Passenger Decision‐Making in Mass Transit Systems: Insights From Dual‐Process Theories

ABSTRACT This experimental study explores how dual‐process theories of decision‐making may enrich our understanding of the cognitive mechanisms supporting Mass Transit (MT) users' route choices. We examined whether Type 1 (i.e., autonomous and heuristic‐based) and Type 2 (i.e., deliberative and criteria‐based) processing may explain how on‐board crowding information in smartphone route planning apps influences willingness to wait for less crowded routes. The data of 377 participants who completed an online experiment simulating route planning for 35 trips in central Paris were analysed. The willingness to wait phenomenon was found to be driven by two distinct information‐processing mechanisms: (1) deliberative evaluation of explicit crowding, waiting, and in‐vehicle time information, and (2) autonomous heuristics activated by implicit colour cues associated with green‐orange‐red crowding levels. The findings of this study highlight passenger crowding as a key route selection criterion and illustrate the relevance of dual‐process theories in passengers' decision‐making in MT.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Published
2025-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.70112
Primary Topic
Transportation Planning and Optimization
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Passenger Decision‐Making in Mass Transit Systems: Insights From Dual‐Process Theories

Simone Morgagni, Élise Grison, Valérie Gyselinck, Archana Prabhakar et al.
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Transportation Planning and Optimization
article

Passenger Decision‐Making in Mass Transit Systems: Insights From Dual‐Process Theories

Simone Morgagni, Élise Grison, Valérie Gyselinck, Archana Prabhakar, Martin Nöllenburg
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT This experimental study explores how dual‐process theories of decision‐making may enrich our understanding of the cognitive mechanisms supporting Mass Transit (MT) users' route choices. We examined whether Type 1 (i.e., autonomous and heuristic‐based) and Type 2 (i.e., deliberative and criteria‐based) processing may explain how on‐board crowding information in smartphone route planning apps influences willingness to wait for less crowded routes. The data of 377 participants who completed an online experiment simulating route planning for 35 trips in central Paris were analysed. The willingness to wait phenomenon was found to be driven by two distinct information‐processing mechanisms: (1) deliberative evaluation of explicit crowding, waiting, and in‐vehicle time information, and (2) autonomous heuristics activated by implicit colour cues associated with green‐orange‐red crowding levels. The findings of this study highlight passenger crowding as a key route selection criterion and illustrate the relevance of dual‐process theories in passengers' decision‐making in MT.

Applied Cognitive PsychologyVol. 39(5)
TU Wien (AT), Université Paris Cité (FR), Société Nationale des Chemins de Fer Français (France) (FR), Computer Algorithms for Medicine (AT), Complexity Science Hub (AT), Université Gustave Eiffel (FR), Laboratoire de Psychologie et d’Ergonomie Appliquées (FR)
Agence Nationale de la Recherche
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Transportation Planning and Optimization
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Passenger Decision‐Making in Mass Transit Systems: Insights From Dual‐Process Theories — Simone Morgagni, Élise Grison, et al. · Applied Cognitive Psychology (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS