Behavioural sciences, more commonly known as ‘nudges’, have only recently been applied to public transport. We review a new book by some experts in this new field, Transport for Humans, in which they describe the nudges and advertising insights that they have applied. Their book argues that applying insights from the behavioural sciences can rebalance the operations-first thinking mindset of many public transport companies and authorities, to provide a much better experience for passengers.

More specifically, behavioural sciences are the application of psychological research, scientific method, and creative idea generation to resolve everyday problems. Especially problems that have evaded technological innovation (such as apps) as well as traditional economics.

There’s a lot to take in in this book – it’s a refreshing look at public transport. It takes a good hard look at the ways different forms of transport are marketed and operated, and suggests how public transport can be improved using examples from other industries. Co-author Pete Dyson is a long time behavioural science expert at Ogilvy, the multi-national advertising, marketing, and public relations agency. Co-author Rory Sutherland is a career advertising man, much of which also at Ogilvy, and he has given numerous TED talks about the science of persuasion. He co-founded the ad agency’s behavioural science practice. They bring fresh eyes and an outsiders’ perspective, as well as advertising insights and persuasion, to improving public transport.

The division of labour

The book consists of three parts, which each taking a different dimension of transport, with practical examples:

Part I – How travel forgot humans and how behavioural science can help

Part II – Behavioural insights for the passenger

Part III – Behavioural insights for transport providers

Part I – How travel forgot humans and how behavioural science can help

The book starts from the point of view of perfect human beings, Homo Economicus, as described by our ruling Economists. These are the ideal human species, theorised by the macroscopic bean counters to be a race of people solely governed by purely rational economic thought. So perfect are they that economists have based their entire body of work on the species. But not one Homo Economicus exists, because Homo Sapiens is an inherently irrational species.

The authors then postulate a similar but much more societally inclined and useful Homo Transporticus – who always pick the perfect travel routing and mode. Indeed, this species describes many readers of this online magazine (holding dual citizenship in Homo Sapiens as well). Nevertheless, this species is not that widespread. Unfortunately, Homo Economicus is the model used when people design transportation, not Homo Transporticus.

In particular, the Homo Economicus focus applied to road design results in traffic efficiency that is a victim of its own success – it induces demand for even more traffic. Plus roads and motorways are made efficient by being designed to be notoriously hostile to pedestrians, cyclists, and residential neighbourhoods. The human element has been almost completely bypassed in modern road engineering.

Fortunately there are antidotes. Economic incentives such as Congestion Zones have proven effective, as well as bringing in much needed revenue, And Local Traffic Networks (LTNs) have similarly reduced traffic, but by making through driving much more difficult.

Even simple visual effects such as different Zebra crossing pavement markings, such as varying the stripe interval or making them appear three dimensional, have been proven to slow traffic. Whereas putting up more signs and lowering speed limits haven’t address the actual design of the road that the driver instinctively reads and adjusts their speed to accordingly.

And in the end, we are all just freight

Pilots call passengers self-loading freight. Unless one is flying Business or First Class, that’s exactly what the experience feels like. However, flying is sold to everyone as a wonderfully freeing opportunity to visit different places. To the contrary, train travel, and public transport in general is mainly sold as a practical, necessary trudge, which benefits the wonderful yet emotionally distant planet.

Books that promise a solution to improving public transport tend to fall into two categories – academic ones that look at high level policies and the need for more investment and priority for public transport, and more practical ones that stress the need for more of particular modes, with examples and land use, to meet urban and environmental needs. This book follows neither category – which is refreshing!

Instead, it provides examples of underlying psychological concepts, taken from the auto and ride share industries – some of which have proven to be adept at demonising public transport – for public transport. For instance, ride share apps often show a map of the arriving vehicle to alleviate waiting time. Bus and train countdown counters help, but aren’t quite as effective.

“In a world that demands newer and more sustainable transport technologies, we need solutions that are socially as well as technically successful. But everywhere we look, humans are treated like goods.”

This book provides examples of bizarre public transport rules that do not benefit the passenger at all:

“In the UK, train doors close between 30 seconds and two minutes before the listed departure, but from a passenger’s perspective, once the train cannot be boarded or alighted, it might as well have departed.”

What’s more, the book suggests solutions to improve public transport, based not on the usual engineering factors such as specific technologies, passenger capacity, or throughput, but on human psychological factors.

London and UK examples abound, plus relevant case studies from around the world. Some Japanese metros have a unique arrival jingle for each station, so that passengers instinctively know when their station is next. Such innovations appear obvious in hindsight, but were not even on the radar beforehand.

