Investigating generational disparities in attitudes toward automated vehicles and other mobility options
Introduction
The Millennials (born between 1980 and 2000) are currently outnumbering the Baby Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964) as the largest adult group in the United States, accounting for about one-third of the labor force (Rainer and Rainer, 2011, Fry, 2016). This demographic cohort follows Generation X (born between 1965 and 1980) and has shown different behavior compared to their older peers in various domains such as education attainment, technology adoption, and consumption patterns. The term “generation of learners” were used in the literature to describe Millennials as they were much better educated than any other cohorts in U.S. history (Bialik and Fry, 2019). They were “digital natives”, in contrast to “digital immigrants”, which describes their older peers who became familiar with information and communications technology (ICT) after having a substantial life offline (Marc, 2001, Burstein, 2013, DeVaney, 2015). Millennials also showed distinct consumption behavior and shifted toward a shared and on-demand economy, in which access to merchandises and services was more important than the possession of them (Quinones and Augustine, 2015, Godelnik, 2017).
Millennials have also shown distinct travel behavior in terms of their choices and attitudes compared to the generations that preceded them (da Silva et al., 2019, Lee et al., 2019). Literature has indicated that Millennials made fewer trips and traveled less compared to Generation Xers (Tiedeman et al., 2017, McDonald, 2015). Millennials also contributed to the ridership of public transportation and shared mobility services across the United States and were referred to as “real-time riders” due to their constant access to real-time information of all transportation modes (Tiedeman and Circella, 2018, Rahimi et al., 2020). Hence, it is not surprising that they have shown a higher tendency to live in denser multimodal urban areas, in contrast to Generation Xers, who favored smaller cities and rural environments (Delbosc et al., 2019, Okulicz-Kozaryn and Valente, 2019). In this line, Millennials were also referred to as the “car-free” generation as they shift away from private vehicles (Sigall, 2016). The literature reported that members of this demographic cohort owned fewer cars and were less likely to be licensed drivers compared to the previous generation (Klein and Smart, 2017, McDonald, 2015). Regarding emerging transportation modes, Millennials have shown a higher inclination toward automated vehicles (AVs) and were estimated to be early adopters (Hardman et al., 2019, Jin et al., 2020, Shabanpour et al., 2018).
While there is a general consensus on the differences between Millennials and the preceding generations in terms of mobility preferences and travel patterns, the real debate lies on whether these generational gaps will vanish as Millennials enter later lifecycle stages or they may sustain much longer. In other words, the observed differences in mobility choices and travel behavior may represent actual distinct attitudes and preferences that could persist through one’s life, or they might just reflect the generation’s unique attributes, such as delayed marriage and childbearing, smaller household, lower vehicle ownership, along with other socioeconomic conditions that may have influenced their mobility choices and preferences. This forms the major motivation for this study. We aim to provide a closer look into the generational gaps and identify potential sources of these gaps. Specifically, we focus on different generations’ mobility attitudes and preferences, and provide insights on what might have contributed to the differences across the generational groups.
The next section provides an overview of relevant literature in identifying and analyzing disparities among groups, followed by a description of the data used in this study. The following section elaborates on the analytical framework and detailed methods used. The results were presented and discussed in the next section. The final section summarizes major findings and discusses policy implications and contributions.
Section snippets
Generational differences
A few studies in the transportation field have explored the generational differences in the attitudes and preferences for various modes of transportation.
Shamshiripour et al. (2020) investigated the preference for mobility on demand (MoD) services using the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) data. The study showed that Millennials had a higher motivation to use MoD services compared to their older counterparts, mostly due to their higher tendency in using new modes of transportations and
Stated preference survey
A stated preference (SP) survey was conducted in the United States to collect the required data for this study. The survey was conducted in 2017 and included information such as socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, mobility profile, mobility preferences and attitudes. The survey used a stratified random sampling approach to select respondents given a preset quota for every cohort based on age, gender, ethnicity, education, and household income. The sampling plan followed the 2010
Analytical framework
The proposed analytical framework for this study consists of four main steps, as presented in Fig. 3. Leveraging data from the SP survey, the first step estimates the attitudes using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The attitudes are measured using observed indicators, such as current mode usage, mode preferences, and attitudes toward AV technologies. The identified latent attitude factors are labeled and interpreted based on the contribution of their indicators. Correlations between
Model results
The first part of this section presents the findings of the CFA in identifying various mobility attitudes. The second part identifies potential disparities in these attitudes between the generational cohorts through t-tests and Cohen’s d measure. The last section discusses the findings of the OLS regression analysis and the BO decomposition, and explains the various aspects of disparities between the generations for each attitude (dependent variable).
