Advancing the design and implementation of accessible taxi services: A study of driver and disabled rider experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accessible taxi services play an important role in supporting disabled people's mobility and their access to employment, education, healthcare, and social activities. This paper examines the accessible taxi service experiences of drivers and disabled riders in Toronto, Canada. Findings are based on a thematic analysis of 590 customer-reported complaints and 494 driver-reported incident reports provided by an accessible taxi brokerage contracted by the city's paratransit service. The findings reveal issues concerning safe service delivery, communication and disability awareness, and conflict management. To address these issues, we propose a three-part training program for drivers and riders, focused on disability awareness, physical safety, and conflict resolution. We then discuss policy implications and the roles of accessible taxi brokerages, paratransit agencies, and local governments in ensuring safe and effective accessible taxi services. We recommend incorporating a critical disabilities studies perspective into future policies and protocols to help with identifying and addressing ableist elements of accessible taxi and paratransit services. • Accessible taxi drivers and disabled riders both face various issues during trips. • Issues with disability awareness, physical safety, and conflicts must be addressed. • Taxi protocols for conflict management and inclement weather trips must be clearer. • Accessible taxi drivers require better disability training. • A three-module disability training framework is proposed for consideration.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".