­­­Logistic regression models for the nearest train station choice: A comparison of captive and non-captive stations

• We investigate why commuters do not always choose the nearest train station to their origin, such as home, to reach their destination.
• The chosen stations are at, or near, the end of train lines were defined as captive stations, otherwise, they are non-captive stations.
• Distance and further-away travel direction were found to be significant for captive station choice model and distance, cost from the chosen station to a destination and waiting time for non-captive station choice model.

We usually assume that each commuter is an efficient traveller, which means they maximize trip utility. From a spatial optimization perspective, a commuter might therefore choose the nearest station to reach their destination. However, based on a survey at seven train stations in Perth, Western Australia, only between 30 and 80 percent of commuters choose the nearest station to their origin. Many factors could affect this travel behaviour. From a logistic regression model, five factors were found to be significant (p-value <0.05), indicating that commuters are more likely to choose the non-nearest station for longer commutes, while traveling further away from origins and destination if the chosen stations are at, or near, the end of train lines (captive stations). If the chosen stations are along the train line (non-captive stations), longer distance, longer wait times and lower costs from the chosen station to a destination were found to be significant. The results of the study are important for public transport policy makers to understand transit choice behaviours. Therefore public transport policies such as adjustments of travel fees and improving station service and facilities, could be developed.