Exploring the Influence of Digital Competence on Older Pedestrians’ Engagement with Autonomous Vehicles
Downloads
As autonomous vehicles (AVs) become increasingly integrated into urban mobility systems, understanding how older pedestrians interact with these technologies is essential for ensuring inclusive and safe transportation. This study investigates the role of digital competence in shaping the behaviours and attitudes of older pedestrians toward autonomous vehicles (AVs) in China, where the rapid deployment of AVs coincides with an ageing population. Using data from a structured survey of 750 older pedestrians (aged ≥60 years) in Wuhan, this study employs item response theory (IRT) to measure individual digital competence. It integrates the technology acceptance model (TAM) and pedestrian behaviour questionnaire (PBQ) frameworks to explore behavioural mechanisms. Structural equation modelling (SEM) results reveal that perceived ease of use (PEU) significantly influences perceived usefulness (PU) and attitude (ATT), which in turn drive behavioural intention (BIU) to engage with AVs. However, positive pedestrian behaviours (e.g. rule adherence) exhibit a negative relationship with AV acceptance when external human-machine interfaces (eHMIs) are introduced, suggesting that safety-conscious individuals may be more cautious toward unfamiliar AV systems. Mixed-effects ordered logistic regression models, incorporating digital competence as a random effect, confirm its significant moderating role in both AV and eHMI interaction scenarios. Findings highlight the need for intuitive eHMI design, targeted digital literacy interventions, and policy efforts to reduce socioeconomic barriers to AV adoption. This study contributes to the literature by providing a multidimensional analysis of AV-pedestrian interaction grounded in psychometric measurement and behavioural theory, offering valuable implications for age-friendly smart mobility systems.
Downloads
Gao C, Zhao F, Zhang Y, Wan M. Research on multitask model of object detection and road segmentation in unstructured road scenes. Measurement Science and Technology. 2024;35(6):065113. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6501/ad35dd.
Reyes-Muñoz A, Ibáñez JAG. Vulnerable road users and connected autonomous vehicles interaction: A survey. Sensors. 2022;22(12):4614. DOI: 10.3390/s22124614.
Tafidis P, Pirdavani A, Brijs T, Farah H. Can automated vehicles improve cyclist safety in urban areas? Safety. 2019;5(3):57. DOI: 10.3390/safety5030057.
Zeng Y, Hesketh T. The effects of China's universal two-child policy. The Lancet. 2016;388(10054):1930-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31405-2.
Taylor CA, Bouldin ED, McGuire LC. Subjective cognitive decline among adults aged ≥45 years — United States, 2015–2016. MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2018;67(27):753-7. DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6727a1.
Bellet T, et al. Interaction between pedestrians and automated vehicles: Perceived safety of yielding behaviors and benefits of an external human–machine interface for elderly people. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022;13. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1021656.
Choi EY, Park N. IT humanities education program to improve digital literacy of the elderly. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching. 2022;11(5):138. DOI: 10.5430/jct.v11n5p138.
Nisa U, Nisak CLC, Fatia D. Literasi digital lansia pada aspek digital skill dan digital safety. Jurnal Komunikasi Global. 2023;12(1):143-67. DOI: 10.24815/jkg.v12i1.31667.
Ilomäki L, Paavola S, Lakkala M, Kantosalo A. Digital competence – an emergent boundary concept for policy and educational research. Education and Information Technologies. 2014;21(3):655-79. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-014-9346-4.
Oladimeji D, et al. Smart transportation: an overview of technologies and applications. Sensors. 2023;23(8):3880. DOI: 10.3390/s23083880.
Hilmani A, Maizate A, Hassouni L. Automated real-time intelligent traffic control system for smart cities using wireless sensor networks. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing. 2020;2020:1-28. DOI: 10.1155/2020/8841893.
Litman T. Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions: Implications for transport planning. 2020.
Hulse LM, Xie H, Galea ER. Perceptions of autonomous vehicles: Relationships with road users, risk, gender and age. Safety science. 2018;102:1-13.
Buke M, Tikac G, Calik BB. Effect of sensory integrity and cognitive functions on fall history, balance and quality of life in elderly individuals. Physikalische Medizin Rehabilitationsmedizin Kurortmedizin. 2024. DOI: 10.1055/a-2357-9631.
Vercillo T, Carrasco C, Jiang F. Age-related changes in sensorimotor temporal binding. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2017;11. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00500.
