Article
citation information:
Zahir,
A., Rehaimi, H., Bouazid, H. Determinants of perceived service quality in urban
public transport in emerging economies. Scientific
Journal of Silesian University of Technology. Series Transport. 2026, 130, 285-298. ISSN: 0209-3324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2026.130.16
Allal ZAHIR[1],
Hassan REHAIMI[2],
Hassan BOUAZID[3]
DETERMINANTS OF
PERCEIVED SERVICE QUALITY IN URBAN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN EMERGING ECONOMIES
Summary. This article examines
the main factors influencing user satisfaction with urban public transport,
based on the case of the ALSA network in Greater Agadir (Morocco). A
questionnaire survey conducted among 205 users was analyzed
using a two-step statistical approach: Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was
first employed to identify the dimensions of perceived service quality,
followed by multiple linear regression to assess their impact on overall
satisfaction. The results highlight three major determinants: service
reliability, travel time, and cost. These findings emphasize the importance of
improving service regularity and adapting fare policies in order to enhance
equity and the overall quality of urban transport. The study therefore provides
an empirical framework that can support decision-making and may be applicable
to other emerging urban contexts.
Keywords: perceived quality, urban public transport, principal component
analysis, multiple linear regression
1. INTRODUCTION
Public transport plays a central
role in the life of contemporary cities. Providing high-quality services that
truly meet user expectations is no longer merely a technical or financial
challenge; it is a strategic issue for public authorities [20]. Large urban
areas face familiar problems: road congestion, air pollution, parking
shortages, and ever-increasing mobility costs. In this context, prioritizing
the development of public transport and making it more attractive appears to be
an essential lever to reduce urban congestion and promote a sustainable city
model [22]. Reducing reliance on private cars and encouraging collective modes
of transport is a key condition for sustainably improving urban quality of
life.
This issue becomes particularly
salient when considering environmental impacts. A large portion of
environmental challenges stems from our dependence on fossil fuels, which is
especially critical in the transport sector. Despite numerous initiatives to reduce
pollutant emissions, this dependence remains a major challenge for cities and
their inhabitants [13].
Encouraging citizens to adopt public
transport goes beyond simply increasing supply. Services must be reliable,
comfortable, and accessible to retain users and attract new passengers [33].
Public transport, often presented as a cornerstone of the transition to more
sustainable cities, must also address social and economic challenges to remain
inclusive and equitable [19,31].
To enhance their attractiveness,
networks must act on several fronts: frequency, coverage, comfort, safety, and
value for money. Many cities worldwide invest in these aspects to improve user
satisfaction and increase the modal share of public transport [27].
Beyond its mobility function, public
transport promotes individual autonomy, particularly for those without
alternatives, and contributes to more equitable mobility while limiting
environmental impact. By facilitating access to employment, services, and social
activities, it directly contributes to citizens’ well-being and social cohesion
[38, 39].
Service quality and user
satisfaction are therefore at the heart of mobility strategies [1]. Evaluating
these aspects helps identify what works, what needs improvement, and guides
investment and operational decisions by transport operators [16, 30]. A positive
perception of services can encourage a shift away from private cars and support
the transition to more sustainable mobility [18].
In emerging countries, urban public
transport plays a central role in daily mobility, congestion reduction, and the
promotion of sustainable transport. Perceived service quality is a key factor
for user acceptance and regular usage. However, in the absence of user-centered studies, understanding the factors that influence
this quality remains limited.
In this context, the present
research focuses on the Greater Agadir metropolitan area in Morocco, where
public transport is primarily provided by the urban operator ALSA. To date, no
study has explored the determinants of user perceptions regarding the ALSA bus
service. This research aims to fill this gap by identifying the main factors
influencing perceived quality and providing concrete recommendations to improve
services and encourage regular use of public transport.
The study is conducted in three
stages: first, a literature review identifies the key factors influencing
perceived quality in various urban contexts; next, the methodology is
presented, including data collection and analysis from users; finally, the analysis
and discussion of results allow for operational recommendations to be
formulated for urban transport stakeholders, aiming to optimize satisfaction
and the use of public transport in Greater Agadir, Morocco.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS
Urban transport systems have
historically played a central role in shaping economic development, spatial
organization, and social dynamics within cities. Rapid urbanization and
population growth have intensified congestion, environmental degradation, and
spatial inequalities, challenging the sustainability and livability
of urban environments [3]. In this context, public transport is increasingly
recognized as a key instrument for promoting sustainable urban mobility by
reducing car dependency, mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, and improving
accessibility and quality of life [36, 40].