Companies like Amazon and Uber have put enormous focus and research on ease and simplicity of use for their services, and they have been well rewarded for it.

But thinking and doing business differently requires people to see things in different ways.

Part II – Behavioural insights for the passenger

There are lots of gems in this book that explain some of the things we experience on the Underground and the railways, such as:

“a well-meaning effort to reduce false alarms on Tube trains involved adding the phrase ‘use emergency alarm only in genuine emergencies’ – alarms rose still further. Had behavioural scientists been consulted, they would have warned about psychological reactance to the signs’ overt messaging. They might have instead recommended engagement and education on safety as an alternative – something that did indeed prove successful in the long term.”

As well as the TfL’s ‘Every Journey Matters’ messaging, although it is not clear precisely what the intended effect is. Personally, I do welcome the acknowledgement that every trip, no matter how short, is important. You mileage may vary.

The passenger is always right, in the end

Thameslink’s latest train order did not specify seat back tables. A trivial savings in cost and in time for passengers to disembark, but that was paramount to passengers’ use of the trains.

The transport industry’s reductionist approach puts operational performance before customer usefulness and satisfaction. No wonder people gravitate towards much more comfortable private vehicles. People have more choices than ever nowadays.

The prevalence of aircraft after World War II led to increasingly viewing cities from above. Hence the fascination of post-war planners with the big picture view of new development. Large architectural statements were prized over finely grained streets that worked better at ground level. This lack of on the ground planning observation was married to the expressway as the new mode of transport, which also ruined most of the neighbourhoods they passed through.

Cars are parked for an average of 98% of their lives, but require a disproportionate amount of household costs.

Milton Keynes has more bike lane kilometrage than Cambridge, but only a 4% cycle mode share. Cambridge has 30% of its commuters taking the bike. What is the difference? A cycling culture. Providing infrastructure is just one aspect. Cambridge also has an ecosystem of bike repair shops and bike racks.

Unfortunately, people often don’t think what they feel, don’t say what they think, and don’t do what they say. So making passenger improvements requires a more systematic and rigorous approach. Behavioural science can help break the car-first habit.

Design is also about what you leave out

Most public transport ticket machines operate slowly as they ask the user too many questions. How many trips every day are missed due to users having to tap through multiple screens, or wait agonisingly for new users tryng to navigate the screens and take in all of the options.

One thing I’ve found particularly frustrating whilst traveling in many cities is the sheer number of fare options available – ‘Super Off-Peak Return Day Ranger Saver’ with varying modes train only, train & bus, bus only, train & tram but not bus, bus & tram &c. The conditions to meet these are rarely met without considerable planning, and the confusion they cause really frustrates new and even experienced users. These options may delight Homo Economicus, but as is clear, he (clearly a he) is an academic laughing stock.

The KISS princIple is key – Keep It Simple Stupid. Or as architect Mies van der Rohe stated – ‘Less is more’.

Innovative transport authorities use the machines’ data to determine the most frequent ticket options, to provide users with much quicker and intuitive options. Furthermore, replacing a ticket booth with a live person who can answer simple questions with a dumb terminal is not helpful to new users.

And research shows that it is much more aggravating to miss a train by two minutes than by 22.

Fare’s fair

The authors provide many suggestions on how ticket and fare schemes can be simplified. Particularly, how online and ticket machines can provide more options for what the passenger values, such as identifying less busy, more scenic, cheapest, or fastest trains.

Furthermore, the authors have summarised research into perceptions of time:

• Walking feels twice as long as the same amount of time using other transport modes.
• But the time walking feels shorter than waiting at a stop or station.
• Calm ambience shrinks time (such as with warmer lighting hues and relaxing music).
• Travel on clean trains is perceived as shorter.

Faster is often a perception

Similarly, the authors present facts that demonstrate that designing a train to travel faster may not be the best way to improve travel times. Increasing the speed across a switch or junction is more cost effective than increasing top speed. Increasing top speed typically requires a train upgrade, track improvements, and signaling upgrade. Whilst reducing or eliminating waits at switches is usually simpler and has a much better benefit to cost ratio.

“The transport industry needs to care about maximising the quality of travel time as much as minimising the quantity of travel time.”

TfL’s Ian Pring, Customer Marketing and behaviour Change Lead, explaining the importance of travel quality

Why does the return segment of a trip feel faster?

Passengers perceive return trips to be 22% faster. The anticipation and impatience of arriving at the destination have the a ‘watched kettle’ effect.

