Agent-Based Psychometric Route Optimization: Personality-Driven Pedestrian Navigation and Infrastructure Design
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65069/jessd21202616Keywords:
Psychometric routing, Big Five personality, Multinomial logit, Agent-based modeling, Multi-modal transport, Pedestrian infrastructure, Campus mobility, KVKKAbstract
Current pedestrian routing assumes all pedestrians are identical and optimizes a single objective such as journey time, despite 6 decades of evidence showing personality consistently influences route preference. This paper develops a route, an agent-based framework that maps Big-Five-plus-sensation-seeking profiles to eight route attributes through a multinomial logit (MNL) cost function governed by an 8 × 6 personality, attribute interaction matrix (γ). The framework integrates a Mesa 3.x simulation on the Boğaziçi University campus map (740 nodes, 1,892 edges, SRTM elevation 4–135 m), a five-layer multi-modal pathfinder governed by a personality–mode matrix (δ), and a p-median facility-location optimiser that converts personality-segmented demand into infrastructure placement. Three converging lines of evidence support the approach. A 2,000-agent simulation produced significant alignment improvements on all nine pre-registered tests at p < .001 (Reserved archetype Cohen's d = 1.563), and was robust to terrain. A real Phase 1 screening survey (n = 26, 19 eligible) confirmed 16 of 23 hypothesised δ sign directions (70 %, binomial p = .047). A synthetic pipeline validation produced large subjective-measure effects (satisfaction d = 1.169, commercial viability d = 1.445) while objective deviation stayed flat. A multi-modal extension cut travel time by 43 %; the optimiser recommended 23 scooter docks, saving 2,397 person-hours per day at Gini = 0.007. Personality matters for routing, as does the technology that underlies it.
References
Bast, H., Delling, D., Goldberg, A., Müller-Hannemann, M., Pajor, T., Sanders, P., Wagner, D., & Werneck, R. F. (2016). Route planning in transportation networks. In Algorithm Engineering (pp. 19–80). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49487-6_2
Ory, D. T., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005). When is getting there half the fun? Modeling the liking for travel. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39(2–3), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2004.09.006
Anable, J. (2005). "Complacent car addicts" or "aspiring environmentalists"? Identifying travel behaviour segments using attitude theory. Transport Policy, 12(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2004.11.004
Guo, Z., & Loo, B. P. Y. (2013). Pedestrian environment and route choice: Evidence from New York City and Hong Kong. Journal of Transport Geography, 28, 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.11.013
Borst, H. C., de Vries, S. I., Graham, J. M. A., van Dongen, J. E. F., Bakker, I., & Miedema, H. M. E. (2009). Influence of environmental street characteristics on walking route choice of elderly people. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(4), 477–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.08.002
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory Professional Manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy. In Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (3rd ed., pp. 114–158). Guilford Press.
Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioral Expressions and Biosocial Bases of Sensation Seeking. Cambridge University Press.
Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. C. (2009). Personality Traits (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Jonah, B. A. (1997). Sensation seeking and risky driving: A review and synthesis of the literature. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 29(5), 651–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(97)00017-1
Hirsh, J. B., & Dolderman, D. (2007). Personality predictors of consumerism and environmentalism: A preliminary study. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(6), 1583–1593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.04.015
McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics (pp. 105–142). Academic Press.
Train, K. E. (2009). Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Boeing, G. (2025). Modeling and analyzing urban networks and amenities with OSMnx. Geographical Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1111/gean.70009
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1
Atak, H. (2013). The Turkish adaptation of the Ten-Item Personality Inventory. Archives of Neuropsychiatry, 50(4), 312–319. https://doi.org/10.4274/npa.y6128
Kazil, J., Masad, D., & Crooks, A. (2020). Utilizing Python for agent-based modeling: The Mesa framework. In Social, Cultural, and Behavioral Modeling (pp. 308–317). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61255-9_30
Horni, A., Nagel, K., & Axhausen, K. W. (Eds.). (2016). The Multi-Agent Transport Simulation MATSim. Ubiquity Press. https://doi.org/10.5334/baw
Lopez, P. A., Behrisch, M., Bieker-Walz, L., Erdmann, J., Flötteröd, Y.-P., Hilbrich, R., Lücken, L., Rummel, J., Wagner, P., & Wießner, E. (2018). Microscopic traffic simulation using SUMO. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC), 2575–2582. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITSC.2018.8569938
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
Chorus, C. G., Arentze, T. A., & Timmermans, H. J. P. (2008). A random regret-minimization model of travel choice. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 42(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2007.05.004
Prato, C. G. (2009). Route choice modeling: Past, present and future research directions. Journal of Choice Modelling, 2(1), 65–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1755-5345(13)70005-8
Quercia, D., Schifanella, R., & Aiello, L. M. (2014). The shortest path to happiness: Recommending beautiful, quiet, and happy routes in the city. Proceedings of the 25th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media, 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1145/2631775.2631799
Letchner, J., Krumm, J., & Horvitz, E. (2006). Trip router with individualized preferences (TRIP): Incorporating personalization into route planning. Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence (IAAI). https://cdn.aaai.org/AAAI/2006/AAAI06-297.pdf
Liu, Q., Li, C., & Ma, W. (2025). GATSim: Generative agent-based transportation simulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.23306. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2506.23306
Wang, L., Duan, P., He, Z., Lyu, C., Chen, X., Zheng, N., ... & Ma, Z. (2025). Agentic Large Language Models for day-to-day route choices. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 180, 105307.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2025.105307
Yan, Y., Zeng, Q., Zheng, Z., Yuan, J., Feng, J., Zhang, J., ... & Li, Y. (2024). Opencity: A scalable platform to simulate urban activities with massive llm agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2410.21286
Bonabeau, E. (2002). Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(suppl 3), 7280–7287. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.082080899
Hoyle, R. H., Stephenson, M. T., Palmgreen, P., Lorch, E. P., & Donohew, R. L. (2002). Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 32(3), 401–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00032-0
Newson, P., & Krumm, J. (2009). Hidden Markov map matching through noise and sparseness. Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference, 336–343. https://doi.org/10.1145/1653771.1653818
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under the 