Despite its strategic importance,
research on public transport service quality remains unevenly distributed
geographically, with limited empirical evidence from Global South cities [26].
Recent studies emphasize the need for user-centered
approaches, highlighting perceived quality as a critical determinant of
satisfaction, modal choice, and long-term transport sustainability [43].
Policies primarily oriented toward private car use have proven ineffective in
addressing congestion and environmental challenges, reinforcing the importance
of improving collective transport systems [41].
Existing empirical research
identifies several recurring determinants of perceived service quality.
Large-scale reviews and case studies consistently highlight reliability, travel
time, cost, safety, comfort, accessibility, and service frequency as key factors
influencing user satisfaction [24, 42]. Reliability and punctuality emerge as
particularly influential across diverse contexts, while travel time and
affordability strongly shape perceived value and modal preference [21]. Studies
also demonstrate that contextual factors such as neighborhood
characteristics, time of travel, and socio-demographic profiles influence user
expectations and satisfaction levels [17, 45].
Comparative analyses reveal local
variations in priorities, although punctuality and frequency remain universally
critical attributes [10]. Research conducted in both formal and informal
transport systems further indicates that accessibility, safety conditions,
information availability, and infrastructure quality significantly affect
perceived service performance [35, 9]. Inclusive mobility studies additionally
underline the importance of accessibility and information systems for
vulnerable user groups [32].
Overall, despite methodological
differences including factor analysis, structural equation modeling,
and spatio-temporal approaches, the literature
converges on a common conclusion: perceived service quality plays a decisive
role in shaping user satisfaction and influencing mobility behavior.
Based on this review, the following
research hypotheses are formulated:
H.1 Proximity to
transport stops positively influences perceived service quality.
H.2 Transport cost
negatively affects perceived quality.
H.3 Service
frequency positively influences perceived quality.
H.4 Total travel
time negatively affects perceived quality.
H.5 Service
reliability positively influences perceived quality.
H.6 Travel comfort
positively affects perceived quality.
H.7 Perceived
safety positively influences perceived quality.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Target population and sampling strategy
The objective of this study is to
identify the key determinants of perceived quality in urban public transport
and to measure their impact on user satisfaction, focusing on the Greater
Agadir area in Morocco, which is representative of dynamics typical of
developing cities.
Greater Agadir is a strategic
tourism and economic hub, characterized by rapid urbanization and sustained
population growth. These dynamics place increasing pressure on transport
infrastructure and pose a major challenge for urban mobility. In this context,
public transport constitutes an essential public good, ensuring accessibility
and territorial cohesion. The bus network, primarily operated by ALSA, plays a
central role in the daily mobility of residents. The choice of this study area
is justified by its representativeness of the mobility and public transport
challenges faced by emerging cities, allowing conclusions applicable to similar
contexts.
The study sample comprises 205
individuals, all regular users of the bus network. In the absence of complete
and reliable secondary data, data were collected through a structured
questionnaire administered directly in the field, onboard buses and at major
stops. Each quality dimension was measured on a five-point Likert scale (1 =
very low, 5 = very high), allowing precise quantification of perceptions and
systematic comparison across different dimensions.
Given the absence of an exhaustive
sampling frame, a convenience sampling method was adopted. This approach,
commonly used in social sciences when probabilistic sampling is difficult,
involved distributing observations across multiple time slots, different days
of the week, and various areas of the network. This strategy allowed for
reasonable heterogeneity in terms of sociodemographic characteristics (age,
gender) and mobility behaviors (trip frequency and
purpose), while limiting selection bias and enhancing the relative
representativeness of the sample.
3.2 Estimation Methods
Data analysis was conducted in two
stages. First, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was employed to reduce the
dimensionality of the dataset while identifying latent variables that explain
most of the observed variance [8, 12, 14, 23]. The adequacy of PCA was verified
using the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure and Bartlett’s test of sphericity,
ensuring the statistical validity of the analysis [25, 47].
