Transactions on Transport Sciences 2023, 14(1):14-23 | DOI: 10.5507/tots.2022.024

Identification of older adults' needs as future users of autonomous shuttles: A serious game co-creation approach for inclusiveness

Cesar Casiano Flores, Fien Vanongeval, Thérèse Steenberghen
Spatial Application Division Leuven, KU Leuven, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium

Automated vehicles are potential disrupters of the mobility system and are expected to address inclusive mobility issues. Yet, the transition to their full implementation in cities is expected to face numerous challenges. While companies and governments interested in their future implementation have conducted pilots to understand better their implementation in cities, there is still a limited understanding of potential users' needs. This understanding becomes even more limited when considering vulnerable groups. To address this gap, we have developed a novel Serious Game named "A shuttle for everyone". We use it as a co-creation method to engage potential users, in this case, older adults in the Noordrand-Brussels region, Belgium. This study case contributes to the co-creation and transport literature as there is scarce research focused on developing new inclusive mobility public services. Three game sessions with older adults took place. The key identified needs are related to comfort, safety, ease of use, and accessibility. Our results confirm and complete previous automated vehicle studies. We can confirm that our Serious Game as a co-creation method has facilitated anticipatory needs identification. Understanding users' needs contribute to improving design and can help to create policy recommendations that aim for an inclusive implementation of automated vehicle mobility services.

Keywords: Inclusive mobility; co-creation; autonomous vehicles; serious games; older adults

