Gender Difference in Perception of Value of Travel Time and Travel Mode Choice Behavior in Eight European Countries

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is clearly structured and contains all the necessary elements. However, it has certain weaknesses that need to be carefully addressed in the manuscript:

1. Abstract: Reduce the introduction and add the main findings of this study in the abstract.

2. Revise the sentence in Line 168 – 169. “…thanks to the data?”.

3. The screenshot of Woori Apps as mentioned in Line 174 needs to show in Appendix.

4. Line 174: Woori apps, Line 180: Woorti apps. Which one is correct?

5. To make the readability more smoothly, Figure 2 should be adjusted.

6. Line 238: “…between women and women...”. Please check.

7. Data analysis and tools are not mentioned in the methodology section. Please add.

8. Please provide a rationale for the sample size based on the specific methodology you have applied in this study. Please, provide methodological citations to justify it.

9. The comparison of the results between 8 European countries provides meaningful findings for this study. The authors just analyzed the total data from 8 European countries. Please justify.

10. Sub-section order for section 3.1 is not consistence. Please check. E.g., 3.1.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.2.4 etc.

11. Check the header for Table 1. The header is not consistence. Mal and Male?

12. Some in-text citations are missing. E.g., Line 337, 379, 388, 401 etc.

13. The list of symbols and abbreviations used in the paper with their descriptions would be useful for the reader.

14. The conclusions should be more specific and reflect the specific results of the authors, preferably without citing other scientific literature.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We appreciate you for your precious time in reviewing our manuscript and providing valuable feedback and comments. The authors have carefully considered the comments and tried our best to address every one of them. We hope the manuscript after careful revisions meet your standards. Below we provide the point-by-point responses. All modifications in the manuscript have marked up using the “Track Changes”.

 

The paper is clearly structured and contains all the necessary elements. However, it has certain weaknesses that need to be carefully addressed in the manuscript:

1. Abstract: Reduce the introduction and add the main findings of this study in the abstract.

It has been revised based on your comment and suggestion.

2. Revise the sentence in Line 168 – 169. “…thanks to the data?”.

It has been revised.

3. The screenshot of Woori Apps as mentioned in Line 174 needs to show in Appendix.

The screenshots of Woorti App have been added in Appendix.

4. Line 174: Woori apps, Line 180: Woorti apps. Which one is correct?

The correct name of App is Woorti and all inconsistencies in the manuscript have been corrected.

5. To make the readability more smoothly, Figure 2 should be adjusted.

Figure 2 was updated.

6. Line 238: “…between women and women...”. Please check.

Corrected.

7. Data analysis and tools are not mentioned in the methodology section. Please add.

Thank you very much for your comment. Section 2.2 added in the manuscript explaining about the modeling methodology using Multinomial logistic regression. Section 3.2 has been also revised with providing further information such as used modeling tool (R software) and method.

8. Please provide a rationale for the sample size based on the specific methodology you have applied in this study. Please, provide methodological citations to justify it.

We added paragraph about the sampling method and sample size calculation in the methodology part.

9. The comparison of the results between 8 European countries provides meaningful findings for this study. The authors just analyzed the total data from 8 European countries. Please justify.

Thanks for your valuable remarks. In our analysis we considered the participants’ country of residence as an external factor in our models to analysis its impact on travelers’ mode choice. But this factor has been eliminated after the multicollinearity test. On the other, due to imbalanced sample sample size to avoid biased interpretation of analysis results nationality of respondents ( i.e. country of residence ) has been taken into account in models.

However, the urban size as one of the dimensions of the built environment impact on travelers’ mode choice has been incorporated in the models

10. Sub-section order for section 3.1 is not consistence. Please check. E.g., 3.1.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.2.4 etc.

Corrected.

11. Check the header for Table 1. The header is not consistence. Mal and Male?

Corrected.

12. Some in-text citations are missing. E.g., Line 337, 379, 388, 401 etc.

Corrected.

