Older adults tend to be slower to adopt various technologies, despite noting the benefits that technology can bring to their lives. One such technology, fully autonomous vehicles (AVs), are projected to have significant impact on older adults’ quality of life and ability to age in place. Based on previous literature, we hypothesized that previous driving experience, self-efficacy, trust, and technology acceptance would be significant predictors of an individual’s intent to use AVs and that this relationship would be stronger for older adults than younger ones. This study included both young (18–30 years old) and older (60+ years old) adults. A linear regression model was tested on both age groups. As hypothesized, the model was significant for both samples; furthermore, model fit was higher for the older group. As such, this research adds to the current body of literature that states that older adults have unique concerns and considerations when adopting these technologies.
ArtisticoD.CervoneD.PezzutiL. (2003). Perceived self-efficacy and everyday problem solving among young and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 18(1), 68–79.
3.
BarrettA.MimbsH.SoulieB.NoblittJ.MichaelC. (2023). Why do older women limit their dricing more than older men?Innovation in Aging, 7(1), 832.
4.
BiassoniF.GnerreM. (2024). Understanding elderly drivers’ perception of advanced driver assistance systems: A systematic review of perceived risks, trust, ease of use, and usefulness. Geriatrics, 9(6), 144. https://doi.org/10.3390/geriatrics9060144
5.
ChenA.ChanK. (2011). A review of technology acceptance by older adults. Gerontechnology, 10(1), 1–12.
6.
ChihuriS.MielenzT. J.DiMaggioC. J.BetzM. E.DiGuiseppiC.JonesV. C.LiG. (2016). Driving cessation and health outcomes in older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 64(2), 332–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.13931
7.
ClassenS.SisiopikuV.MasonJ.YangW.HwangboS.McKinneyB.LiY. (2023). Experience of drivers of all age groups in accepting autonomous vehicle technology. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 28(5), 651–667. https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2023.2197115
8.
DavisF. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
9.
EbyD. W.MolnarL. J.StanciuS. C. (2018). Older adults’ attitudes and opinions about automated vehicles: A literature review (ATLAS-2018-26). University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute Center for Advancing Transportation Leadership and Safety (ATLAS Center).
GkartzonikasC.GkritzaK. (2019). What have we learned? A review of stated preference and choice studies on autonomous vehicles. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 98, 323–337.
13.
HaghzareS.CamposJ.BakK.MihailidisA. (2021). Older adults’ acceptance of fully automated vehicles: Effects of exposure, driving style, age, and driving conditions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 150, 105919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105919
14.
HassanH. M.FergusonM. R.RazaviS.VrkljanB. (2019). Factors that influence older Canadians’ preferences for using autonomous vehicle technology: A structural equation analysis. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2673(1), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.103133
15.
HassanH. M.FergusonM. R.VrkljanB.NewboldB.RazaviS. (2021). Older adults and their willingness to use semi and fully autonomous vehicles: A structural equation analysis. Journal of Transport Geography, 95, 103133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.103133
16.
HoffK.BashirM. (2015). Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(3), 407–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720814547570
17.
JianJ.BisantzA.DruryC. (2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(1), 53–71.
18.
LaverK.GeorgeS.RatcliffeJ.CrottyM. (2011). Measuring technology self efficacy: Reliability and construct validity of a modified computer self efficacy scale in a clinical rehabilitation setting. Disability and Rehabilitation, 34(3), 220–227.
19.
LuszczynskaA.ScholzU.SchwarzerR. (2005). The general self-efficacy scale: Multicultural validation studies. The Journal of Psychology, 139(5), 439–457.
20.
McDonaldT.SiegallM. (1992). The effects of technological self-efficacy and job focus on performance, attitudes, and withdrawal behaviors. The Journal of Psychology, 126(5), 465–475.
OlsonK. E.O’BrienM. A.RogersW. A.CharnessN. (2010). Diffusion of technology: Frequency of use for younger and older adults. Ageing International, 36, 123–145.
23.
RahmanM. M.DebS.StrawdermanL.BurchR.SmithB. (2019). How the older population perceives self-driving vehicles. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behavior, 65, 242–257.
24.
SmarrC. A.MitznerT. L.BeerJ. M.PrakashA.ChenT. L.KempC. C.RogersW. A. (2014). Domestic robots for older adults: Attitudes, preferences, and potential. International Journal of Social Robotics, 6, 229–247.