Subsequently, multiple linear
regression was applied to examine the effect of each factor on users’ perceived
quality. This approach allows quantification of the relative influence of each
variable and identification of the primary determinants of satisfaction. All
analyses were performed using SPSS 26, widely recognized for its reliability in
estimating econometric models in social sciences. This methodological approach
ensures robust, interpretable, and actionable results, providing a solid
foundation for practical recommendations.
3.3 Selection and Justification of Explanatory
Variables
The choice of explanatory variables
is based both on theoretical foundations related to perceived quality in public
transport and on the specific characteristics observed in the Greater Agadir
context. The survey conducted with 205 bus users captured individual
assessments of service quality using a five-point Likert scale to reflect the
diversity of perceptions and experiences.
Perceived quality is considered a
multidimensional concept encompassing both tangible aspects (travel time,
physical accessibility, comfort) and intangible aspects (reliability, safety,
service perception). These dimensions interact complementarily in shaping
overall user judgments and influence satisfaction and public transport usage.
Accordingly, the explanatory
variables included in the model reflect the main components of service that
structure the traveler experience: accessibility,
operational performance, fare equity, travel comfort, and travel safety. Each
of these elements is documented in the literature as being critical for
evaluating public transport service quality.
To account for user heterogeneity
and adjust estimated effects, control variables such as age, gender, employment
status, and usage frequency were included. Their inclusion allows for
neutralization of individual differences and enhances the robustness of the
results.
The empirical model is specified as
follows:
= 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+
+ 
+ 
+ 
(1)
Where:
: model constant,
: coefficients representing the
marginal effect of each variable on perceived quality,
: error term capturing unexplained
variance.
Tab. 1
Public Transport
Perceived Quality Indicators
|
Variable |
Description |
|
Dependent Variable |
|
|
Perceived Quality |
Quality can be defined as the ability of a
product or service to fulfill its intended use by
fully satisfying the purpose for which it is designed [15]. |
|
Independent Variables |
|
|
Proximity |
Usually defined as the distance or walking
time from a departure point to the nearest transport stop, with 400 meters
considered good accessibility [34, 44]. |
|
Cost |
Represents access equity, considering
expenditures on single tickets and subscriptions [29]. |
|
Frequency |
Number of vehicle passages on a line within a
given interval [28]. |
|
Travel Time |
Total journey duration, including initial
walking, waiting, onboard travel, transfers, and final walking [46]. |
|
Reliability |
Punctuality (adherence to published
schedules) and regularity of vehicle intervals [4]. |
|
Comfort |
Quality of travel experience, including
occupancy, temperature, noise, vibration, and cleanliness [37]. |
|
Safety |
User perception of safety both during travel
and at stops [6]. |
Source: Author’s work
4. RESULTS PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Socio-Demographic Profile of Respondents
The socio-demographic profile of respondents is presented in Table 2.
Tab. 2
Socio-demographic Profile of Respondents
|
Characteristic |
Main Categories |
Percentage (%) |
|
Gender |
Female |
52 |
|
Male |
48 |
|
|
Age |
18–25 years |
56 |
|
26–40 years |
31 |
|
|
41–60 years |
10.5 |
|
|
Others (<18 & >60 years) |
2.5 |
|
|
Employment Status |
Student |
44.5 |
|
Employed |
40.5 |
|
|
Others (self-employed, unemployed, retired, other) |
15 |
Source: Results from SPSS
The
socio-demographic characteristics of respondents are summarized in Table 2. The
sample is relatively balanced in terms of gender, with a slight predominance of
female users (52%). The age distribution reveals a strong representation of
young individuals, as 56% of respondents are aged between 18 and 25 years,
followed by the 26–40 age group (31%). Older age categories remain marginally
represented.
Regarding
employment status, students constitute the largest group (44.5%), followed by
employed individuals (40.5%), while other categories account for 15% of
respondents. This profile indicates that the bus network is primarily used by
young and economically active populations, particularly students and workers.
Such a structure suggests that public transport in Greater Agadir mainly fulfills daily mobility needs related to education and
employment activities, which may influence service expectations, especially
concerning travel time reliability and affordability.
