Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 13 Download : 10

Main Article Content

Abstract

Purpose: This study examines whether price perceptions and physical evidence are associated with consumer decisions among users of DAMRI Executive Class bus services on the Pontianak-Sintang corridor.


Research Method: A quantitative associative design used questionnaire data from 100 purposively selected users aged 17 years or older with direct experience of the service. Price, physical evidence, and consumer decisions were measured using five-point Likert scales and analyzed with instrument checks, descriptive statistics, multiple linear regression, partial tests, and a simultaneous model test.


Results and Discussion: More favorable evaluations of price and physical evidence were each positively associated with consumer decisions, and the two predictors were jointly related to the outcome.


Implications: The cross-sectional, single-corridor, purposive-sample design and two-predictor model limit generalization. The findings support managerial attention to fare-value alignment and consistent maintenance of cleanliness, comfort, vehicle condition, and supporting facilities.


Originality: The study provides route-specific evidence on how monetary and tangible service attributes jointly relate to executive intercity bus choice.

Keywords

price physical evidence consumer decisions bus services public transportation DAMRI

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Ikramullah, I., & Sukardi, S. (2026). Price and Physical Evidence on Consumer Decisions Regarding Damri Executive Class Bus Services. Advances in Business & Industrial Marketing Research, 4(3), 372–382. https://doi.org/10.60079/abim.v4i3.1089
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Alhassan, I. B., Matthews, B., Toner, J. P., & Susilo, Y. O. (2022). Public transport users' willingness-to-pay for a multi-county and multi-operator integrated ticket: Valuation and policy implications. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 45, 100836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2022.100836
  2. Deb, S., & Ahmed, M. A. (2018). Determining the service quality of the city bus service based on users' perceptions and expectations. Travel Behaviour and Society, 12, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2018.02.008
  3. Deb, S., Ahmed, M. A., & Das, D. (2022). Service quality estimation and improvement plan of bus service: A perception and expectation based analysis. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 10(3), 1775–1789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2022.07.008
  4. Eldeeb, G., & Mohamed, M. (2022). Consumers oriented investments in transit service quality improvements: The best bang for your buck. Research in Transportation Economics, 94, 101175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2021.101175
  5. Esmailpour, J., Aghabayk, K., Aghajanzadeh, M., & De Gruyter, C. (2022). Has COVID-19 changed our loyalty towards public transport? Understanding the moderating role of the pandemic in the relationship between service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 162, 80–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2022.05.023
  6. Ganji, S. S., Ahangar, A. N., Awasthi, A., & Jamshidi Bandari, S. (2021). Psychological analysis of intercity bus passenger satisfaction using Q methodology. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 154, 345–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2021.10.023
  7. Ghozali, I. (2018). Aplikasi analisis multivariate dengan program IBM SPSS 25. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
  8. Girma, M., Woldetensae, B., Nuriye, G., & Lika, T. (2022). Importance performance analysis for evaluating city bus service quality in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Urban, Planning and Transport Research, 10(1), 451–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2022.2099968
  9. He, L., Yang, D., & Li, J. (2021). Improving the service quality of public transit with exclusive bus lanes: A perspective from passenger satisfaction. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2021, 8599256. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8599256
  10. Iannario, M., & Monti, A. C. (2022). Modelling consumer perceptions of service quality for urban public transport systems using statistical models for ordinal data. METRON, 80, 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40300-021-00197-7
  11. Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2018). Principles of marketing (17th ed.). Pearson.
  12. Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management (15th ed.). Pearson.
  13. Nikel, C., Eldeeb, G., & Mohamed, M. (2020). Perceived quality of bus transit services: A route-level analysis. Transportation Research Record, 2674(2), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198120904380
  14. Obsie, A., Woldeamanuel, M., & Woldetensae, B. (2020). Service quality of Addis Ababa Light Rail Transit: Passengers' views and perspectives. Urban Rail Transit, 6, 231–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40864-020-00135-2
  15. Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405
  16. Rong, R., Liu, L., Jia, N., & Ma, S. (2022). Impact analysis of actual traveling performance on bus passenger's perception and satisfaction. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 160, 80–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2022.03.029
  17. Saleem, M. A., Afzal, H., Ahmad, F., Ismail, H., & Nguyen, N. (2023). An exploration and importance-performance analysis of bus rapid transit systems' service quality attributes: Evidence from an emerging economy. Transport Policy, 141, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.07.010
  18. Schiffman, L. G., & Wisenblit, J. (2019). Consumer behavior (12th ed.). Pearson.
  19. Sogbe, E., Susilawati, S., & Pin, T. C. (2025). Scaling up public transport usage: A systematic literature review of service quality, satisfaction and attitude towards bus transport systems in developing countries. Public Transport, 17, 1–44.
  20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-024-00367-6
  21. Sukhov, A., Olsson, L. E., & Friman, M. (2022). Necessary and sufficient conditions for attractive public transport: Combined use of PLS-SEM and NCA. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 158, 239–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2022.03.012
  22. Ulahannan, A., & Birrell, S. (2022). Designing better public transport: Understanding mode choice preferences following the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability, 14(10), 5952. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105952
  23. Weng, J., Yu, J., Di, X., Lin, P., Wang, J.-J., & Mao, L.-Z. (2023). How does the state of bus operations influence passengers' service satisfaction? A method considering the differences in passenger preferences. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 174, 103734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2023.103734
  24. Wong, R. C. P., Yang, L., & Szeto, W. Y. (2023). Comparing passengers' satisfaction with fixed-route and demand-responsive transport services: Empirical evidence from public light bus services in Hong Kong. Travel Behaviour and Society, 32, 100583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2023.100583
  25. Wu, J., Yang, M., Rasouli, S., & Xu, C. (2016). Exploring passenger assessments of bus service quality using Bayesian networks. Journal of Public Transportation, 19(3), 36–54. https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.19.3.3
  26. Zhang, J., Chen, W., Petrovsky, N., & Walker, R. M. (2022). The expectancy-disconfirmation model and citizen satisfaction with public services: A meta-analysis and an agenda for best practice. Public Administration Review, 82(1), 147–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13368
  27. Zeithaml, V. A., Bitner, M. J., & Gremler, D. D. (2018). Services marketing: Integrating customer focus across the firm (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education