were explored within each segment. Results indicated that bus-stop
safety and security were perceived with low importance, whereas sidewalk quality was satisfactory. Similarly, bus travel's
safety, comfort, and reliability aspects were unsatisfactory compared to walking, indicating immediate intervention toward
bus-specific infrastructure. The proposed methodology would help formulate specific policy measures to improve the trip
satisfaction of urban commuters and facilitate efficient budget allocation for infrastructure improvement programs.

Keywords Travel satisfaction · Subjective well-being (SWB) · Built environment · Socioeconomic characteristics ·
Segmentation · Two-step clustering

Introduction

* Prasanta K. Sahu One of the main goals of a country’s government planning

prasantsahu222@gmail.com agency to improve the quality of life is to improve the urban
Malavika Jayakumar people's subjective well-being (SWB) and satisfaction with
malujaykay@gmail.com life (SWL) [1]. Access to good transportation infrastructure
Bandhan Bandhu Majumdar is one of the key indicators to evaluate a person's quality
bandykolkata@gmail.com of life, particularly for metropolitan residents. Transporta-
Agnivesh Pani tion has become a significant component of everyday life—
agniveshpani@gmail.com thus, policies for commuting within a city carry important
implications for both SWB and SWL. Existing research
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute suggests that urban commuters’ perceived travel satisfaction
of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400076, India
significantly influences the SWB [2–4]; poor public trans-
2
Department of Civil Engineering, BITS Pilani – Hyderabad port commute increases rider dissatisfaction [5], negatively
Campus, Hyderabad 500078, India
affecting their SWB. Intra-city commuting has frequently
3
Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute been considered a stressor that reduces an individual’s
of Technology Durgapur, West Bengal 713209, India
quality of life [6]. The dissatisfaction may originate from
4
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute longer travel times or uncomfortable travel scenarios such
of Technology (BHU), Varanasi, India

