Perception and Acceptance of Vehicle Safety Technology among Older Drivers

1. Older drivers perceptions and acceptance of vehicle safety technologyTim DavernSenior Programs Coordinator Road User Behaviour

2. Background • An ageing population suggests there will be more older drivers on the road • Older drivers have a higher risk of injury in a crash due to increased frailty • Vehicle safety technology can play a role in reducing risk to older drivers

3. Aims • Research aims: • Explore the perceptions and acceptance of vehicle safety technologies • Understand the decision making process – with a focus on knowledge and consideration of safety technology • Better understand the likely uptake/barriers of vehicle safety technologies

4. Methodology • Participants • 60+ • Current Victorian drivers licence • Purchased or looking to purchase a vehicle in the past/next 12 months • Purchased or looking to purchase a vehicle no more than 3 years old • Qualitative phase • 8 x 45 minute telephone interviews (4 x purchased / 4 x intend to purchase) • Quantitative phase • 1,070 x 15 minute online survey • Recruited through RACV database and RACV e-newsletter • Results are representative of RACV membership database, aged 60+ - data weighted based on age, location (metro vs regional), and gender.

5. Reasons for considering vehicle purchase Approaching or entering retirement was a part of the consideration for 18% of the sample, and was the main consideration for 4% Wanting a safer car was a part of the consideration for 26% of the sample, and was the mainconsideration for 6% N = 1,070

6. Criteria used to decide which car to buy N = 1,070

7. Resources used to inform purchase • Main sources of information included: • Internet websites (e.g. RoyalAuto online, car and motoring websites) • printed publications (e.g. RoyalAuto, newspapers, classifieds) • Independent reviews and word of mouth were the most trusted and reliable sources of information • If a trusted and reliable source reported a vehicle was safe – this negated the need to investigate safety in further detail.

8. Awareness, knowledge, and understanding of safety technology • When unprompted, technologies mentioned mainly related to standard inclusions: • Airbags • ABS braking • Parking sensors/cameras • Stability control • When prompted, awareness of newer technologies somewhat improved: • Blindspot warning (68%) • Driverless cars (66%) • Adaptive cruise control (65%) • Autonomous emergency braking (65%) • Lane departure warning (63%)

9. Awareness, knowledge, and understanding of safety technology • Direct experience was important to aid recall of technology • First hand demonstration & endorsement • Could be perceived as a “gadget” • Very little understanding about what technologies were designed to do • Variations of current features easier to understand • Technical terms lead to avoidance rather than further investigation

10. Perceptions of vehicle safety Mainly referred to ‘standard inclusions’, such as airbags, ABS braking and five star safety ratings which only required minimal consideration Attitude towards safety features impacted by lack of understanding and cynicism toward new technology. N = 1,070

11. Concerns of older drivers N = 1,070

12. Concerns of older drivers N = 1,070

13. Likely uptake and barriers • Focus on direct benefit of technology, rather than how it works • Is the technology easy to experience? • Is the technology a standard inclusion? • Is there awareness of the technology? • Technology vs experience • Technical terms perceived as ambiguous – can lead to avoidance

14. Conclusion • Older drivers just want to be reassured of safety • Effective communication should tap into emotional aspects of safety • Health & medical conditions can increase crash risk; technologies can reduce crash risk