Influence of Socio-Cultural Attributes on Stigmatizing Public Transport in Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several factors over the years have contributed to stigma in public transport. Many studies have highlighted the need to make the transport system more equitable both from economic and gender perspectives. This study attempts to demonstrate how the perceptions of public transport users and non-users are stigmatized from social and cultural standpoints. Thus, it identifies the social and cultural stigma-induced barriers embedded with the use and people’s general perception about the public bus service, taking SAPTCO (Saudi Public Transport Company) as a case study. The study results suggest that privacy concern is the primary cause of stigma. Most of the users are unwilling to ride with their families as SAPTCO does not account for gender needs (e.g., privacy, travel convenience, safety, comfort, etc.). Moreover, people from the high-income classes are more stigmatized against this ridership. A fuzzy inference system (FIS) model is used to analyze the survey questionnaire responses and understand what stigma means for the public bus service. Expert opinions are employed to generate “if–then” rules of the FIS models. Sensitivity of the defined fuzzy model is conducted to different aspects of the ridership. The study results further suggest that “inconvenience” poses the highest impact while “feeling safe”, “privacy”, “fare”, “timing”, and “comfort” are found to be the medium impact-making variables for stigma. The stigma-defining variables would be critical for the public bus service to improve its service quality and help (re-)design the policies that would attract a high amount of ridership. Some solutions are suggested in the end that would complement, strengthen, and promote the current SAPTCO service. The demonstrated methodology of this study would be relevant and adaptive to any relevant context to improve public transportation service and pertaining policies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".