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 7 Page 2 of 14
as congestion, overcrowding, etc. Longer trips in congested
environments lead to stress and deteriorating individual
and aggregate-level SWB. Therefore, to improve commut-
ers' SWB, appropriate policies must be formulated to reduce
travel dissatisfaction. However, designing efficient policy
measures requires a detailed investigation of the associa-
tions between transport characteristics and travel satisfac-
tion [6]. Several empirical studies have investigated the
impact of various transportation system characteristics and
commuters’ well-being [7–9]. In developing nations, where
various commuting modes operate in heterogeneous traf-
fic conditions, studies identifying various commuter market
segments based on travel satisfaction and examining the
impact of socioeconomic parameters on travel satisfaction
have been somewhat limited. In this context, detailed market
segmentation of users for different trip satisfaction levels
would enable the planning bodies to formulate targeted poli-
cies for a manageable segment of commuters. In addition
to market segmentation, investigating the heterogeneity in
perception for different socioeconomic sub-groups, such as
male/female, would give the right perspectives to draft poli-
cies [10]. Evidence-based knowledge of travel satisfaction
would facilitate transport services' planning and operations
to improve based on travellers’ requirements. Such investi-
gations can confirm which user group/market segment will
benefit from implementing the proposed policy. This study
has attempted to address the following objectives.
• To classify the commuters into different segments with
respect to their travel satisfaction level associated with
different modes and their characteristics.
• To identify the most and least satisfied commuter seg-
ment and make necessary recommendations to improve
their trip-related satisfaction.
• To investigate the influence of socio-economic and trip
related characteristics travel satisfaction level across vari-
ous commuter segments.
Hence, understanding which sections of society are least
satisfied and identifying differences across user groups
would help planners develop policies and programs for com-
mute stress reduction. Previous research investigated the role
of transport characteristics on travel satisfaction and well-
being aspects in developed countries such as the USA and
Canada, England, Australia, the Netherland, Japan, etc. [2,
11–14]. On the contrary, there is a lack of studies investigat-
ing travel satisfaction in developing countries. Commuters in
developing countries are less satisfied with their daily travel,
particularly in megacities, due to congested networks with
unreliable, inaccessible, uncomfortable, and overcrowded
public and para-transit modes, poor safety records, and
low health standards due to vehicular emission [15, 16].
As per a news report from The Times of India, commuters
13
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7
travelling from suburban areas to Mumbai metropolitan area
face severe shortage of transport facilities and have to bear
with long waiting times and multiple transfers, among other
problems, for their daily travel [17]. Mumbai is ranked 5th,
Bengaluru is ranked 10th, and Delhi is ranked 11th among
404 cities across 58 countries in terms of congestion, accord-
ing to The Economic Times [18], which negatively affects
the SWB of people living in these megacities. This research
considers New Delhi (India's capital) as the case city to
address these externalities. New Delhi has a very high trip
rate and traffic density compared to other metropolitan cities.
Specifically, this study makes the following contributions
to this emergent research topic related to travel satisfaction
by (1) classifying the commuters into different segments
based on the socioeconomic characteristics, travel patterns,
and trip satisfaction associated with daily trips (including
both revenue-generating and non-revenue generating trips),
work or commute trips, and non-work trips respectively; (2)
investigating trip satisfaction variation across different soci-
oeconomic sub-groups and (3) formulating a set of segment-
specific policy recommendations for improving satisfaction
derived from commuting.
Literature Review
The literature review focuses on identifying the critical fac-
tors influencing trip satisfaction, including trip-related fac-
tors such as trip duration, travel mode, built environment-
related characteristics and socioeconomic characteristics.
Subsequently, a short note on available methods for hetero-
geneity analysis is presented along with commuter segmen-
tation techniques.
Factors Influencing Trip Satisfaction
The trip satisfaction level depends on several factors, one
being the trip duration; commuting for a longer time is less
satisfying because of higher stress levels, boredom, and
social isolation [19]. Some studies showed that trip duration
might positively affect journey satisfaction [14], while oth-
ers indicated that trip duration negatively affects the user's
perception [20]. Lancée et al. suggested that longer com-
muting time depresses mood, and specific commuting time
and mode combinations adversely affect satisfaction [2].
Travel distance is another factor that was found to influence
users’ travel satisfaction positively and negatively. Distance
positively impacts travel satisfaction as it provides a means
for commuters to escape routines [21]. Handy and Thigpen
reported that commuters undertaking trips with longer com-
mute distances like inter-urban travel were less satisfied with
their daily travel [3]. Choice of mode was also observed to
influence trip satisfaction; an increase in satisfaction level
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7
with a particular mode encourages users to use the same
mode for future travel [4, 20, 22]. Pedestrians, train commut-
ers, and cyclists were more satisfied than car-, metro-, and
bus users [14]. Walking improves travel satisfaction signifi-
cantly, while public transport use has shown a lower level
of satisfaction [3, 20]. Ettema et al. found that if a car user
switched to public transport and active mode, the associated
trip-satisfaction level would decrease and increase, respec-
tively [23]. Cycling to work positively affects SWB [20],
but there is a negative perception of bicycle usage among
adults considering it to be a mode used by low-income
groups, resulting in a reluctance to use bicycles for work
purposes [24]. Hence creating awareness about bicycle usage
through campaigns can promote its usage, improving travel
satisfaction [22]. Commuters would be more likely to uti-
lize bicycles if separate lanes, signals, and parking spaces
were provided for their convenience [25]. Similarly, during
peak hour travel, congestion increases stress due to increased
travel time for public-transport users, while lack of control
over factors such as driving speed and the presence of an
increased number of other vehicles in closer vicinity affects
private-vehicle users [23]. Thus, trip-related factors such as
trip time, distance, mode, and external factors such as con-
gestion affect travel satisfaction.
The built environment and accessibility-related elements,
including street lighting, presence of sidewalk, station acces-
sibility and safety, affect travellers' satisfaction [26]. It was
also observed that the built environment influences trip-
related characteristics (e.g. travel mode choice, congestion
levels), thereby indirectly affecting commute satisfaction
[27, 28]. It was revealed that commuters are unwilling to
travel by public transport due to inconvenience, discomfort,
and lack of door-to-door connectivity [15]. Studies have
shown that socioeconomic characteristics such as age, gen-
der, income, employment etc., influence travel satisfaction.
Young commuters perceived public transport reliability and
frequency as necessary to improve satisfaction [29]. Trip
satisfaction of employed users increases with better transit
frequency and punctuality, while elder commuters highly
value comfort. Women users were least satisfied with public
transport due to safety concerns [30]; however, increased
security and cleanliness increased their trip satisfaction [10].
Women were also willing to walk more compared to men
[31]. Higher-income is related to higher trip satisfaction lev-
els, especially for men [12]. Employment has a significant
effect on SWB based on a study conducted in Canada [32].
Thus, the critical factors influencing trip satisfaction were
identified to include built environment-related characteris-
tics and socioeconomic characteristics.
From the above literature, based on the difference in
perception of satisfaction between commuters of differ-
ent socioeconomic groups, there is a need to investigate
heterogeneity in user perception of satisfaction among
Page 3 of 14 7
socioeconomic groups for targeted policy planning. How-
ever, studies analyzing the heterogeneity in travel satisfac-
tion among the various socioeconomic group is missing in
developing countries. For ordinal data, heterogeneity can
ideally be evaluated using nonparametric tests, such as the
Kruskal–Wallis H-test. The Kruskal–Wallis H-test is applied
to compare the statistical difference between two or more
population sub-groups and has been extensively adopted in
previous transportation-related research [33]. Differences
in trip satisfaction across different population sub-groups
would indicate specific improvement needs for user groups.
Segmentation of commuters would help planners formulate
effective policy instruments targeting a particular group of
users.
Commuter Segmentation Concerning Trip
Satisfaction
Segmentation of commuter user groups would help inves-
tigate overall trip satisfaction levels based on the commut-
ers' socioeconomic profile. Data clustering can be used to
create groups with objects having similar characteristics.
This can be achieved through many methods such as factor
analysis, structural equation models, hierarchical cluster-
ing, K-Means clustering, and two-step clustering. Past stud-
ies used factor analysis and structural equation models for
variable reduction and clustering to divide the dataset based
on socioeconomic and travel attributes [34]. Hierarchical
clustering is restricted to small datasets; K-Means is lim-
ited to continuous data [35]. Two-step clustering can handle
large datasets consisting of both continuous and categorical
variables. Two-step cluster analysis combines hierarchical
and non-hierarchical methods and can automatically find
the optimal number of clusters [7]. Abenoza et al. [7] used
Two-step clustering to segment travellers based on their
socioeconomic, travel patterns, and accessibility measures to
measure the determinants of satisfaction for different market
segments. This study used the two-step clustering method
to determine commuter segments based on trip satisfaction
to identify the least and most satisfied groups of commut-
ers. Figure 1 presents a methodological framework for this
work. The study would help planners develop policies and
programs for improving commuter satisfaction.
Survey Design and Data Collection
Survey Design
The travel behaviour questionnaire covers different aspects
of user perception on travel satisfaction concerning daily,
work, and non-work trips. Existing research literature was
critically reviewed for designing the questionnaire. The
13
 7 Page 4 of 14
Fig. 1 Methodological frame-
work
commuter’s responses are captured in a five-point Likert
Scale which quantifies the level of agreement or disagree-
ment on a symmetric agree-disagree scale for a series of
statements related to trip satisfaction and trip characteristics.
The questionnaire consisted of three parts.
• Part A was used to collect respondents’ socioeconomic
characteristics such as gender, age, income level and
mode used
• Part B was used to elicit users’ perceptions of various
mode-specific aspects such as safety, comfort, and time-
efficiency of bus, walk, and private car. Further, users’
perceptions of built environment-specific factors such as
bus-stop safety and security, bus-stop accessibility, street
congestion, sidewalk availability, and walking health
benefits were assessed using a five-point Likert Scale
to elicit the users’ level of agreement or disagreement
with the quality. For example, the level of safety associ-
ated with different travel modes was captured on a Likert
scale with ordinal values ranging from 0 to 4 (0—Very
unsafe, 1—Unsafe, 2—Neutral, 3—Safe, 4—Very safe).
Similarly, the perception of bus-stop accessibility was
measured on a five-point Likert scale (0—Highly inac-
cessible, 1—Inaccessible, 2—Neutral, 3—Accessible,
13
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7
4—Highly accessible). Similarly, all other variables were
measured. Details of all questionnaire elements, high-
lighting the ordinal nature of the responses, are presented
in Appendix
• Part C was used to collect three types of user-perceived
trip satisfaction, namely, daily travel satisfaction (DTS),
work-trip satisfaction (WTS), and non-work/other than
work trip satisfaction (OTS) on a five-point Likert Scale
to capture the users’ level of agreement or disagreement
with satisfaction (0—Least Satisfied, 1—Less satisfied,
2—Neutral, 3—Satisfied, 4—Highly satisfied). Details
of all questionnaire elements are presented in Appendix.
Data Collection
Initially, a pilot survey was conducted using the prelimi-
nary version of the survey questionnaire. Then, the question-
naire was further refined to improve responses for the final
survey. A team of four skilled interviewers were positioned
at key trip generators (college, hospital, market, metro sta-
tion, office area) across New Delhi to identify respondents
for the survey using the random sampling technique. Ran-
dom sampling allows all commuters an equal chance of
being chosen to give an unbiased sample representative of
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7 Page 5 of 14 7

the population. Face-to-face interviews were conducted dur-

ing weekdays of the 2018 summer months. Pen-and-Pencil
Interview (PAPI)/Face-to-face interview was used for the
survey due to the relatively higher response rate and asso-
ciated minimal cost component. Commuters were chosen
randomly from bus stations, markets, office areas etc. and
asked if they were willing to participate in the survey. If they
were willing, then a face-to-face interview was conducted.
A total of 1000 responses were collected; 102 responses
were incomplete and thus excluded from the study. Finally,
898 complete and consistent responses were used for the
analysis.