There is actual speed and perceived speed. Some of the aforementioned nudges would be well implemented to increase the perceived speed of trips. A pleasant experience, in a pleasant environment, go a long way to improve the perception of speed.

Oh why are we waiting?

Providing passengers with the walking time to their platform or train car reduces the stress and panic of rushing at the last moment. This is especially important at large stations and for long trains, such as the 400m long Eurostars.

Being on-time at the platform for a train departure, yet finding that the gate and doors closed two minutes before departure, is supremely and utterly frustrating. Closing the gates effectively means that the train has left for those passengers not making the arbitrary cutoff. When boarding at smaller stations, there is no such hassle – train departure time is the train departure time. It’s these inconsistencies that really drive passengers crazy.

We all want fair and consistent rules and fares, that are simple and easy to follow. One of the great advantages of train travel used to be being able to turn up at the very last minute and still boarding the train. And without the hassle of security checks, waiting thrice in lines, opening luggage up, taking shoes off &c.

Surely train departure time should be actually the last minute one can board the train? Why do train companies copy the hassle of boarding a cramped airliner? Not to mention the sky high last minute fares…

Train companies really need to think like passengers, and what would help them more, not just say they do. Providing seating and small tables for waiting passengers would allow them to work, watch videos comfortably, or put their coffee and snack somewhere, greatly improving their waiting experience without feeling like squatters. A gate at Brussels Airport projects Rubens paintings onto the wall, with cupids dancing between them, to entertain and delight passengers.

This train has been delayed

When there are delays, there are four things that humans need:

• Cause – This greatly helps us understand and accept the situation, and may help us decide what to do next.
• Estimate – We want to know how bad the delay is, whenever possible, so we can make alternative plans and notify people.
• Apology – Real apologies are popular, yet rare. Apologising for ‘any inconvenience’ suits train companies as it’s one size fits all, but it rings hollow to passengers. The human touch is key here.
• Silver linings – Again not always possible, but a small credit or coupon, combined with a sincere apology has been found to keep passengers happy and loyal.

The power of memes and fun

The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, also known as linguistic relativity, is the name for giving a concept or idea a name to make it easier to discuss, as well as fostering understanding. Memes are brilliant examples of this. Memetics is the study of which cultural ideas, words, and behaviours stick and why (and why not). The Swedish term ‘flight shame’ is an example meme that has inspired many to take train and sea voyages instead of flying. And it is much easier to understand and digest than ‘environmentally friendly travel’.

Painting piano keys on stairs at some rail stations (and at hospitals, malls etc) has made using the stairs fun for many, and has been much more effective than trying to persuade people to take the ‘healthy choice’ of walking up steps.

Sociologist Mark Granovetter found through his study of collective behaviour that humans follow an S curve – slowly at first, then rising rapidly, then plateauing. For instance switching to a smart phone. Individual adoption depends on each person’s threshold for acting, such as whether they like to be first adopters or have technological hesitancy. In his model, small changes in society or culture can have a large influence on when the S curve starts rising rapidly. However the tipping point is often difficult to identify beforehand, as well as which factor(s) sends the curve over that point.

Seeing transport as a skill

Whether traveling locally or internationally, there are many small things to learn – from how the local public transport authority operates, how to pay its fares, to requiring a passport and arriving at least an hour before departure for international trips. Once mastered, commuting for instance becomes almost automatic and possibly restful, a useful buffer between home and work. Like being able to nap on the train before or after work. We only noticed the benefit(s)of commuting when this buffer disappeared suddenly with the pandemic.

Furthermore, such disruptions often force travelers out of their comfort zone to try new routes and modes. A great example is TfL urging Londoners prior to the 2012 Olympics to ‘Get Ahead of the Games’ by travelling at different times, walking where possible, or taking a different route. A study shewed that 12% of Londoners studied persisted with their new route months after the Olympics ended.

New public transport users, indeed even new walkers and cyclists, also now have a plethora of websites and apps to help them learn the unknowns, ask questions, and even pair up with others to learn the ropes.

The Law of Stretched Systems states that as technology improves, our expectations and demands of it increase accordingly. However, technology does not provide all transport skills, merely makes them easier to learn. But not everyone has a smartphone or internet, so technology is shifting the need to learn new skills and purchase what is to some expensive services. This changes the barriers to entry. Transport systems still need to be able to deal with the technologically unadorned traveler, with not even rudimentary transport skills.

Understanding the range of people’s limitations is essential to making public transport usable by all.