4.2 Validation of Data Adequacy for PCA
Prior
to conducting Principal Component Analysis (PCA), data adequacy was assessed
using the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure and Bartlett’s test of sphericity
(Table 3).
Tab. 3
KMO Index and Bartlett’s Test for Sample Adequacy
|
Test |
Value |
df |
Significance |
|
KMO Index |
0.810 |
- |
- |
|
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity |
404.387 |
21 |
0.000 |
Source: Result from SPSS
The
KMO value (0.810) indicates strong sampling adequacy, exceeding the recommended
threshold of 0.70 for factor analysis. Bartlett’s test is highly significant,
confirming that correlations among variables are sufficient to justify
dimensional reduction. These results validate the appropriateness of PCA and
support the robustness of subsequent factor extraction.
4.3 Component Extraction and Communalities
Communality
values (Table 4) indicate the proportion of variance explained by the extracted
components for each variable. All variables present acceptable extraction
values, confirming their contribution to the latent structure of perceived
quality.
Tab. 4
Initial and Extracted Communalities of Perceived Quality Variables
|
Variables |
Initial |
Extraction |
|
Proximity |
1.000 |
0.387 |
|
Travel Time |
1.000 |
0.553 |
|
Frequency |
1.000 |
0.597 |
|
Cost |
1.000 |
0.929 |
|
Reliability |
1.000 |
0.646 |
|
Comfort |
1.000 |
0.507 |
|
Safety |
1.000 |
0.552 |
Source: Result from SPSS
Cost
exhibits the highest communality (0.929), suggesting that economic
considerations are strongly captured by the factorial model. Reliability,
frequency, and travel time also show substantial explanatory power. Although
proximity and comfort display comparatively lower communalities (0.387 and
0.507), their values remain within acceptable limits, supporting their
retention to preserve conceptual completeness.
4.4 Total Variance Explained
Eigenvalue
analysis (Table 5) indicates that the first two components explain 59.6% of the
total variance, which is considered satisfactory for behavioral
and perception-based research. Additional components contribute only marginal
explanatory gains and would reduce interpretability without significantly
improving model performance.
Consequently,
a two-component solution is retained, ensuring parsimony while maintaining
sufficient explanatory capacity.
Tab. 5
Total
Variance Explained for Perceived Quality Components
|
Total Variance Explained |
|||||||||
|
Component |
Initial Eigenvalues |
Extracted Sums of Squared Loadings |
Rotated Sums of Squared Loadings |
||||||
|
Total |
% of Variance |
Cumulative % |
Total |
% of Variance |
Cumulative % |
Total |
% of Variance |
Cumulative % |
|
|
1 |
3,214 |
45,921 |
45,921 |
3,214 |
45,921 |
45,921 |
3,072 |
43,885 |
43,885 |
|
2 |
0,958 |
13,682 |
59,603 |
0,958 |
13,682 |
59,603 |
1,100 |
15,718 |
59,603 |
Source: Result from SPSS
4.5 Interpretation of Factor Structure
Varimax
rotation was applied to enhance interpretability (Table 6). The rotated matrix
reveals a clear two-dimensional structure.
Tab. 6
Rotated Component Matrix of Perceived Quality Dimensions
|
Variables |
Component 1 |
Component 2 |
|
Proximity |
0.540 |
0.309 |
|
Travel Time |
0.737 |
0.103 |
|
Frequency |
0.773 |
-0.011 |
|
Cost |
0.067 |
0.962 |
|
Reliability |
0.803 |
0.023 |
|
Comfort |
0.707 |
0.083 |
|
Safety |
0.700 |
0.248 |
Source: Result from SPSS
The first component groups variables
related to operational and experiential service performance, including
reliability, frequency, travel time, comfort, and safety. This dimension
reflects operational service quality, capturing users’ daily travel experience.
The second component is strongly
dominated by cost, highlighting the central role of economic accessibility in
shaping perceived quality. Proximity loads moderately on the first component,
indicating a secondary but relevant contribution to service evaluation.
This structure confirms that users
primarily evaluate public transport through operational performance and
affordability dimensions.
