Andri Warman, Muhammad Iqbal Firdaus, Aisyah Rahmawati


Public transport services provided by Bus Rapid Transit TransJakarta has been launched by the local government of DKI Jakarta as a mass and rapid transport mode that can attract the users of personal vehicle to use this mode of transport. Although the passengers are increasing, but the condition has not reached the optimum level yet. This study is done as an attempt to map the image perceived by the users, either frequent users, occasional users, or non-frequent users. The image projected by the users will depend on the experience degree and information each individual has. The method used here is descriptive analysis and reduction factor to obtain the dimensions of image in the respondents’ mind toward TransJakarta bus. The result shows five dimensions that construct the image, namely affective dimension (Eigenvalue = 5,488, or 26% of all variances), dimension of vehicle aspects (Eigenvalue = 1,794, or 8.5% of all variances), dimension of service characteristic (Eigenvalue = 1,635, or 7.8% of all variances), dimension of impact on the trip (Eigenvalue = 1,348, or 6.4% of all variances), and dimension of impact on the user/other people (Eigenvalue = 1,088, or 5.1% of all variances).


image, TransJakarta, Bus Rapid Transit, perception, transport

Full Text:



Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) Annual Urban Mobility Report. Accessed on 26 September 2013 from

Adebambo, S. 2009. Impact of Bus Rapid Transit System (BRT) on Passengers' Satisfaction in Lagos Metropolis, Nigeria. International Journal of Creativity and Technical Development. 1 (1 – 3), 106 – 122. Accessed on 25 June 2013 from‎.

Cain, A dan Flynn, J. 2009. Quantifying the Importance of Image and Perception to Bus Rapid Transit. Report No: FTA-FL-26-7109.2009.3. Washington DC.

Currie, G. 2005. The Demand Performance of Bus Rapid Transit. Journal of Public Transportation. 8 (1), 41 – 55.

Deng, T dan Nelson, J. D. 2011. The Perception of Bus Rapid Transit: A Passenger Survey from Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1. Transportation Planning and Technology. 35 (2), 201 – 219. Accessed on 25 June 2013 from

Evans, J., IV, and Pratt, R. 2003. TCRP Report 95: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C.

Lai, W. T dan Chen, C. F. 2010. Behavioral Intentions of Public Transit Passenger – the Role of Service Quality, Perceived Value, Satisfaction and Involvement. Transport Policy. 18, 318 – 325.

Mahmoud, M., Hine, J., dan Kashyap, A. 2011. Bus Transit Service Quality Monitoring in UK: A Methodological Framework. Paper presented in ITRN 2011. Univerisity College Cork, 31 August – 1 September 2011. Accessed on 27 June 2013 from

Scherer, M. 2011. The Image of Bus and Tram: First Results. Paper presented in the11th Swiss Transport Research Conference. Ascona, 11 – 13 May 2011. Accessed on 26 June 2013 from

van Exel, N. J. A dan Rietveld, P. 2010. Perceptions of Public Transport Travel Time and Their Effect on Choice-Sets among Car Drivers. Journal of Transport and Land Use 2 (3/4), 75–86

Vaz, C dan Venter, C. 2012. The Effectiveness of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) as Part of a Poverty Reduction Strategy: Some Early Impacts in Johannnesburg. Paper presented in the 31st Southern African Transport Conference (SATC 2012). Pretoria, South Afrika 9 – 12 July 2012. Accessed on 25 June 2012 from



  • There are currently no refbacks.


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

 Creative Commons Licence

Jurnal Manajemen Transportasi & Logistik (JMTRANSLOG) is licensed under a  Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

View My Stats