Choi EY, Kanthawala S, Kim YS, Lee HY. Urban/rural digital divide exists in older adults: does it vary by racial/ethnic groups? Journal of Applied Gerontology. 2022;41(5):1348-56. DOI: 10.1177/07334648211073605.
Rivan NFM, et al. Cognitive frailty is a robust predictor of falls, injuries, and disability among community-dwelling older adults. BMC Geriatrics. 2021;21(1). DOI: 10.1186/s12877-021-02525-y.
Kongsuk J, Brown CJ, Rosenblatt NJ, Hurt CP. Increased attentional focus on walking by older adults limits maximum speed and is related to dynamic stability. Gerontology. 2021;68(9):1010-7. DOI: 10.1159/000520323.
Trpković A, et al. The crossing speed of elderly pedestrians. Promet - Traffic&transportation. 2017;29(2):175-83. DOI: 10.7307/ptt.v29i2.2101.
Elavsky S, et al. Multiple perspectives on the adoption of smart technologies for improving care of older people: mixed methods study. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2024;26:e45492. DOI: 10.2196/45492.
Kim J, Jeon S, Byun H, Yi ES. Exploring E-Health literacy and technology-use anxiety among older adults in Korea. Healthcare. 2023;11(11):1556. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11111556.
Deka D, Brown CT. Self-perception and general perception of the safety impact of autonomous vehicles on pedestrians, bicyclists, and people with ambulatory disability. Journal of Transportation Technologies. 2021;11(03):357-77. DOI: 10.4236/jtts.2021.113023.
Schmitt P, et al. Can cars gesture? A case for expressive behavior within autonomous vehicle and pedestrian interactions. Ieee Robotics and Automation Letters. 2022;7(2):1416-23. DOI: 10.1109/lra.2021.3138161.
Hensch AC, et al. Effects of a light-based communication approach as an external HMI for automated vehicles - A wizard-of-oz study. Transactions on Transport Sciences. 2020;10(2):18-32. DOI: 10.5507/tots.2019.012.
Mason B, et al. Lighting a path for autonomous vehicle communication: The effect of light projection on the detection of reversing vehicles by older adult pedestrians. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022;19(22):14700. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192214700.
Merat N, et al. What externally presented information do VRUs require when interacting with fully automated road transport systems in shared space? Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2018;118:244-52.
Gao R, Martens MH. External HMI for automated vehicles: Adding a communication perspective for all road users. Ergonomics in Design, 2022,47:78-84. DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1001922.
Jayaraman SK, et al. Analysis and prediction of pedestrian crosswalk behavior during automated vehicle interactions //2020 IEEE International Conference on robotics and automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2020:6426-6432. DOI: 10.1109/icra40945.2020.9197347.
Liu YC, Chen Y. How the interface of self-driving cars influences the road-crossing behavior and subjective evaluation of pedestrians of different ages. Advances in Human Factors of Transportation. 2024;148. DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1005215.
Romero-García C, García OB, Paz-Lugo P. Improving future teachers’ digital competence using active methodologies. Sustainability. 2020;12(18):7798. DOI: 10.3390/su12187798.
Adamczyk M, Betlej A. Social determinants of digital exclusion in an ageing society. the case of Poland. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues. 2021;8(3):122-35. DOI: 10.9770/jesi.2021.8.3(7).
Hargittai E, Dobransky K. Old dogs, new clicks: Digital inequality in skills and uses among older adults. Canadian Journal of Communication. 2017;42(2):195-212. DOI: 10.22230/cjc.2017v42n2a3176.
Sun X, et al. Internet use and need for digital health technology among the elderly: A cross-sectional survey in China. BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1). DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-09448-0.
Leví‐Orta G, Sevillano‐García L, Vázquez‐Cano E. An evaluation of university students' latent and self‐perceived digital competence in the use of mobile devices. European Journal of Education. 2020;55(3):441-55. DOI: 10.1111/ejed.12404.
Aesaert K, Nijlen DV, Vanderlinde R, Braak J. Direct measures of digital information processing and communication skills in primary education: Using item response theory for the development and validation of an ICT competence scale. Computers & Education. 2014;76:168-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.03.013.
Hämäläinen R, De Wever B, Nissinen K, Cincinnato S. Understanding adults’ strong problem-solving skills based on PIAAC. Journal of Workplace Learning. 2017;29(7/8):537-53. DOI: 10.1108/JWL-05-2016-0032.