Part III – Behavioural insights for transport providers

Too often the people designing transport are not the ones taking the service. Thus the gap begins. Having transport managers and executives take the transport they manage regularly should be mandatory.

The quantification trap occurs when managers place too much importance on performance measures at the expense of considering the bigger picture. For example, the over-concentration on lowering costs, which tends to take all the quality out of a product or service – tight seat pitch, uncomfortably hard seats, crowded to standing trains, cheap and nasty lighting. Managers tend to optimise the metrics that they are assessed on, to the detriment of other, unmeasurable facets of a service. Hence Goodhart’s Law, in which banker Charles Goodhart declared ‘When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.’.

Comfort and sustainability are two concepts that are perceived through emotion and beliefs, and so are much more difficult to measure accurately. Many other factors are difficult to accurately quantify, such as sustainability, with its singular focus on carbon emissions. The authors show that, just as dieting is more than minimising calorie intake, there are many other factors involved when looking at environmental impacts of transport.

Similarly, whilst gross figures of transport capacity, billions spent, and car voyages avoided provide somewhat useful metrics, the benefits of small-scale improvements such as adding cycling lanes are much more difficult measure. Counting cyclists does not take into account the better health for the cyclists, nor the impression it makes on motivating others to get on their bikes (if only on weekends). Nonetheless, recent benefit-cost ratio calculations of walking, cycling, and street improvements have been estimated at over 3.5 – far greater than most urban public transport schemes.

Fortunately, the authors provide some behavioural solutions to the quantification trap. Using the example of the abuilding HS2 line, they look at the rather annoying transport experience of HS1. Specifically, the billions spent on the latter line’s engineering was not nearly matched by time saving improvements in the passenger ticketing or queuing experience. They proffer the suggestion that HS2 could be more flexible with its ticket structure, allowing early arrivers at stations to use unsold seats on earlier trips. This in turn reduces the uncertainty of those further from the station from making the specific train they have a ticket for. This is already implemented by the EuroTunnel rail car shuttle between the UK and France.

The authors also consider the HS2 name itself. It focuses passengers, politicians, and critics on only the high speed aspect of the line. But more important than the time savings, HS2 will provide much needed increased capacity between the UK’s three largest cities, and will allow more local services on the congested West Coast Main Line. Furthermore, Britain has long had an attachment to affectionate infrastructure names – the Bakerloo, the Tube, the GOBLIN, the Piccadilly for the Great Northern, Piccadilly, and Brompton Railway, and Brunel’s Billiard Table for the Great Western Railway, amongst others. Surely an evocative name could be devised to replace ‘HS2’.

Design for perception first

Personal electronics manufacturers understand this well – Apple products are renowned for their design, for instance. Known in Japan as the Kano Theory of development, it connects customer requirements and customer satisfaction in product and service creation. It takes into account products and services that have ‘delight’ attributes that make us happy. For Dyson vacuums, for instance, it’s the transparent body which highlights the appliance’s performance,

Professor Noriaki Kano of Tokyo University of Science, developed this model for customer satisfaction in 1978, which comprise these five customer requirements characteristics:

• Threshold attributes – Basic & essential, such as passenger safety.
• One-dimensional performance attributes – Indicators of attributes that companies compete with, such as journey time, frequency, and punctuality.
• Attract & delight qualities – These are not normally expected and thus often unspoken. Examples include free & fast WiFi, unexpected and helpful employee effort, etc.
• Indifferent qualities – These have no effect on customer satisfaction, but are essential to the product or service. Can also be passenger perks that aren’t actually useful.
• Reverse qualities – Advanced features and effort that add complexity or annoyance.

In this chart:

• Different customer requirements are indicated by different lines.
• Excitement attributes are not expected by customers.
• Performance attributes have a direct impact on customer satisfaction.
• The Zone of Indifference is the area in which expectations are more or less satisfied.
• Threshold attributes are taken for granted by customers.
• Over time, delight attributes become performance attributes, and subsequently threshold attributes. Mobile phones and IT are excellent examples of the Law of Stretched Systems.

However, this model does not deduce overall product or service satisfaction. Nonetheless, applying this model will help transport companies better understand how passengers experience and appreciate comfort, connectedness, safety, and loyalty.

Unfortunately, the franchise system under which most UK train companies operate put little or no weight on improving the passenger experience. In sharp contrast, airliner manufacturer Boeing used lighting, pressurisation, and humidity to reduce jet lag, and a slightly larger entranceway, in its 787 Dreamliner to improve the flying experience.

