A Perceptional Investigation into The Adoption of Timber Bridges
Keywords:Perceptions, timber bridges, factor analysis, highway officials
AbstractPerceptions of major bridge materials by four distinct groups of decision-makers were investigated within five geographic regions of the United States. Timber was rated lowest in perceived performance within each group and region. Timber was compared to prestressed concrete, steel, and reinforced concrete on eight preselected attributes. Timber was rated lowest on the attributes of low maintenance, easy to design, long life, and high strength. Only on the attribute of easy to construct did the rating for wood exceed the rating for reinforced concrete. On no attribute did timber rate higher than prestressed concrete. Highway officials who have participated in the Timber Bridge Initiative program rated timber as a bridge material statistically higher in overall performance than those highway officials who have not participated in the program.
American Consulting Engineers Council Directory. 1992-1993. Washington, DC.nBlomgren, G. W. 1965. The psychological image of wood. Forest Prod. J. 51:149-151.nBogozzi, R., and Y. YI. 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 16: 74-94.nBrungraber, R., R. Gutkowski, K. William, and R. McWilliams. 1987. Timber bridges: Part of the solution for rural America. Transportation Research Record 1106, Washington, DC. Pp. 131-139.nCheney, R. 1986. Decaying bridges teach a valuable lesson. Public Works August:50-52.nChurchill, G. 1991. Marketing research methodological foundations. The Dryden Press, Chicago, IL. 1,070 pp.nClapp, V. 1990. Timber bridges in the real world. Wood Design Focus 1(3): 19-20.nComrey, A., and H. Lee. 1992. A first course in factor analysis, vol. 1. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, NJ. 430 pp.nCooper, R. 1988. Predevelopment activities determine new products success. Indust. Marketing Mgmt. 17(3): 237-247.nCooper, R., and S. Kalafatis. 1984. Changes in attitudes in solid timber species: A test of some promotional elements. Canadian J. Forest Res. 14:22-26.nDay, G., A. Shocker, and R. Srivastava. 1979. Customer-oriented approaches to identifying product-markets. J. Marketing 43:8-19.nDickson, J. 1974. Use of semantic differentials in developing product marketing strategies. Forest Prod. J. 24(6): 12-16.nDillon, W., and M. Goldstein. 1984. Multivariate analysis methods and applications. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY. 587 pp.nDunker, K., and B. Rabbat. 1992. Performance of prestressed concrete highway bridges in the United States, the first 40 years. Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) J. 37(3):49.nFHWA. 1992. National Bridge Inventory Data. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC.nGreen, P., and F. Carmone. 1970. Multidimensional scaling and related techniques in marketing analysis. Allyn and Bacon Inc., Boston, MA. 245 pp.nHair, J., R. Anderson, R. Tatham, and W. Black. 1992. Multivariate Data Analysis. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, NY. 544 pp.nHiam, A., and C. Schewe. 1992. The portable MBA in marketing. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, NY. 464 pp.nJohnson, R. 1971. Market segmentation: A strategic management tool. J. Marketing Res. 8:13-18.nLehmann, D., and J. O'Shaughnessy. 1974. Difference in attribute importance for different industrial products. J. Marketing 38:36-42.nLuppold, H. M. and Associates. 1990. Southern pine usage and timber bridge status of ten southeastern states highway departments. Holly Hill, SC. 89 pp.nPeter, J. 1979. Reliability: A review of psychometric basics and recent marketing practices. J. Marketing Res. 16:6-17.nPorter, M. E. 1980. Competitive strategy. Free Press, New York, NY. 396 pp.nRitter, M. 1990. Timber bridges: Design, construction, inspection and maintenance. Chapter 1. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC.nRosenberg, N., P. Ince, K. Skog, and A. Plantigna. 1990. Understanding the adoption of new technology in the forest products industry. Forest Prod. J. 40(10): 15-22.nStalling, E. C., and S. A. Sinclair. 1989. The competitive position of wood as a residential siding material. Forest Prod. J. 39(4):8-14.nStevens, J. 1986. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. LEA Publishers, Hillsdale, NJ. 515 pp.nTimber Bridge Initiative Program. 1989. U.S. Forest Service, Morgantown, WV. 8 pp.nTrinka, M., S. Sinclair, and T. Marcin. 1992. Determinant attribute analysis: A tool for new product development. Wood Fiber Sci. 24(4):385-391.nUnited States Department of Transportation (USDOT). 1989. The status of the nation's high way sand bridges: Conditions and performance, and highway bridge replacement and rehabilitation program. Report of the Secretary of Transportation to the United States Congress. Report No. 98-815, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.nUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1989. Rural bridges: An assessment based upon the national bridge inventory. USDA, Transportation Report, Washington, DC.nUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1993. The national timber bridge initiative, A status report. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC. P. 7.nWind, Y. 1978. Issues and advances in segmentation research. J. Marketing Res. 15:153-65.n
The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:
1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.
3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.