4.6 Internal Reliability
Reliability analysis using
Cronbach’s alpha yields a coefficient of 0.786 (Table 7), indicating good
internal consistency according to commonly accepted thresholds (>0.70). The
measurement scale therefore, demonstrates satisfactory reliability and supports
the use of extracted factors in subsequent regression analysis.
Tab. 7
Reliability Statistics
|
Cronbach’s Alpha |
Number of Items |
|
0.786 |
7 |
Source: Result from SPSS
4.7 Regression Analysis and Influence of
Dimensions
Multiple linear regression was
conducted to evaluate the relative influence of service attributes on perceived
quality (Table 8).
Tab. 8
Multiple Linear Regression Results
|
Variables |
Standardized Coefficients (β) |
t |
P-value |
|
Proximity |
0.154 |
2.279 |
0.024 |
|
Travel Time |
0.245 |
3.276 |
0.001 |
|
Frequency |
0.070 |
0.942 |
0.347 |
|
Cost |
0.217 |
3.422 |
0.001 |
|
Reliability |
0.186 |
2.464 |
0.015 |
|
Comfort |
0.046 |
0.660 |
0.510 |
|
Safety |
0.070 |
0.895 |
0.372 |
Source: Result from SPSS
The results indicate that travel
time (β = 0.245, p
= 0.001), cost (β
= 0.217, p = 0.001), reliability (β = 0.186, p = 0.015), and proximity (β = 0.154, p = 0.024) exert
statistically significant effects. Among these variables, travel time emerges
as the strongest predictor, emphasizing the importance of temporal efficiency
in user evaluations.
Conversely, frequency, comfort, and
safety do not exhibit statistically significant effects. This finding suggests
that these attributes may operate as baseline expectations rather than
differentiating factors influencing overall perceived quality within the
studied context.
Overall Model Significance
|
R² Change |
F Change |
Sig. F Change |
|
0.905 |
268.490 |
0.000 |
Source: Result from SPSS
The regression model demonstrates strong explanatory power, accounting
for 90.5% of the variance in perceived quality (R² = 0.905). The overall
model is highly significant (F = 268.490, p < 0.001), confirming the
robustness of the estimated relationship between service attributes and
perceived quality.
These results highlight that improvements targeting travel time
efficiency, fare affordability, service reliability, and accessibility are
likely to generate the greatest gains in user satisfaction and perceived
service performance.
5. DISCUSSION
The results of our study confirm hypotheses H2, H4, and H5. Principal
Component Analysis (PCA) and multiple linear regression revealed that travel
time, cost, and reliability are the main determinants of perceived quality in
urban public transport in Greater Agadir. Specifically, increases in cost or
travel time reduce perceived quality, whereas higher reliability, reflected in
punctuality and service regularity, significantly enhances user satisfaction.
These findings highlight the importance of economic, temporal, and operational
dimensions in the overall evaluation of service quality.
These findings are consistent with previous studies reported in the
literature. Reliability has been identified as a key quality factor by several
authors [42], while other studies [2, 11] emphasize the importance of travel
time in shaping users’ perceptions of service quality. Furthermore, prior
research [5, 7] recommends improving fare affordability to encourage public
transport use, supporting the significant impact of cost observed in our study.
The results suggest that reducing travel time, controlling costs, and
improving reliability constitute essential strategic levers for enhancing
perceived quality and promoting public transport use. These priorities can
guide decision-making by public authorities and transport operators seeking to
increase the attractiveness and operational efficiency of services in Greater
Agadir.
This study also provides insights into overall user satisfaction,
offering practical evidence to help policymakers focus on the most critical
service dimensions. However, several limitations should be acknowledged. The
relatively small sample size may limit the generalizability of the findings.
Moreover, the study focused exclusively on current public transport users,
excluding non-users (such as private car drivers), whose needs and preferences
may differ.
Future research could include private car users to assess the potential
for modal shifts toward public transport. Additionally, examining secondary
factors such as comfort, safety, and service frequency could provide a more
comprehensive understanding of overall satisfaction and support more effective
strategic improvements.
Overall, these results underscore that targeted interventions addressing
travel time, cost, and reliability are likely to have the greatest impact on
user satisfaction and urban public transport usage in Greater Agadir.