Helsper EJ, Eynon R. Distinct skill pathways to digital engagement. European Journal of Communication. 2013;28(6):696-713. DOI: 10.1177/0267323113499113.
Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Mis Quarterly. 1989. DOI: 10.2307/249008.
Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science. 2000;46(2):186-204. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
Yousafzai S, Foxall GR, Pallister JG. Technology Acceptance: A Meta‐analysis of the TAM: Part 1. Journal of Modelling in Management. 2007;2(3):251-80. DOI: 10.1108/17465660710834453.
Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly. 1989:319-40.
Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior human decision processes. 1991;50(2):179-211.
Venkatesh V, Bala H. Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences. 2008;39(2):273-315. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x.
Wang Q, Sun X. Investigating gameplay intention of the elderly using an extended technology acceptance model (ETAM). Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2016;107:59-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.10.024.
Meyer J, Becker H, Bösch PM. Autonomous vehicles: the next jump in accessibilities? Research in Transportation Economics. 2017;62:80-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2017.03.005.
Lajunen T, Sullman MJM. Attitudes toward four levels of self-driving technology among elderly drivers. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021;12. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.682973.
Kang H, Baek J, Chu SH, Choi J. Digital literacy among korean older adults: a scoping review of quantitative studies. Digital Health. 2023;9. DOI: 10.1177/20552076231197334.
Sun H, et al. Research on the mode choice intention of the elderly for autonomous vehicles based on the extended ecological model. Sustainability. 2020;12(24):10661. DOI: 10.3390/su122410661.
Hao M, et al. The elderly acceptance of autonomous vehicle services in Beijing, China. International Review for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development. 2023;11(1):64-84. DOI: 10.14246/irspsd.11.1_64.
Ma Q, Chan AHS, Teh PL. Insights into older adults’ technology acceptance through Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 2021;37(11):1049-62. DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2020.1865005.
Granié MA. Effects of gender, sex-stereotype conformity, age and internalization on risk-taking among adolescent pedestrians. Safety Science. 2009;47(9):1277-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2009.03.010.
Deb S, et al. Efficacy of virtual reality in pedestrian safety research. Applied Ergonomics. 2017;65:449-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2017.03.007.
Rothenbücher D, et al. Ghost driver: A field study investigating the interaction between pedestrians and driverless vehicles. 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).2016. p. 795-802.
Wells H, McClure LA, Porter BE, Schwebel DC. Distracted pedestrian behavior on two urban college campuses. Journal of Community Health. 2017;43(1):96-102. DOI: 10.1007/s10900-017-0392-x.
Yadav A, Pawar NM, Velaga NR. Modeling the influence of smartphone distraction and pedestrian characteristics on pedestrian road crossing behavior. Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2023;2678(5):346-61. DOI: 10.1177/03611981231189499.
Tom A, Granié MA. Gender differences in pedestrian rule compliance and visual search at signalized and unsignalized crossroads. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2011;43(5):1794-801. DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.04.012.
Grosĕlj D, et al. Measuring internet skills in a general population: A large-scale validation of the short internet skills scale in Slovenia. The Information Society. 2021;37(2):63-81. DOI: 10.1080/01972243.2020.1862377.
Chen YRR, Schulz P. The effect of information communication technology interventions on reducing social isolation in the elderly: a systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2016;18(1):e18. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.4596.
Barroso CL, Abad MV, Valle MS. Internet and the elderly: enhancing active ageing. Comunicar. 2015;23(45):29-36. DOI: 10.3916/c45-2015-03.
Qi J, Wang T, Huai F. The significance of senior education in the internet era for the construction of lifelong education system. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences. 2023;9(1). DOI: 10.2478/amns.2023.2.00523.
Pihlainen K, Korjonen Kuusipuro K, Kärnä E. Perceived benefits from non-formal digital training sessions in later life: views of older adult learners, peer tutors, and teachers. International Journal of Lifelong Education. 2021;40(2):155-69. DOI: 10.1080/02601370.2021.1919768.
Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? when should it be applied, and what should one look for in a rasch paper? Arthritis Care & Research.2007;57(8):1358-62. DOI: 10.1002/art.23108.
Othman K. Exploring the implications of autonomous vehicles: a comprehensive review. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions. 2022;7(2). DOI: 10.1007/s41062-022-00763-6.