Preliminary Analysis

The descriptive analysis of the data was carried out for a pre- (a) Summary of commuters’ socioeconomic characteristics
liminary understanding of the data's nature. Figure 2a pre-
sents the descriptive statistics of the respondents. It shows
that out of the 898 respondents surveyed, 61% were males,
and around 39% were females. Most respondents fall in the
age group of 25–34 years (36%), followed by the 35–44 age
group (27%). Almost 39% of respondents have income in the
range of 20,000–50,000 INR per month, whereas only 4% of
the respondents earn less than 10,000 INR per month. More
than 50% of the commuters use modes other than buses,
cars and walking for their travel. More than 20% use car and
more than 15% use buses for travel. A small percentage use
walking (4%), while the rest uses combinations of car bus
and walk for travel. 30% of commuters have both car and
two-wheelers, while around 20% own only car. Figure 2b
shows the commuters’ perception of satisfaction (DTS, WTS
and OTS). It was observed that most respondents gave a
(b) Perception of satisfaction
neutral response for satisfaction. Hence further analysis is
necessary to understand the commuter perceptions better.
Fig. 2 Descriptive statistics of the data set

Data Analysis
Evaluation of Heterogeneity Across Population
Sub-groups Using Kruskal–Wallis H-test
Kruskal–Wallis H-test is a nonparametric test commonly
used in transportation problems to compare variation across
two or more populations [33]. This test was used in the pre-
sent study to understand if users’ perception of various types
of travel satisfaction differs across specific sub-groups, say,
do male and female respondents perceive satisfaction in a
statistically similar or different way? Where null hypothesis
(H0): Median score against any variable is the same across
groups. Alternative hypothesis (H1): Median score against
any variable is not the same across groups. The test statistic
H is expressed in Eq. 1.
12 ∑ Rj
2
H= − 3(n + 1) (1)
n(n + 1) nj
where Rj denotes the rank-sum for sample j, n represents the
total number of samples, nj indicates the number of respond-
ents in sample j. To interpret the outcome of this test, p-val-
ues need to be checked for each test statistic [33]. The test
statistic was applied to assess heterogeneity within users’
perceived trip satisfaction levels for various user sub-groups
based on age, gender, and travel mode choice. For a particu-
lar factor, if heterogeneity could be observed among com-
muters’ responses across a specific population sub-group,
the respective asymptotic significance or p-value should be
less than 0.1 considering a 90% confidence interval [33].
For example, the H test statistic of 10.12 and the p-value of

13
 7 Page 6 of 14 Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7

0.04 (< 0.1) were reported for DTS for age. This observation
indicates that users of different ages perceive daily travel sat-
isfaction statistically differently at a 95% confidence interval.
Similarly, the H-test statistic was observed as 2.53, and the
associated p-value was observed as 0.66 (> 0.1) when DTS
was tested for evidence of heterogeneity for gender. This
finding shows no significant heterogeneity in the perception
of DTS among the genders. The test statistic and associated
asymptotic significance or p-value derived for each test are
reported in Table 1 for DTS, WTS, and OTS, respectively.
Evidence of Heterogeneity for Socioeconomic
Characteristics and Travel Mode
Heterogeneity was observed in user perceptions of DTS
for different age groups, with a significant p-value of 0.04
for DTS, while heterogeneity in the perception of WTS
and OTS was not found to be significant. When compar-
ing the perceptions of DTS, WTS, and OTS between male
and female commuters, it was found that there was no
heterogeneity among male and female users’ perceived
DTS and OTS, but their perceptions of WTS are statisti-
cally different. The heterogeneity may be attributed to the
exposure of women commuters to an unsafe environment
that may affect their personal safety. An in-depth analysis
is necessary to understand male and female users’ trip
requirements. Monthly income and vehicle ownership
were found not to affect the perception of satisfaction.
Finally, for various travel modes used by the commuters,
significant heterogeneity was observed in perceptions for
(a) DTS between private car users and other mode users
(excluding bus and walk) and (b) WTS and OTS between
bus users and other mode users (excluding car and walk).
This could be attributed to the variation in comfort and
safety of different travel modes. The heterogeneity inves-
tigation results indicated a significant difference in user-
perceived trip satisfaction for socioeconomic attributes
such as age, gender, and travel modes used. This obser-
vation strengthens the need for a detailed investigation
of the interaction and association between the socioeco-
nomic characteristics through segment-based analysis.
Further these observations may also assist in developing
suitable policies to improve travel satisfaction.
Commuter Segmentation Using Two-Step Clustering
Technique
Two‑Step Clustering‑Theoretical Basis
Two-step clustering involves two steps [36]. First, all data
points were scanned, and the dense regions were stored. Sec-
ond, each dense region was treated as an individual point, and
a hierarchical clustering algorithm was applied.
• Step-1: Pre-clustering
All data records were scanned sequentially from the dataset.
It was then assessed whether the current record would be
merged with any previously constructed dense region or a
single cluster would be formed based on the distance crite-
rion [36]. During this data screening, a CF (Cluster Feature)-
tree was constructed to store the summary statistics of dense
regions or singletons containing the cluster centres. CFj of
a cluster Cj is:
{ }
2
CFj = Nj , SAj , SAj , NBj (2)
where Nj—the number of data records, SAj—the sum of
continuous attributes. SAj2—squared continuous attributes of�
∑KB �
data records Nj. NBj = (NBj1, NBj2…,NBjKk ) is a k=1 Lk − 1
-dimensional vector, where kth sub-vector is of (Lk − 1)
dimension, given by NB jk = (Njk1, Njk2…. NjkLk −1) in which

Table 1 Kruskal–Wallis H-test Population subgroups Travel satisfaction

summary
DTS WTS OTS
Chi-square value p-value Chi-square value p-value Chi-square value p-value

