Table B-3 Zupan Model
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Table B-3 Zupan Model
| Equation | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| Assumptions: Semantic values: Effectiveness: Varies | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Assumptions: Semantic values: Implementation: Unknown/not applicable | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Assumptions: Semantic values: Acceptability: Varies | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Assumptions: Semantic values: Acceptability: Negative | -1 | -1 | 1 | 1 |
| Assumptions: Semantic values: Acceptability: Unknown/not applicable | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Assumptions: Semantic values: Acceptability: Positive | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Effectiveness: SOV reduction | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.0 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Effectiveness: Peak trip reduction | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.0 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Effectiveness: VMT reduction | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.7 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Effectiveness: Transit impact | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2.5 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Cost: Employee | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.0 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Cost: Employer | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2.2 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Cost: Public capital | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.0 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Acceptability: Employee | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.0 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Acceptability: Employer | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.0 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Acceptability: Municipal | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2.7 |
| Assumptions: Component weights: Acceptability: Public | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.9 |
| Results: Estimated coefficients: Effectiveness: Coefficient | -0.27 | -0.34* | -0.46* | -0.45* |
| Results: Estimated coefficients: Effectiveness: Standard error | 0.19 | 0.16 | 0.14 | 0.11 |
| Results: Estimated coefficients: Effectiveness: t-score | -1.39 | -2.12 | -3.31 | -4.05 |
| Results: Estimated coefficients: Cost: Coefficient | 0.19 | 0.24 | 0.05 | 0.39* |
| Results: Estimated coefficients: Cost: Standard error | 0.19 | 0.16 | 0.14 | 0.11 |
| Results: Estimated coefficients: Cost: t-score | 0.98 | 1.49 | 0.38 | 3.50 |
| Results: Estimated coefficients: Implementation: Coefficient | -0.41* | -0.56* | -0.66* | -0.56* |
| Results: Estimated coefficients: Implementation: Standard error | 0.19 | 0.16 | 0.14 | 0.11 |
| Results: Estimated coefficients: Implementation: t-score | -2.14 | -3.46 | -4.78 | -5.09 |
| Results: Goodness-of-fit: Standard error of Y | 0.91 | 0.76 | 0.65 | 0.50 |
| Results: Goodness-of-fit: R-squared | 29.00% | 49.90% | 63.90% | 78.30% |
| Results: Goodness-of-fit: Number of observations | 22 | 22 | 22 | 22 |
| Results: Goodness-of-fit: Degrees of freedom | 19 | 19 | 19 | 19 |
* significant at 0.01 level
** significant at 0.05 level
*** 1.00 < t < 2.00
d.f. = degrees of freedom
HOV = high-occupancy vechicle
NA = not applicable
SOV = single-occupancy vehicle
SRSD = studentized residual
TDM = travel demand management
TMA = transportation management association
TSM = transportation system management
U = data are unavailable
VHT = vehicle hours of travel
VMT = vehicle-miles traveled
* Significant at 95% confidence interval.