13. The list of symbols and abbreviations used in the paper with their descriptions would be useful for the reader.

Thanks for your comment. The abbreviations list has been added in Appendix.

14. The conclusions should be more specific and reflect the specific results of the authors, preferably without citing other scientific literature.

Thank you very much for your remarkable comment. For future clarification the discussion and conclusion section split into two separate sections. Actually, in conclusion section the specific findings of this research have been reflected and their implications discussed in the broadest context in line 631- 690.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The analysis of gender differences in travel and choice patterns using the mobility big data in this manuscript is an important and interesting topic in the transportation area. However, I have recommended revising the manuscript based on the following comments.

·       What is the “ICT”? information and communication technology?

·       One of the critical and vital parts of this research is collecting various information such as travel behaviors, socioeconomic factors, and trip data from smartphone data. However, some of the information may be estimated information, not directly collected information from the devices. Therefore, the authors need to give more information on how to estimate the transport mode used, trip purpose, etc. from the devices.

·       The level of spatial details for the weather data may be very vague. Therefore, the authors need to show how to combine the weather data and the device information their accuracy and reliability.

 

·       As I understand, there is much information about personal attributes in the collected data in this study. However, not much information about personal attributes is used in the estimated model in this study. I also think that age may be one of the critical factors to divide travel patterns and characteristics. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
We appreciate you for your precious time in reviewing our manuscript and providing valuable feedback and comments. The authors have carefully considered the comments and tried our best to address every one of them. We hope the manuscript after careful revisions meet your standards. Below we provide the point-by-point responses. All modifications in the manuscript have marked up using the “Track Changes”.

 

The analysis of gender differences in travel and choice patterns using the mobility big data in this manuscript is an important and interesting topic in the transportation area. However, I have recommended revising the manuscript based on the following comments.

• What is the “ICT”? information and communication technology?

Yes, ICT stands for the information and communication technology. It has been corrected in the text.

• One of the critical and vital parts of this research is collecting various information such as travel behaviors, socioeconomic factors, and trip data from smartphone data. However, some of the information may be estimated information, not directly collected information from the devices. Therefore, the authors need to give more information on how to estimate the transport mode used, trip purpose, etc. from the devices.

Thank you for your comment and remarks. When the Woorti app, developed within the MoTiV project, is installed, its advanced algorithms automatically detect the travelers’ trips and recognize the transport mode which was used. Once a trip is recorded, a few questions need to be validated by the user to give a qualitative value to the time spent. The data characteristics have been explained in the manuscript. (Line 181-196). For further clarification, the screenshots of the App features have been also added in Appendix.

• The level of spatial details for the weather data may be very vague. Therefore, the authors need to show how to combine the weather data and the device information their accuracy and reliability.

Weather data have been collected through the API provided by the OpenWeatherMap online service (https://openweathermap.org/). The API was queried regularly to obtain weather data for a set of 66 cities of interest in the scope of the project. Weather information was collected for the times of 09:00, 12:00 and 18:00 for each day from July 8th, 2019, to December 18th, 2019. Based on the real time weather data collected, the weather conditions have been computed for the time and place trips were occurred.

• As I understand, there is much information about personal attributes in the collected data in this study. However, not much information about personal attributes is used in the estimated model in this study. I also think that age may be one of the critical factors to divide travel patterns and characteristics.

Thank you very much for your comment. This absolutely is a remarkable comment and suggestion to divide female and male travelers in different age groups to more precisely investigate their different travel behavior in particular perception of travel time in connection with travel experience and choice of the transport mode. But this approach needs a bigger sample of travelers’ representative of different age groups. Due to the smartphone-based data collection limitation, regarding the age, our overall sample is skewed towards the 25-49 -year-old population. However, we have analyzed the age range as an influence factor in women and men multinomial mode choice models estimation in the participant countries. Please see Table S4.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you very much. No reply is required.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your valuable time for reviewing our paper.