Age 10.12*** 0.04 5.36 0.25 1.31 0.86

Gender 2.53 0.64 8.90** 0.06 2.00 0.74
Monthly income 1.36 0.85 5.63 0.23 5.90 0.21
Vehicle ownership 0.44 0.98 1.62 0.81 2.58 0.63
Travel mode: car 11.52*** 0.02 4.92 0.29 2.41 0.66
Travel mode: bus 5.98 0.201 9.64*** 0.05 10.33*** 0.04
Travel mode: walk 7.04 0.13 2.84 0.58 6.13 0.19

***95% Confidence level

**90% Confidence level

13
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7
Njkl is the number of data in cluster Cj, whose kth categorical
attribute takes the lth category, l = 1, …, Lk−1.
This cluster feature is an effective way of data storage
and is sufficient to estimate all measures specific to cluster-
ing algorithms. Based on CF measures, two clusters can
also be merged. The algorithm also has an optional step that
excludes the outlier dataset from clustering [36].
• Step-2: Clustering
First, the number of clusters is estimated using the Bayes-
ian Information Criterion (BIC). A cluster with low BIC is
generally preferred [36]. The decrease in BIC with each step
is calculated in hierarchical clustering of the dense region
from the pre-clustering step. The number of clusters is
approximated with a reduction in BIC with an increase in the
number of clusters. Second, the ratio change in the distance
at each merge is considered the criteria. For an incorrect
merging of clusters, high estimates of ratio change could be
observed. Subsequently, each data set is assigned to a par-
ticular cluster and given a specific cluster membership. For
a more detailed theoretical background, readers may refer
to Chiu et al. [36].
Commuter Segmentation
Commuter segmentation was carried out using the two-step
cluster analysis in IBM SPSS Statistics Version 20. Initially,
clustering was carried out considering several combinations
of socioeconomic factors like age, gender, monthly income,
vehicle ownership and travel mode. Based on the variables'
statistical significance, a five-cluster solution was found con-
sidering age, gender, and travel mode (bus, car, and walk-
ing). Commuters using a single mode (bus/car/walking)
and a combination of two or all three modes (bus, car, and
walking) were considered in this analysis. The correlations
between all variables chosen for clustering were lesser than
0.12 and considered for analysis [7]. The solution had the
maximum cluster quality index (silhouette coefficient) of
0.3, which measures how similar an object is to its cluster
compared to other clusters represented within a range of − 1
to + 1, with one being the best solution. The ratio between
the largest and smallest cluster was found to be 1.88, below
the threshold value of 3, hence found acceptable [7]. The
two-step clustering partitioned the data into five clusters/
segments. The composition of all the segments in terms of
the total sample is given in Fig. 3. Based on the composition,
it could be observed that the commuters are almost equally
distributed in five clusters barring segment-5, where only
135 commuters are present. Subsequently, Fig. 4 presents
each segment's socioeconomic characteristics, modal share,
Page 7 of 14 7
Segment 1
Segment 2
Segment 3
24.5% Segment 4
18.3% Segment 5
13%
22.9%
21.3%
Fig. 3 Segment composition
and trip-satisfaction characteristics. Based on the segments,
some interesting preliminary observations could be found.
Segment-2 and segment-5 were all-male and all-female
commuter clusters, respectively, indicating the difference in
trip-satisfaction perception among males and females. This
finding also suggests differential trip requirements between
the two groups.
All other segments were skewed with a higher number of
male commuters, indicating the general male-dominant trips
in New Delhi, a typical Indian characteristic. Concerning
age, in the all-male and all-female commuter segments, 60%
and 80% of commuters were observed to belong to the age
group between 25 and 34 years, which points towards plan-
ning for young travel incentives to encourage them to com-
mute frequently. The income profile of segments provides
information about the relative affordability of each cluster
segment. Results indicate that segment-3 and segment-5
have a comparatively higher proportion of commuters with
a monthly income of more than 100,000 INR/month. Fig-
ure 4d shows the respective commuters' modal share, which
is further used to interpret the clusters in the subsequent
section. Figure 4(e) shows the satisfaction associated with
DTS, WTS and OTS. It was found that DTS is highest for
all segments, followed by WTS and OTS.
For an in-depth understanding of the segment-specific
discussions and policy-level interpretations, the variations
in commuter perceptions of the built-environment factors are
compared. User perception towards some of the built envi-
ronment-specific attributes, namely, (1) bus-stop accessibil-
ity, (2) bus-stop safety and security, (3) street congestion,
(4) sidewalk availability, and (5) walk health benefits, were
collected in a five-point Likert scale and analyzed for each
segment. For mode-specific policy development to improve
trip satisfaction, a segment-wise comparison focusing on
mode-specific (1) safety, (2) time efficiency, and c) comfort
13
 7 Page 8 of 14 Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7

Female 18-24 Less than 10000 INR

25-34 10000-20000 INR
Male 20000-50000 INR
100 35-44 50
50000-100000 INR
44-54 100000 INR and above
100
55 and above
80 40

80

Percentage
60 30

Percentage
Percentage

60

40 20
40

20 10
20

0
0 0
Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5
Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5 Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5

(a) Gender (b) Age group (c) Monthly income

Other modes 4.0

Bus (B)
Car (C) DTS
Walking (W)
3.5 WTS
B+W
100
C+B
C+W
OTS
3.0

Average Likert scale value

C+B+W

80
2.5
2.21 2.14 2.11
2.03
Percentage

60 2.0 1.97 1.99 1.96 1.92 1.96

1.88
1.67 1.74 1.67
1.58
1.5 1.49
40

1.0
20
0.5

0 0.0
Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5 Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5