6. CONCLUSION
This study aimed to identify the factors
influencing perceived quality in urban public transport in Greater Agadir,
Morocco, and to provide recommendations for improving services and encouraging
greater public transport use. Data were collected from 205 users through a
questionnaire and analyzed using Principal Component
Analysis (PCA) and multiple linear regression.
The results indicate that travel time, cost,
and reliability are the primary determinants of perceived service quality.
Specifically, longer travel times and higher costs reduce perceived quality,
whereas improved reliability significantly enhances user satisfaction.
Optimizing these dimensions, therefore, represents a key strategic lever for
increasing the attractiveness of public transport and promoting a modal shift
from private vehicles, thereby contributing to more sustainable urban mobility.
From a practical perspective, the study
provides concrete recommendations for decision-makers and transport operators,
including reducing travel times, adjusting fare policies, and strengthening
service reliability. The findings also offer a solid empirical basis for the
development of integrated mobility policies centered
on user needs.
However, several limitations should be
acknowledged. The relatively small sample size and the exclusion of non-users
limit the generalizability of the results. Future research should include
private vehicle users and examine additional dimensions such as comfort,
safety, and service frequency to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of
perceived quality.
Overall, the study highlights that targeted
interventions addressing travel time, cost, and reliability are likely to have
the greatest impact on user satisfaction and urban public transport usage in
Greater Agadir.
References
1.
Anjani Gita Indri, Popong Nurhayati,
Lilik Noor Yuliati. 2025. “The Impact of
Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction on Reuse Intention in Urban Public
Transportation”. Indonesian Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship (IJBE)
11(1): 212-212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17358/IJBE.11.1.212.
2.
Bahar Taslim, Mashuri
Mashuri, K. Sari Puji Lestari. 2025. “User Perception Model of Urban Public Transport Service
Satisfaction”. In: 3rd International Conference on Science in Engineering
and Technology (ICOSIET 2024): 196-204. Atlantis Press.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-768-7_22.
3.
Cai Zhaoyang, Jianwei Yan. 2018. “Analysis of residents' travel characteristics along Beijing rail transit
line based on binary choice model”. Archives of Transport 47(3):
19-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0012.6504.
4.
Cats Oded. 2014. “Regularity-driven bus operation: Principles,
implementation and business models”. Transport Policy 36: 223-230. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.09.002.
5.
Chou Chun-Chen, Kenji Doi, Kento Yoh, Masanobu Kii. 2025. “Time
Wealth as a Determinant of Public Transport Behavior:
Empirical Evidence from Japan”. Urban Science 9(5): 172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci9050172.
6.
Cox Andrew, Fynnwin Prager, Adam Rose. 2011.
“Transportation security and the role of resilience: A foundation for
operational metrics”. Transport Policy 18(2): 307-317.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.09.004.
7.
Czerliński, Mirosław, Michał
Sebastian Bańka. 2021. “Ticket tariffs modelling in urban and regional public transport”. Archives of Transport 57:
103-117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0014.8041.
8.
D’ovidio Francesco Domenico, Domenico Leogrande, Rossana Mancarella,
Andrea Schinzano, Domenico Viola. 2014. “A multivariate analysis of the quality
of public transport services”. Procedia Economics and Finance 17: 238-247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00868-5.
9.
De Aquino Joás Tomaz, Fagner José Coutinho De Melo, Taciana De Barros Jerônimo, Denise Dumke De Medeiros. 2019. “Evaluation of quality in public transport services: the use of
quality dimensions as an input for fuzzy TOPSIS”. International Journal of
Fuzzy Systems 21(1): 176-193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-018-0524-1.
10. De Oña Juan. 2022. “Service quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions towards public transport from the
point of view of private vehicle users”. Transportation 49(1): 237-269.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-021-10175-7.
11. Dell’olio Luigi, Angel Ibeas,
Patricia Cecin. 2011. “The quality of service desired by public transport
users”. Transport Policy 18(1): 217-227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.08.005.
12.
Deveci Muhammet, Sultan Ceren Öner,
Fatih Canitez, Mahir Öner. 2019. “Evaluation
of service quality in public bus transportation using interval-valued
intuitionistic fuzzy QFD methodology”. Research in Transportation Business
& Management 33: 100387. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2019.100387.