Discussions
In summary, five distinct mobility-related attitudes were identified based on existing mode usage frequency, mode choices under different circumstances, and preferences for various AV technologies. These attitudes represent the user’s inclination and preferences toward different mobility options, including shared mobility, transit, private vehicle, driving assistance features, and fully automated vehicles.
Comparing the average attitude scores between Generation X and Millennials, significant
Conclusions
Many researchers have noted that Millennials had distinct travel behavior compared to the previous generations, but it is unclear whether these generational gaps are due to their unique characteristics or the true taste differences between the generations. This has motivated this study to investigate the generational gaps in their attitudes toward various mobility options and identify whether and to what extent these gaps may be attributed to the true taste differences between the generations,
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Alireza Rahimi: Conceptualization, Methodology. Ghazaleh Azimi: . Xia Jin: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Funding acquisition.
Acknowledgment
This work is funded by the research office of the Florida Department of Transportation (BDV29 977-47). The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Florida Department of Transportation or the U.S. Department of Transportation.
References (55)
- et al.
Understanding the motivational processes involved in adolescents’ active commuting behaviour: development and validation of the Behavioural Regulation in Active Commuting to and from School (BR-ACS) Questionnaire
Transport. Res. Part F: Traffic Psychol. Behav.
(2019) - et al.
Millennials in cities: comparing travel behaviour trends across six case study regions
Cities
(2019) Millennials and the sharing economy: Lessons from a ‘buy nothing new, share everything month’project
Environ. Innovat. Societal Transit.
(2017)- et al.
Who will be the early adopters of automated vehicles? Insights from a survey of electric vehicle owners in the United States
Transport. Res. Part D: Transp. Environ.
(2019) - et al.
Millennials and car ownership: less money, fewer cars
Transp. Pol.
(2017) - et al.
What are the determinants of rural-urban digital inequality among schoolchildren in Taiwan? Insights from Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition
Comput. Educ.
(2016) - et al.
Driver behaviour and crash involvement among professional taxi and truck drivers: light passenger cars versus heavy goods vehicles
Transport. Res. Part F: Traffic Psychol. Behav.
(2019) - et al.
Cross-generational acceptance of and interest in advanced vehicle technologies: a nationwide survey
Transport. Res. Part F: Traffic Psychol. Behav.
(2015) - et al.
Eliciting preferences for adoption of fully automated vehicles using best-worst analysis
Transport. Res. Part C: Emerg. Technol.
(2018) - et al.
Dynamics of travelers’ modality style in the presence of mobility-on-demand services
Transport. Res. Part C: Emerg. Technol.
(2020)
Travel time use over five decades
Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract.
Validating an older adult driving behaviour model with structural equation modelling and confirmatory factor analysis
Transport. Res. F: Traffic Psychol. Behav.
Generational differences in attitudes towards car, car ownership and car use in Beijing
Transport. Res. D: Transp. Environ.
Incorporating attitudinal factors to examine adoption of and willingness to pay for autonomous vehicles
Transp. Res. Rec.
Role of attitudes in transit and auto users’ mode choice of ridesourcing
Transp. Res. Record
Millennial life
Wage discrimination: reduced form and structural estimates
J. Human Resources
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
On the decomposition of wage differentials
The review of economics and statistics
Understanding the millennial generation
J. Financ. Serv. Profess.
Managing generation Y
Quart. J. S.A.M. Adv. Manage. J.
What drives the gap? Applying the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition method to examine generational differences in transportation-related attitudes
Transportation
Millennials overtake Baby Boomers as America’s largest generation
Pew Res. Center
Cited by (16)
Shared versus pooled automated vehicles: Understanding behavioral intentions towards adopting on-demand automated vehicles
2024, Travel Behaviour and SocietyThe gender gap in the acceptance of automated vehicles in Europe
2024, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and BehaviourImpact of perceived value, positive emotion, product coolness and Mianzi on new energy vehicle purchase intention
2024, Journal of Retailing and Consumer ServicesAutomated bus services – To whom are they appealing in their early stages?
2024, Travel Behaviour and SocietyImpact of e-scooter sharing on bike sharing in Chicago
2021, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and PracticeCitation Excerpt :The results show that after the e-scooter sharing is introduced, ridership of male and female members decreased by 3.3 and 2.0 trips per week, respectively. We categorize age into five groups: 19–24, 25–30, 31–40, 41–54, and 55–73, which corresponds with the age range usually used in previous studies (Lee et al., 2019; Newbold and Scott, 2017; 2018; Rahimi et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2018; Wang, 2019). Age groups may be as important, or more important, than other generational factors.