(d) Modal Share (e) Satisfaction

Fig. 4 Segment characteristics

was also conducted. Figure 5 presents the variation of the It can be observed from Fig. 4e that the mean DTS, WTS,
built environment-specific attributes for the segments. It can and OTS are 1.97, 1.88, and 1.49, respectively. This seg-
be observed that walking-health benefits scale values are on ment of commuters is found to be the least satisfied in terms
the top with very high values for segments 1 and 5, whereas of OTS than any other segment. Among built-environment
bus stop safety and security has the lowest value, especially attributes, bus-stop safety and security are perceived to be
for segment 5. Figure 6 presents the mode-specific variations very low (1.77) by the commuters. In comparison, walk
in safety, time efficiency, and comfort for all segments. health benefits (3.94) have been perceived quite highly by
the commuters, followed by bus-stop accessibility (3.18) and
sidewalk availability (3.02). Commuters in this segment feel
Segment-Specific Analysis and Discussions dissatisfied with safety and security while travelling by bus.
But compared to other segments, they perceive the bus as a
Segment-1 safer and more secure mode of transportation, which may
be because they are restricted to public transport use due to
This segment mainly consists of commuters aged between relatively lower affordability (see Fig. 5).
25 and 34 years. In this group, 56.5% and 43.5% of com- Mode-specific analysis (Fig. 6) for captive bus commut-
muters are male and female, respectively. For work trips, ers also clearly indicates that bus travel's safety and time-
78.01% of commuters use bus, 4.71% use both bus and walk- efficiency or reliability are perceived rather poorly (2.08 and
ing, 1.05% use a combination of car, bus and walking, and 2.01 respectively) by the commuters. On the other hand,
16.23% use only walking. This group's average income is the safety and comfort associated with the walk are perceived
least among all groups, from which it can be inferred that quite positively by commuters (3.12 and 3.94). Interestingly,
users belonging to this segment are captive bus commuters. the time efficiency related to car travel is also perceived to
A user with only one commute alternative is called a captive be relatively lower (2.60) by the commuters. This observa-
user. In contrast, a user with several alternative modes is a tion could be attributed to the congested road network of
choice commuter. New Delhi, which negatively affects the time-efficiency of

13
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7 Page 9 of 14 7

Fig. 5 Variation of user percep- 4.0

tion towards built environment 3.94 3.81
attributes across five segments 3.70 3.91
3.77
3.5 Bus stop

Average Likert Scale Value

accessibility
3.18
3.02
3.14 3.01 2.99 Bus stop safety
3.02 3.06
3.0 3.00 2.99 3.00 and security
2.92 2.93
2.89 2.93
2.79 Street congestion

2.5 Sidewalk
availability

Walking-health
2.0 benefits
1.77 1.78
1.66 1.64
1.58
1.5
Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5

4.0 4.0
3.67 Bus_safety Bus_time efficiency
Car_safety Car_ time efficiency
3.5 3.5 3.55
Average Value in Likert Scale

Average Value in Likert Scale

3.18 3.38 3.43 Walking_time

3.12 Walking_safety 3.29 efficiency
3.0
3.05 3.0 2.80 2.76 2.88
2.89
2.75 2.76 2.60
2.5 2.76 2.5
2.61 2.54
2.60 2.70
2.08
2.0 2.0 2.01

1.5 1.5
1.21 1.09 1.31 1.09
0.902 0.915 1.03 1.19
1.0 1.0

Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5 Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5

(a) Safety (b) Time Efficiency

4.0
3.81 3.91 Bus_comfort
3.94 3.73
Average Value in Likert Scale

3.5 3.77 3.70 3.53 Car_comfort

Walking_comfort
3.0
2.85 2.85 2.83
2.5

2.0 2.07

1.5
1.17 1.21
1.0 0.878 1.05
0.5
Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5

(c) Comfort

Fig. 6 Variation of mode-related attributes (a) safety, (b) time efficiency, and (c) comfort for various travel modes for each segment

cars or buses. Overall, this segment could be inferred as Segment-2

less satisfied with bus trips and moderately satisfied with
car and walk trips. This segment comprises all-male commuters (100%),
of which the majority belong to the age category of
25–34 years (59.5%). Commuters in this group are
observed to use modes other than private-car, buses, or

