OLDER ADULT DRIVERS’ CHALLENGES AND IN-VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE

Motamedi, Sanaz; Wang, Jyh-Hone; Blanger, A; Gagnon, S; Yamin, S; Casutt, G; Martin, M; Keller, M; Jncke, L; Cattell, R; Charlton, J; Oxley, J; Fildes, B; Oxley, P; Newstead, S; Koppel, S; O'hare, M; Cicchino, J; Mccartt, A; Davidse, R; Davis, F; Dawson, J; Anderson, S; Uc, E; Dastrup, E; Rizzo, M; Eby, D; Molnar, L; Zhang, L; St Louis, R; Zanier, N; Kostyniuk, L; Hojjati-Emami, K; Dhillon, B; Jenab, K; Lam, L; Lavalliere, M; Laurendeau, D; Simoneau, M; Teasdale, N; Li, Y; Wang, H; Wang, W; Liu, S; Xiang, Y; Macleod, K; Satariano, W; Ragland, D; Madigan, R; Louw, T; Dziennus, M; Graindorge, T; Ortega, E; Graindorge, M; Merat, N; Mayhew, D; Simpson, H; Ferguson, S; Mitchell, C; Suen, S; Motamedi, S; Wang, J.-H; Musselwhite, C; Holland, C; Walker, I; Osswald, S; Wurhofer, D; Trsterer, S; Beck, E; Tscheligi, M; Pavlou, D; Papantoniou, P; Papadimitriou, E; Vardaki, S; Economou, A; Yannis, G; Papageorgiou, S; Reimer, B; Rosenbloom, S; Coughlin, J; D'ambrosio, L ;; Schulz, R; Wahl, H; Matthews, J; Dabbs, A De Vito; Beach, S; Czaja, S; Siren, A; Meng, A; Son, J; Park, M; Park, B; Venkatesh, V; Bala, H; Venkatesh, V; Davis, F; Venkatesh, V; Morris, M; Davis, G; Davis, F · 2017 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.7708/ijtte.2017.7(4).08

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the driving challenges faced by older adult drivers and their acceptance of in-vehicle technologies designed to mitigate these risks. Motivated by the rapid growth of the older driver population and the associated decline in sensory, motor, and cognitive abilities, the research aims to identify specific challenging driving situations and determine which lower-level automation technologies older adults are willing to adopt. The study addresses four key questions: what situations pose challenges, what assistance is needed, which technologies provide this assistance, and what dimensions influence technology acceptance. The methodology involved two questionnaires administered to older adult drivers in Rhode Island. Questionnaire 1, completed by 135 participants, collected demographic data, driving profiles, health concerns, and crash histories. Participants also rated the challenge level of 20 specific driving situations on a 1–5 Likert scale. Based on these results, six lower-level in-vehicle technologies were selected for further study: Automatic Windshield Wipers (AWW), Night Vision Camera (NVC), Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC), Lane Departure Warning (LDW), Side View Assist (SVA), and Automated Pedestrian Detecting (APD). Questionnaire 2, completed by 115 participants, assessed the acceptance of these technologies using a four-dimensional conceptual model (UESA) adapted from the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Car Technology Acceptance Model (CTAM). The model included perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived safety, and perceived anxiety. Results from Questionnaire 1 indicated that 54% of participants reported health concerns, with vision, bone/joint flexibility, and memory being the most prevalent. Crash experiences were common, with 94% of participants reporting at least one crash in the past decade, frequently occurring in conditions such as snow, fog, intersections, and at night. The study identified that older adults find driving in bad weather, at night, on highways, and in heavy traffic particularly challenging due to declines in vision, motion perception, and selective attention. Questionnaire 2 results explored the acceptance of the six identified technologies based on the UESA dimensions, aiming to understand how perceived safety and anxiety, alongside traditional TAM factors, influence the intention to use these systems. The significance of this research lies in its contribution to understanding the specific needs and acceptance barriers of older adult drivers regarding driving assistance technologies. By focusing on lower-level automation, the study addresses the limited cognitive capacity of older drivers, suggesting that these systems may enhance safety without causing the distraction associated with higher-level automation. The findings provide engineers and policymakers with insights into the factors that make technologies useful and acceptable to this demographic, thereby informing the development of systems that can improve driving safety and support the mobility of an aging population.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

StageOutcomeToolModelPromptAttemptsCompleted
discover success OpenAlex-citations 1 2026-06-25
archive success unpaywall 2 2026-06-26
extract success cached 2 2026-06-26
clean success clean 1 2026-06-25
chunk success chunk 1 2026-06-25
embed success embed Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B 1 2026-06-25
promote success 1 2026-06-25
summarize success llm qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant summ-v5 1 2026-06-26
tag success vector_similarity 6 2026-06-25
verify success 1 2026-06-26

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).