Designing for non-average people

Aggregation of data means that transport planners cannot distinguish between different experiences of different passengers – as Homo transporticus is sexless and ageless. As a consequence, transport design provides a one size fits all service. For example, most transport agencies have online information and apps for trip planning and schedules. Whilst these are great for the majority of passengers, it means that there are far fewer posted schedules and often fewer route maps in shelters for those without smartphones, such as those below the poverty line, immigrants, and those with disabilities. Visitors to a city can also be overwhelmed by the plethora of digital information and route choices available.

Managing passenger uncertainty

For occasional and new users, fear of using public transport can be an almost insurmountable wall. Fortunately, apps can provide real time information on next vehicle arrival times. Savvy operators are now adding vehicle loading information, to help passengers determine if there is a seat on their next vehicle, or if it would be better to wait for the next one. This also helps operators spread out the passenger load.

The bane of public transport proposals

The people that perceive that they have the most to lose group together and form the ‘concentrated loser’ problem. Seen time and again as NIMBYs or BANANAs (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone), they often derail sensible schemes that would benefit a great number of people.

Clarifying benefits of a scheme is a critical communications challenge. especially for counter-intuitive transport (CIT). Some examples of CIT are:

• adding lanes will increase congestion and delays, despite politicians’ promises.
• stopping Londoners from waking up escalators, to improve throughput, reduce walking, and reduce injuries.

A relatively simple counter example can be effective when trialling such schemes. A number of cycle lanes now feature digital signs that display the number of cyclists traveled per day and per year. This encourages the cyclists, but moreover it demonstrates that driver complaints of empty bike lanes are unfounded.

The latest bête noire of drivers is the Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN). But data demonstrates that 80% of LTNs in 10 countries led to a decline in traffic – despite the loud hoo-haws of motorists. Sometimes, researchers noted, it may take a few years for locals’ behaviour to change to other modes of travel.

The scourge of optimism bias

Psychologists have noted the human tendency overestimate positive events happening, and underestimate negative ones. Another aspect of optimism is the Dunning-Kruger Effect – people overestimate what they know. Even experts.

This applies even to mega-projects, like Crossrail, the Grand Paris Express, and Boston’s Big Dig Highway – all having badly blown their original funding and schedules. Even Berlin’s Brandenburg Airport was almost a decade late in opening and billions over budget.

Optimism in innovation

Optimism bias applies even more to new technologies. People want to believe in new tech to solve the mundane problems of transport, believing the technutpian promises of their promoters. But there is a transport graveyard of one-off technologies – maglev, Hyperloop, Segway, the latter company having gone bankrupt in 2020. Incremental improvements have much greater staying power.

Unfortunately, the mere promise of a new technology is sufficient to postpone or cancel existing transport investments. Politicians fear missing out on the next big thing, and ideally would like to leapfrog existing problems by jumping to a brand new technology.

Note that this merely for the technological aspects. The commercial and social viability are larger hills to overcome, and are often where new transport technology dies.

Transport evolves, and generally the simplest and most adaptable modes are the ones that last. The book cites the Concorde as being unable to adapt to a lower noise and lower pollution world. As well, its initial benefit of supersonic flight greatly limited its commercial market as no country wanted its sonic booms. In the 1990s, Boeing outfitted Business Class on its 747s with flat-bed seats and seat-back video entertainment. This allowed trans-Atlantic passengers to save considerable money and still arrive refreshed. Concorde soon became a dinosaur and was extinct by 2003.

Groupthink

Conformists flourish. Homogeneity smothers imagination. Even with transport planners. So diversity of experience, background, education, and even country of origin help counter groupthink, the tendency for most people to go with the flow unthinkingly.

SCARF – Five Things Transport Economists Can’t Explain

There are lots of things passengers think are important. But most of us are actually motivated by these five things:

• Status – For example, a fancier vehicle or faster train, sitting higher than others when driving.
• Certainty – Reliability and trustworthiness.
• Autonomony – Being able to get around reasonably well in chosen mode.
• Relatedness – The sense of connection with and safety around others, ie a safe feeling environment.
• Fairness – paying a fair amount for transport.

None of these are explained or taken into account by transport economists. “The human mind does not run on logic any more than a horse runs on petrol.” – co-author Rory Sutherland.

Final impressions

There is much more to this book – I have merely gleaned a few examples. However, the authors do not restrict themselves to simple problems. Their proposed solutions to address mega-project bloat are too long to get into here.

Behavioural science provides transport planners and professionals the tools to untangle our imperfect human perceptions and mental models. Like any new approach, it is important to build up agency expertise with small trials to demonstrate the science.