13
 7 Page 10 of 14
walking. Almost 25% of users in this segment have a
monthly income of 50,000 to 1,00,000 INR/month. A
relatively lower proportion of users earn less than 20,000
INR/month indicating higher affordability of this group
of users than Segment-1 (captive bus commuters). The
socio-demographic profile and choice of other modes indi-
cate that users belonging to this segment are Young Male
choice commuters.
The mean values of DTS, WTS, and OTS are 1.99, 1.96,
and 1.67, respectively. Male choice users are moderately
satisfied with the trip quality compared to other segments.
Among built-environment attributes, sidewalk availability,
street-congestion level, and bus-stop safety and security are
perceived to be very low by commuters of this segment com-
pared to other segments. This observation could be the rea-
son for them not choosing to walk or take the bus for com-
muting, and their higher affordability could allow them to
select the best alternative. A similar observation could also
be made by the mode-specific analysis, where safety (1.21)
and time-efficiency (1.09) of bus travel are perceived to be
low. This group of choice users can be attracted to buses
or walking only by improving the infrastructure conditions
based on adequate investment from government planning
bodies.
Segment-3
The male and female commuter proportion in this segment
is 71.3% and 28.7%, respectively. Of them, 40.9% belong to
the age group of 35–44 years; 97.56% travel by car, 1.83%
use both car and bus, while the rest 0.61% use a combination
of car and walk. Almost 30% of users in this segment have a
monthly family income of more than 1,00,000 INR/month,
which increases their chance of using cars compared to other
groups. Users belonging to this group could be termed as
Private car commuters.
Mean values for DTS, WTS, and OTS are 2.21, 1.92, and
1.74, respectively. This segment of commuters is the most
satisfied concerning DTS and OTS than other segments,
which could be attributed to relatively higher income levels
than other segments and the use of cars for travel. This group
of commuters perceive street congestion levels to be better
than other segments. The car's safety, comfort, and time-
efficiency are perceived to be 3.67, 3.73, and 3.55, which
is very high compared to other segments. It can be implied
that improving street congestion levels should be a prior-
ity intervention for improving this commuter segment's trip
satisfaction. Car commuters would benefit from policies to
enhance motor-vehicle mobility on the roadways, such as
constructing high-speed multi-lane highways, flyovers, pro-
vision of de-congestion measures, and improved car-parking
facilities at key trip-generators.
13
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7
Segment-4
In this segment, 54.1% and 45.9% of commuters are male
and female, respectively. Among the commuters, 60% fall
in the age group between 35 and 44 years. All commuters
are observed to use other modes (two-wheelers, cabs, auto-
rickshaw, and metro) for travel. Like segment-2, this group
of users are also choice users, but their socio-demographic
profiles vary. This segment can be termed as Middle-aged
Choice commuters. The mean values for DTS, WTS, and
OTS are 2.14, 1.96, and 1.67, respectively, indicating that
they are highly satisfied with their daily and work trips com-
pared to other segments.
Among built-environment attributes, perception of street
congestion is found to be highest among all groups (3.06),
which means that they perceive streets to be less congested
than segment 3 (reversed scale), followed by perceptions of
sidewalk availability (3.0) and bus-stop accessibility (2.93).
Bus stop safety and security are relatively lower (1.64) than
other segments. Commuters in this segment perceive the
least health benefits associated with walking (3.70) com-
pared to all other segments. Of all the modes considered,
the bus was the least satisfactory regarding safety, time effi-
ciency, and comfort.
Segment-5
Segment-5 is an all-female commuter segment, with 86.3%
of commuters belonging to the age group between 23 and
34 years. Among commute modes, 63.25% of commuters
use other modes for travel, 35.9% use private cars, and the
rest use a combination of private cars and public buses for
their trips. This group of female users is majorly choice
users but with less average income compared to segment-3,
which is an all-male commuter segment. This segment can
be termed as Young Female choice commuters.
These segments of users are observed to be entirely sat-
isfied with daily and work trips with estimates of 2.11 and
2.03, respectively. Among built-environment attributes, bus
stop safety and security and bus-stop accessibility are the
lowest (1.58 and 2.79, respectively) among all segments.
This finding could be attributed to the lack of safety and
security for female commuters in public transport modes
and sidewalks, especially at night in New Delhi. The Times
of India mentioned New Delhi as the city with the high-
est crime cases against women per one lakh population
in 2018 in India [37, 38]. Segment-5 users perceive high
benefits related to walking (3.91) and find sidewalk avail-
ability to be satisfactory (2.93); however, they walk less
due to a poor perception of walk-specific safety (2.89).
Necessary intervention measures must be taken to improve
the overall commute quality of women commuters in New
Delhi specifically and India in general. Identification of an
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7
all-female commuter group is one of the unique findings of
this research work. This finding shows that female commut-
ers' travel requirements vary significantly from their male
counterparts. There is a need to develop specific policy
instruments to improve female commuters' trip quality. In a
developing country such as India, female commuters' needs
are not incorporated into the planning framework. However,
identifying an all-female commuter group in the Indian capi-
tal city would allow planners to think differently and imple-
ment appropriate measures to improve their trip quality.
Policy Implications
Based on the results and critical findings, a set of policy rec-
ommendations can be suggested for overall trip satisfaction
improvement in typical urban Indian context. The results
indicate that improving public transportation infrastructure,
namely, bus transit is critical in enhancing the perceived
travel satisfaction. Improved service quality of bus transit
will have a notable positive effect on urban commuters’
travel satisfaction for all segments; this is in line with previ-
ous studies [7, 39]. This measure would be instrumental for
increasing the travel satisfaction for commuters belonging
to segment-1 in specific. Improving travel satisfaction of
commuters can be achieved by improving the safety in and
around bus stops and ensuring bus stop accessibility by pro-
viding adequate first and last mile connectivity options to
improve satisfaction while travelling in bus. Kruskal–Wallis
H-test also revealed that there is heterogeneity in the percep-
tion of WTS and OTS for bus users and non-users. Bus-stop
safety and security may be improved by considering the
following suggestions. Bus stops should be located away
from junctions to reduce commuter interaction with other
vehicles. Ensuring no-parking near bus stops and providing
appropriate bus stop markings can improve safety. Provi-
sion of variable message signboards indicating real-time bus
location will be informative to commuters as well.
The built environment related factors such as good quality
sidewalks, lighting etc. are also found to influence commuter
satisfaction. Based on the insights from segment 2, the con-
struction of good-quality, obstruction-free sidewalks [40],
and adequate illumination can further improve the positive
perception of built environment-related aspects [41]. It will
further increase the number of commuters using active mode
for travel due to enhanced safety and comfort. Street conges-
tion was found to be a major issue for male choice commut-
ers and private car commuters. Heterogeneity was observed
in the perception of DTS for car users and non-users. Hence,
improving street congestion levels should be a priority by
implementing de-congestion measures and promoting public
transportation usage. Based on the Kruskal–Wallis H-test,
heterogeneity was observed in the perception of WTS for
Page 11 of 14 7
gender. Hence the provision of above-mentioned facilities
along with installation of CCTV cameras at bus stations and
bus stops can reduce the attacks against women, improve
their perception of safety [42], resulting in favourable impli-
cation for female commuters. The development of such
policy measures needs to be prioritized, and the govern-
ment and regional planning organizations can implement
these policies in areas where urban transport infrastructure
improvement is required to enhance overall commute qual-
ity. Overall, the identification of commuter groups (choice
or captive and male or female etc.) would allow the gov-
ernment to understand the differential requirement of com-
muter segments. Subsequently, the geographical and land-
use parameters can also be added as independent variables
of segmentation and those segments would help in region-
specific infrastructure planning for commuter’s trip quality
improvement. Such policy interventions will not only help
commuters in New Delhi but also in other metropolitan cit-
ies across India.
Conclusions
In this study, a detailed analysis of satisfaction with com-
muting is conducted for New Delhi, India's capital. Based on
the findings, the following concluding remarks can be made:
Firstly, based on the research outcome, heterogeneity is
observed among users’ perceived travel satisfaction concern-
ing gender, age, income level and commuting mode. This
observation points toward the need for analyzing the effect
of socioeconomic parameters on travel satisfaction in a more
detailed manner for informed policy-level decision-making.
Secondly, based on the clustering technique, the com-
muters are grouped into five distinct segments with different
characteristics. Variation in user preferences towards vari-
ous determinants of travel satisfaction is also observed for
the identified segments, which would help formulate tar-
geted segment-specific policy measures for trip satisfaction
improvement. For example, the fifth segment consists of
female users and provides evidence of preferences specific
to female commuters. Innovative policies such as installing
CCTV cameras on sidewalks and inside buses and provid-
ing illuminated sidewalks would improve female commut-
ers' travel satisfaction. They would positively influence the
overall subjective well-being of commuters. Similar policies
could be framed for other segments as well.
Thirdly, the study results help identify key built environ-
ment factors requiring priority treatment for improving travel
satisfaction. It was observed that irrespective of segments,
bus-stop safety and security are perceived with very low
scores than bus-stop accessibility or sidewalk quality. Such
findings help allocate the available budget efficiently for
taking up phased built-environment improvement schemes.
13
 7 Page 12 of 14 Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7