13. Di Gangi Massimo, Antonio Comi, Antonio Polimeni, Orlando Marco Belcore.
2022.
“E-bike use in urban commuting:
empirical evidence from the home-work plan”. Archives of Transport 62:
91-104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0015.9568.
14. Diana, Marco, Andre
Duarte, Miriam Pirra. 2017. “Transport quality profiles of European cities
based on a multidimensional set of satisfaction ratings indicators”. Transportation Research Record 2643(1): 84-92.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3141/2643-10.
15.
Drljača Miroslav, Vesna Sesar. 2019. “Quality factors of transport process”. Transportation Research Procedia
40 : 1030-1036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2019.07.144
16. Eboli Laura, Gabriella Mazzulla. 2012. Performance indicators for an objective measure of public
transport service quality. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10077/6119.
17. Echaniz Eneko, Rubén Cordera,
Andrés Rodriguez, Soledad
Nogués, Pierlugi Coppola,
Luigi Dell’olio. 2022. “Spatial and temporal variation of user satisfaction in public
transport systems”. Transport Policy 117: 88-97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.01.003.
18.
Guirao Begoña,
Antonio García-Pastor, María
Eugenia López-Lambas. 2016. “The importance of service quality attributes in public
transportation: Narrowing the gap between scientific research and
practitioners' needs”. Transport Policy 49: 68-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.003.
19.
HESS Daniel Baldwin. 2009. “Access to public transit and its influence
on ridership for older adults in two US cities”. Journal of Transport and
Land Use 2(1): 3-27. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26201621.
20. Hörcher Daniel,
Alejandro Tirachini. 2021. “A review of public transport economics”. Economics of transportation 25: 100196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecotra.2021.100196.
21. Hu Xiaojian, Linna
Zhao, Wei Wang. 2015. “Impact of perceptions of bus service performance on mode
choice preference”. Advances in mechanical engineering 7(3):
1687814015573826. https://doi.org/10.1177/1687814015573826.
22. Hu Xinghua,
Xinghui Chen, Jiahao Zhao, Kun Yu, Bing Long, Gao Dai.
2022. “Comprehensive service quality
evaluation of public transit based on extension cloud model”. Archives of Transport 61(1):
103-115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0015.8198.
23. Ismael Karzan,
Szabolcs Duleba. 2021. “Investigation of the
relationship between the perceived public transport service quality and
satisfaction: A PLS-SEM technique”. Sustainability 13(23): 13018.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313018.
24. Ismael, Karzan, Domokos Esztergár-Kiss, Szabolcs Duleba. 2023. “Evaluating the
quality of the public transport service during the COVID-19 pandemic from the
perception of two user groups”. European
Transport Research Review 15(1): 5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-023-00578-1.
25.
Jolliffe Ian. 2022. “A 50-year personal journey through time with
principal component analysis”. Journal of Multivariate Analysis 188:
104820. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmva.2021.104820.
26.
Kalaoane Retsepile C., Walter Musakwa, Alain Kibangou,
Trynos Gumbo, Innocent Musonda, Abraham R. Matamanda. 2024. “Bibliometric Analysis of Quality of
Service in Public Transportation: Current and Future Trends”. Scientific African 23: 02059. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2024.e02059.
27. Liou James Jh, Chao-Che Hsu, Yun-Shen Chen. 2014. “Improving
transportation service quality based on information fusion”. Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice 67: 225-239. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.07.007.
28.
López-Ramos Francisco. 2014. “Integrating network design and frequency
setting in public transportation networks: a survey”. SORT-Statistics and
Operations Research Transactions
38(2): 181-214.
29.
Lucas Karen. 2012. “Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now? ”.
Transport
Policy 20: 105-113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.01.013.
30. Martynushkin, A.B., V.S. Konkina. 2020. “Quality
improvement of public service of automobile transport: economic evaluation
method”. In: Russian Conference on Digital Economy and Knowledge Management:
449-455. Atlantis Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/aebmr.k.200730.082.
31. Miller Patrick, Alexandre G. de Barros, Lina Kattan, S.C. Wirasinghe. 2016. “Public
transportation and sustainability: A review”. KSCE Journal of Civil
Engineering 20(3): 1076-1083. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-016-0705-0.