Nahdi DS, et al. Pre-service elementary teacher’s digital literacy with cognitive style and self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Innovation and Research. 2022;1(1):19-26. DOI: 10.31949/ijeir.v1i1.1862.
Martínez Bravo MC, Sádaba C, Serrano Puche J. Dimensions of digital literacy in the 21st century competency frameworks. Sustainability. 2022;14(3):1867. DOI: 10.3390/su14031867.
Martín‐García AV, Redolat R, Hernandis SP. Factors influencing intention to technological use in older adults. The TAM Model Aplication. Research on Aging. 2021;44(7-8):573-88. DOI: 10.1177/01640275211063797.
Al-Suqri MN. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease-of-use and faculty acceptance of electronic books. Library Review. 2014;63(4/5):276-94. DOI: 10.1108/lr-05-2013-0062.
Ibrahim R, et al. E-Learning acceptance based on technology acceptance model (TAM). Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences. 2018;9(4S):871. DOI: 10.4314/jfas.v9i4s.50.
Zhou H, Romero SB, Qin X. An extension of the theory of planned behavior to predict pedestrians’ violating crossing behavior using structural equation modeling. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2016;95:417-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.09.009.
Ma W, Liu Y, Head L. Optimization of pedestrian phase patterns at signalized intersections: a multi‐objective approach. Journal of Advanced Transportation. 2013;48(8):1138-52. DOI: 10.1002/atr.1256.
Messner JW, Mayr GJ, Wilks DS, Zeileis A. Extending extended logistic regression: extended versus separate versus ordered versus censored. Monthly Weather Review. 2014;142(8):3003-14. DOI: 10.1175/mwr-d-13-00355.1.
Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989;13(3):319-40. DOI: 10.2307/249008.
Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1991;50(2):179-211. DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
Hair J, Black W, Babin B, Anderson R. Multivariate data analysis: Pearson College division. Person: London, UK. 2010.
Su CT, Parham LD. Validity of sensory systems as distinct constructs. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2014;68(5):546. DOI: 10.5014/ajot.2014.012518.
Guerrero AB, Cárdenas-Gutiérrez AR, Montoro-Fernández E. Basic business knowledge scale for secondary education students: development and validation with spanish teenagers. Plos One. 2020;15(7):e0235681. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235681.
Yang H, Hai T. Reliability and validity of the chinese version of the solution‐focused inventory in college students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development. 2015;43(4):305-15. DOI: 10.1002/jmcd.12023.
Hu Lt, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal. 1999;6(1):1-55.
Babbin SF, et al. Prevention of alcohol use in middle school students: psychometric assessment of the decisional balance inventory. Addictive Behaviors. 2011;36(5):543-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.01.010.
Kim J, Kim H, Park EC, Jang SY. The association between the type of offline social participation and digital literacy among korean older adults. BMC Psychol. 2023. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3309790/v1.
Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences. 1996;27(3):451-81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00860.x.
Jayaraman SK, et al. Pedestrian trust in automated vehicles: Role of traffic signal and av driving behavior. Frontiers in Robotics and Ai. 2019;6. DOI: 10.3389/frobt.2019.00117.
Sun X, et al. Exploring personalised autonomous vehicles to influence user trust. Cognitive Computation. 2020;12(6):1170-86. DOI: 10.1007/s12559-020-09757-x.
Habibovic A, et al. Communicating intent of automated vehicles to pedestrians. Frontiers in Psychology. 2018;9. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01336.
Deursen AJAMv, Dijk JAGMv. The Digital Divide Shifts to Differences in Usage. New Media & Society. 2013;16(3):507-26. DOI: 10.1177/1461444813487959.
Burns C, et al. Pedestrian decision-making responses to external human-machine interface designs for autonomous vehicles. 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV). IEEE. 2019. DOI: 10.1109/ivs.2019.8814030.
Schmidt-Wolf M, Feil-Seifer D. Vehicle-to-pedestrian communication feedback module: A study on increasing legibility. Public Acceptance and Trust. 2022. DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2206.05312.
Classen S, Mason J, Hwangbo SW, Sisiopiku VP. Predicting autonomous shuttle acceptance in older drivers based on technology readiness/use/barriers, life space, driving habits, and cognition. Frontiers in Neurology. 2021;12. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.798762.
Copyright (c) 2026 Zhiwei LIU, Wenli OUYANG, Jie WU
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