Fourthly, it can be concluded that bus travel is unsatisfac- Items Statement Measurement scale
tory across all user segments. Bus-specific safety, comfort,
Sidewalk availability How satisfied are 0—Least satisfied
and time-efficiency were perceived to be the lowest among you with the side- 1—Less satisfied
the three modes in consideration, indicating immediate walk availability in 2—Neutral
attention towards bus infrastructure improvement to improve your locality? 3—Satisfied
the trip quality. Such initiatives would also increase the bus Street light condition How satisfied are 4—Highly satisfied
modal-share. you with the street-
light condition in
Most importantly, it can be concluded that most of the your locality?
users are choice commuters in New Delhi, which is already a Bus stop safety and Are the bus stops 0—Very much unsafe
very congested and polluted city. Until and unless appropri- security safe and secure, in and insecure
ate improvement schemes are taken up, the modal share of your opinion? 1—Unsafe and inse-
public transit, especially female commuters, will decrease. cure
2—Neutral
Hence, appropriate mitigation measures must be planned 3—Safe and secure
and implemented to improve commute quality. As far as the 4—Very much safe
authors are aware, this research is the first of its kind in a and secure
developing nation like India, with heterogeneous traffic con- Bus stop accessibility Is the bus stop at 0—Highly inacces-
ditions and many traffic externalities like congestion, pollu- an accessible sible
distance from your 1—Inaccessible
tion, and accidents. This research thus adds to the present residence? 2—Neutral
literature on travel satisfaction analysis in developing coun- 3—Accessible
tries. The proposed methodology and the survey instrument 4—Highly accessible
are generic, which can be adopted by any planning agency Street congestion What is your 0—Street was very
to investigate travel satisfaction and commuter segment- level perception of the congested
congested street? 1—Street was con-
specific policy formulation for SWB improvement. gested
Future studies could focus on some aspects not addressed 2—Street was neither
by this research. First, for more effective planning, segmen- congested nor free
tation might incorporate additional socioeconomic and trip- 3—Street was a little
congested
related factors, such as trip length. Second, the impact of 4—Street was not at
other competing modes, such as auto-rickshaw, cabs, and all congested
metro rail, on travel satisfaction is also necessary to further Walking health Do you think there 0—There is no health
develop this work. benefits are health benefits benefit
associated with 1—There is a little
walking? health benefit
2—Neutral
Appendix: Description of Questionnaire 3—There is some
Items health benefit
4—There is a signifi-
cant health benefit
Bus—safety How do you perceive 0—Very unsafe
Items Statement Measurement scale
the safety of your 1—Unsafe
Gender (M/F) Please state your 0—Male travel using a bus? 2—Neutral
gender 1—Female Car—safety How do you perceive 3—Safe
the safety of your 4—Very safe
Age Please tick the age- 0—18–24
range 1—25–34 travel using a car?
2—35–44 Walking—safety How do you perceive
3—44–54 the safety of your
4—55 and above travel by walking?
Monthly income Please tick on the 0—Less than 10,000 Bus—time efficiency How do you perceive 0—Very inefficient
level income-level range 1—10,000–20,000 the time efficiency 1—Inefficient
(in INR/month) 2—20,000–50,000 of your travel using 2 – Neutral
3—50,000–100,000 the bus? 3 – Efficient
4—100,000 and above Car—time efficiency How do you perceive 4 – Very efficient
Vehicle ownership Please tick which- 0—No the time efficiency
ever is applicable 1—Motorised two- of your car travel?
wheeler Walking—time How do you perceive
2—Car efficiency the time efficiency
3—Both motorised of your travel by
two-wheeler and car walking?

13
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7 Page 13 of 14 7

and their evolution. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 95:64–84.

Items Statement Measurement scale
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.11.011
Bus—comfort How do you per- 0—Very uncomfort- 8. Bergstad CJ et al (2011) Subjective well-being related to sat-
ceive the comfort able isfaction with daily travel. Transportation (Amst) 38(1):1–15.
associated with bus 1—Uncomfortable https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-010-9283-z
travel? 2—Neutral 9. Elias W, Benjamin J, Shiftan Y (2015) Gender differences in
Car—comfort How do you per- 3—Comfortable activity and travel behavior in the Arab world. Transp Policy
ceive the comfort 4—Very comfortable 44:19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.07.001
associated with car 10. Sweet M, Kanaroglou P (2016) Gender differences: the role of
travel? travel and time use in subjective well-being. Transp Res Part F
Traffic Psychol Behav 40:23–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.
Walking—comfort How do you perceive
2016.03.006
the comfort associ-
11. Redmond LS, Mokhtarian PL (2001) The positive utility of the
ated with walking?
commute: modeling ideal commute time and relative desired
Daily travel satisfac- How satisfied are 0—Least satisfied commute amount. Transportation (Amst) 28(2):179–205.
tion (DTS) you based on your 1—Less satisfied https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010366321778
daily travel experi- 2—Neutral 12. Ory DT, Mokhtarian PL (2005) When is getting there half the
ence? 3—Satisfied fun Modeling the liking for travel. Transp Res Part A Policy
Work trip satisfaction How satisfied are 4—Highly satisfied Pract 39(2–3):97–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2004.09.006
(WTS) you based on your 13. Clark B, Chatterjee K, Martin A, Davis A (2019) How com-
work-trip experi- muting affects subjective wellbeing. Transportation (Amst)
ence? 47(6):2777–2805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-019-09983-9
Other than work trip How satisfied are 14. Mokhtarian PL, Papon F, Goulard M, Diana M (2015) What
satisfaction (OTS) you based on your makes travel pleasant and/or tiring? An investigation based
other / non-work on the French National Travel Survey. Transportation (Amst)
trips (leisure, shop- 42(6):1103–1128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-014-9557-y
ping) 15. Sreechitra CB, Navandar YV, Dhamaniya A (2022) Public trans-
port user’s satisfaction level in India. In: Intelligent infrastruc-
ture in transportation and management, pp 79–89. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-981-16-6936-1_7
16. Mogaji E, Nguyen NP (2021) Transportation satisfaction of
Data Availability Some or all data, models, or codes that support this disabled passengers: evidence from a developing country.
study's findings are available from the corresponding author upon rea- Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 98:102982. https://doi.org/
sonable request. 10.1016/J.TRD.2021.102982
17. Badgeri M Thane: Shortage of public transport troubles daily
Declarations commuters in suburbs, Times of India, May 12, 2020. https://
timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/thane/thane-short age-of-pub-
Conflict of interest There is no potential conflict of interest. lic-transport-troubles-daily-commuters-in-suburbs/articleshow/
76355764.cms. Accessed 21 July 2022
18. ET The Economic Times. The Economic Times, 2022. https://
economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/mumbai-5th-most-
References conge sted- city- in- the- world- delhi- 11th- report/ artic leshow/
89468865.cms?from=mdr. Accessed 10 July 2022
1. Cao J (2013) The association between light rail transit and 19. Olsson LE, Gärling T, Ettema D, Friman M, Fujii S (2013)
satisfactions with travel and life: evidence from Twin Cities. Happiness and satisfaction with work commute. Soc Indic Res
Transportation (Amst) 40(5):921–933. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 111(1):255–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-012-0003-2
s11116-013-9455-8 20. Morris EA, Hirsch JA (2016) Does rush hour see a rush of emo-
2. Lancée S, Veenhoven R, Burger M (2017) Mood during commute tions? Driver mood in conditions likely to exhibit congestion.
in the Netherlands: what way of travel feels best for what kind of Travel Behav Soc 5:5–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2015.07.
people? Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 104:195–208. https://doi. 002
org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.04.025 21. Lee RJ, Sener IN (2016) Transportation planning and quality of
3. Handy S, Thigpen C (2019) Commute quality and its implications life: where do they intersect? Transp Policy 48:146–155. https://
for commute satisfaction: exploring the role of mode, location, doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.03.004
and other factors. Travel Behav Soc 16(September 2017):241– 22. Verma M, Rahul TM, Vinayak P, Verma A (2018) Influence
248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2018.03.001 of childhood and adulthood attitudinal perceptions on bicycle
4. Ferenchak NN, Katirai M (2015) Commute mode and mental usage in the Bangalore city. J Transp Geogr 72:94–105. https://
health in major metropolitan areas. Transp Lett 7(2):92–103. doi.org/10.1016/J.JTRANGEO.2018.08.016
https://doi.org/10.1179/1942787514Y.0000000040 23. Ettema D, Friman M, Gärling T, Olsson LE (2015) Travel mode
5. Li Z, Hensher DA (2013) Crowding in public transport: a review use, travel mode shift and subjective well-being: overview of
of objective and subjective measures. J Public Transp 16(2):107– theories, empirical findings and policy implications. In: Mobil-
134. https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.16.2.6 ity, sociability and well-being of urban living. Springer, Berlin,
6. Jang J, Ko J (2019) Factors associated with commuter satisfaction pp 129–150
across travel time ranges. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 24. Rastogi R (2010) Willingness to shift to walking or bicycling to
66:393–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.09.019 access suburban rail: case study of Mumbai, India. J Urban Plan
7. Abenoza RF, Cats O, Susilo YO (2017) Travel satisfaction with Dev. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2010)136:1(3)
public transport: determinants, user classes, regional disparities