32. Młodystach Łukasz,
Małgorzata Orczyk, Franciszek Tomaszewski.
2023.
“Evaluation of public transport in
Poland form the perspective of the deaf and hard of hearing people towards the
improvement of mobility”. Archives of Transport 66(2):
61-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.3130.
33. Moslem Sarbast, Ahmad Alkharabsheh, Karzan Ismael, Szabolcs Duleba. 2020. “An integrated
decision support model for evaluating public transport quality”. Applied Sciences 10(12): 4158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app10124158.
34. Murray Alan T., Davis Rex, Stimson Robert
J., Ferreira Luis. 1998. “Public transportation access”. Transportation Research Part
D: Transport and Environment 3(5): 319-328. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(98)00010-8.
35.
Olowosegun Adebola, Dumiso Moyo, Deepak Gopinath. 2021.
“Multicriteria evaluation of the quality of service of informal public
transport: An empirical evidence from Ibadan, Nigeria”. Case Studies on
Transport Policy 9(4): 1518-1530. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2021.08.002.
36. Puławska-Obiedowska
Sabina, Aleksandra Ciastoń-Ciulkin, Mariusz Soboń. 2024. “The impact of introducing new stops into the agglomeration railway
network on changes in transport behaviour in the catchment area”. Archives of Transport 72(4):
89-108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61089/aot2024.t6jbnt55.
37.
Rashid Md. Mobasshir, Safkat Tajwar Ahmed, Noman
Bin Kalam, Moinul Hossain. 2018. “Evaluation
of public bus comfort in Dhaka city”. In: Proceedings of the 4th
International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering: 19-21.
38.
Ravensbergen Léa, Mathilde Van Liefferinge,
Jimenez Isabella, Zhang Merrina, Ahmed El-Geneidy. 2022.
“Accessibility by public transport for older adults: a systematic review”.
Journal of Transport Geography 103: 103408. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103408.
39. Saif Muhammad Atiullah, Mohammad Maghrour Zefreh, Adam Torok. 2019.
“Public transport accessibility: A literature review”. Periodica Polytechnica Transportation
Engineering 47(1): 36-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3311/PPtr.12072.
40.
Sendek-Matysiak Ewelina. 2024. “The assessment of the use of vehicles with different types of drive in
car-sharing systems”. Archives of Transport 72:
129-148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61089/aot2024.bg4xmr95.
41.
Sinha Shalini, Hm Shivanand Swamy,
Khelan Modi. 2020. “User
perceptions of public transport service quality”. Transportation Research Procedia 48: 3310-3323.
42.
Sogbe Eugene, Susilawati
Susilawati, Tan Chee Pin. 2025. “Scaling up public transport usage: a systematic literature
review of service quality, satisfaction and attitude towards bus transport
systems in developing countries”. Public Transport 17(1): 1-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-024-00367-6.
43.
Souassi Mohamed Amine, Zainab Hnaka. 2024. “Public Bus Transport Service Quality and Passenger
Satisfaction: A Bibliometric Analysis (2000-2022) ”. In: The International
Workshop on Big Data and Business Intelligence: 265-277. Cham: Springer
Nature Switzerland. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65018-5_25.
44.
Southworth Michael, Eran Ben-Joseph. 2003. Streets and the shaping of towns and cities. Washington, D.C.:
Island Press.
45. Soza-Parra Jaime,
Sebastián Raveau, Juan Carlos Muñoz, Oded Cats. 2019. “The
underlying effect of public transport reliability on users’ satisfaction”. Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice 126: 83-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.06.004.
46. Tahmasbi Behnam, Hossein Haghshenas. 2019. “Public transport accessibility measure based on weighted door to
door travel time”. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 76: 163-177.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2019.05.002.
47.
Wanke Peter Fernandes, Amir Karbassi Yazdi, Thomas Hanne, Yong Tan. 2023. “Unveiling
drivers of sustainability in Chinese transport: an approach based on principal
component analysis and neural networks”. Transportation Planning
and Technology 46(5): 573-598. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2023.2198517.
Received 23.11.2025; accepted in revised form 24.02.2026
Scientific Journal of Silesian
University of Technology. Series Transport is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