13
 7 Page 14 of 14
25. Verma M, Rahul TM, Reddy PV, Verma A (2016) The factors
influencing bicycling in the Bangalore city. Transp Res Part A
Policy Pract 89:29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2016.04.
006
26. Majumdar BB, Jayakumar M, Sahu PK, Potoglou D (2021) Iden-
tification of key determinants of travel satisfaction for developing
policy instrument to improve quality of life: an analysis of com-
muting in Delhi. Transp Policy 110:281–292. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.tranpol.2021.06.012
27. Ye R, Titheridge H (2017) Satisfaction with the commute: the role
of travel mode choice, built environment and attitudes. Transp
Res Part D Transp Environ 52:535–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
TRD.2016.06.011
28. Sahu PK, Sharma G, Guharoy A (2018) Commuter travel cost esti-
mation at different levels of crowding in a suburban rail system: a
case study of Mumbai. Public Transport 10(3):379–398. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12469-018-0190-6
29. Susilo YO, Cats O (2014) Exploring key determinants of travel
satisfaction for multi-modal trips by different traveler groups.
Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 67:366–380. https://doi.org/10.
1016/J.TRA.2014.08.002
30. Ouali LAB, Graham DJ, Barron A, Trompet M (2020) Gender
differences in the perception of safety in public transport. J R
Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc 183(3):737–769. https://doi.org/10.1111/
RSSA.12558
31. Rahul TM, Manoj M (2020) Categorization of pedestrian level of
service perceptions and accounting its response heterogeneity and
latent correlation on travel decisions. Transp Res Part A Policy
Pract 142:40–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2020.10.011
32. Latif E (2010) Crisis, unemployment and psychological wellbe-
ing in Canada. J Policy Model 32(4):520–530. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jpolmod.2010.05.010
33. Majumdar BB, Mitra S, Pareekh P (2015) Methodological frame-
work to obtain key factors influencing choice of bicycle as a mode.
Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2512(1):110–121. https://doi.
org/10.3141/2512-13
34. Shiftan Y, Outwater ML, Zhou Y (2008) Transit market research
using structural equation modeling and attitudinal market segmen-
tation. Transp Policy 15(3):186–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tranpol.2008.03.002
35. Grisé E, El-Geneidy A (2018) Where is the happy transit rider?
Evaluating satisfaction with regional rail service using a spatial
segmentation approach. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.11.005
13
Transportation in Developing Economies (2023) 9:7
36. Chiu T, Fang DP, Chen J, Wang Y, Jeris C (2001) A robust and
scalable clustering algorithm for mixed type attributes in large
database environment. In: Proceedings of seventh ACM SIGKDD
international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining,
pp 263–268. https://doi.org/10.1145/502512.502549
37. Jain B At 28.3%, Delhi’s percentage share of crimes against
women in 2017 the most across 19 cities | India News—Times of
India, The Times of India, 22 Oct 2019. https://timesofindia.india
times.com/india/at-28-3-delhis-percentage-share-of-crimes-again
st-women-in-2017-the-most-across-19-cities/articleshow/71698
694.cms. Accessed 15 Mar 2021
38. TNN, Delhi crime rate is 4 times of other metros | Delhi News—
Times of India, The Times of India, 10 January 2020. https://times
ofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/delhi-crime-rate-is-4-times-of-
other-metros/articleshow/73179559.cms. Accessed 01 May 2021
39. Zhang C, Cao X, Nagpure A, Agarwal S (2019) Exploring rider
satisfaction with transit service in Indore, India: an application of
the three-factor theory. Transp Lett 11(8):469–477. https://doi.
org/10.1080/19427867.2017.1398484
40. Shafabakhsh G, Mirzanamadi R, Mohammadi M (2015) Pedestri-
ans’ mental satisfaction’s relationship with physical characteristics
on sidewalks using analytical hierarchy process: case study of
Tehran, Iran. Transp Lett 7(3):121–132. https://doi.org/10.1179/
1942787514Y.0000000039
41. Guliani A, Mitra R, Buliung RN, Larsen K, Faulkner GEJ (2015)
Gender-based differences in school travel mode choice behaviour:
examining the relationship between the neighbourhood environ-
ment and perceived traffic safety. J Transp Health 2(4):502–511.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.008
42. Nadimi N, Sangdeh AK, Amiri AM (2020) Deciding about the
effective factors on improving public transit popularity among
women in developing countries. Transp Lett. https://doi.org/10.
1080/19427867.2020.1801022
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
such publishing agreement and applicable law.