Received: September 30, 2022; Revised: November 29, 2022; Accepted: December 21, 2022; Prepublished online: January 17, 2023; Published: April 20, 2023  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Flores, C.C., Vanongeval, F., & Steenberghen, T. (2023). Identification of older adults' needs as future users of autonomous shuttles: A serious game co-creation approach for inclusiveness. Transactions on Transport Sciences, 14(1), 14-23. doi: 10.5507/tots.2022.024
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Acheampong, R. . T. N., Marten, K., Beyazit, E., Cugurullo, F., & Dusparic, I. (2018). Literature review on the social challenges of autonomous transport.
    2. Ahangar, M. N., Ahmed, Q. Z., Khan, F. A., & Hafeez, M. (2021). A Survey of Autonomous Vehicles: Enabling Communication Technologies and Challenges. Sensors, 21(3), 706. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21030706 Go to original source...
    3. Ahmed, M. L., Iqbal, R., Karyotis, C., Palade, V., & Amin, S. A. (2022). Predicting the Public Adoption of Connected and Autonomous Vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23(2), 1680-1688. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2021.3109846 Go to original source...
    4. Alsalman, A., Assi, L. N., Ghotbi, S., Ghahari, S., & Shubbar, A. (2021). Users, planners, and governments perspectives: A public survey on autonomous vehicles future advancements. Transportation Engineering, 3, 100044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.treng.2020.100044 Go to original source...
    5. Amann, J., & Sleigh, J. (2021). Too Vulnerable to Involve? Challenges of Engaging Vulnerable Groups in the Co-production of Public Services through Research. International Journal of Public Administration, 44(9), 715-727. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2021.1912089 Go to original source...
    6. Ampatzidou, C., Gugerell, K., Constantinescu, T., Devisch, O., Jauschneg, M., & Berger, M. (2018). All Work and No Play? Facilitating Serious Games and Gamified Applications in Participatory Urban Planning and Governance. Urban Planning, 3(1), 34-46. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v3i1.1261 Go to original source...
    7. Azad, M., Hoseinzadeh, N., Brakewood, C., Cherry, C. R., & Han, L. D. (2019). Fully Autonomous Buses: A Literature Review and Future Research Directions. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2019, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4603548 Go to original source...
    8. Belton, O., & Dillon, S. (2021). Futures of autonomous flight: Using a collaborative storytelling game to assess anticipatory assumptions. Futures, 128, 102688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2020.102688 Go to original source...
    9. Brandsen, T. (2021). The Palgrave Handbook of Co-Production of Public Services and Outcomes (E. Loeffler & T. Bovaird (eds.)). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53705-0 Go to original source...
    10. Broome, K., Nalder, E., Worrall, L., & Boldy, D. (2010). Age-friendly buses? A comparison of reported barriers and facilitators to bus use for younger and older adults. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 29(1), 33-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6612.2009.00382.x Go to original source...
    11. Chaloupka, C., & Risser, R. (2020). Communication between road users and the influence of increased car automation. Transactions on Transport Sciences, 10(2), 5-17. https://doi.org/10.5507/tots.2019.014 Go to original source...
    12. Chen, C.-F. (2019). Factors affecting the decision to use autonomous shuttle services: Evidence from a scooter-dominant urban context. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 67, 195-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.10.016 Go to original source...
    13. Chikaraishi, M., Khan, D., Yasuda, B., & Fujiwara, A. (2020). Risk perception and social acceptability of autonomous vehicles: A case study in Hiroshima, Japan. Transport Policy, 98, 105-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.05.014 Go to original source...
    14. Chng, S., Anowar, S., & Cheah, L. (2021). To embrace or not to embrace? Understanding public's dilemma about autonomous mobility services: A case study of Singapore. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 9(4), 1542-1552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2021.08.004 Go to original source...
    15. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness. Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference on Envisioning Future Media Environments - MindTrek '11, 9. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040 Go to original source...
    16. Eden, G., Nanchen, B., Ramseyer, R., & Evéquoz, F. (2017). Expectation and Experience: Passenger Acceptance of Autonomous Public Transportation Vehicles (pp. 360-363). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68059-0_30 Go to original source...
    17. Feeley, C., Lubin, A., Kornhauser, A., Tobin, B., & Hwang, J. (2020). Autonomous Vehicles: Capturing In-Vehicle Experience & Focus Group Follow-up with Persons with Autism and Other Disabilities at the 2019 Princeton University SmartDrivingCar Summit. https://cait.rutgers.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/cait-utc-reg21-final-1.pdf
    18. Feys, M., Rombaut, E., & Vanhaverbeke, L. (2020). Experience and Acceptance of Autonomous Shuttles in the Brussels Capital Region. Sustainability, 12(20), 8403. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208403 Go to original source...
    19. Feys, M., Rombaut, E., & Vanhaverbeke, L. (2021). Does a Test Ride Influence Attitude towards Autonomous Vehicles? A Field Experiment with Pretest and Posttest Measurement. Sustainability, 13(10), 5387. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105387 Go to original source...
    20. Gallez, C., & Motte-Baumvol, B. (2017). INCLUSIVE MOBILITY OR INCLUSIVE ACCESSIBILITY? A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE. In Governing Mobility in Europe: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (pp. 79-104). HAL Open Science. Go to original source...
    21. Gamito, S., & Martinho, C. (2021). Highlight the Path Not Taken to Add Replay Value to Digital Storytelling Games (pp. 61-70). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92300-6_6 Go to original source...
    22. Gavanas, N. (2019). Autonomous Road Vehicles: Challenges for Urban Planning in European Cities. Urban Science, 3(2), 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci3020061 Go to original source...
    23. Golbabaei, F., Yigitcanlar, T., Paz, A., & Bunker, J. (2020). Individual Predictors of Autonomous Vehicle Public Acceptance and Intention to Use: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(4), 106. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040106 Go to original source...
    24. Greed, C. (2004). Public toilets: the need for compulsory provision. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Municipal Engineer, 157(2), 77-85. https://doi.org/10.1680/muen.2004.157.2.77 Go to original source...
    25. Guo, J., Susilo, Y., Antoniou, C., & Pernestål Brenden, A. (2020). Influence of Individual Perceptions on the Decision to Adopt Automated Bus Services. Sustainability, 12(16), 6484. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166484 Go to original source...
    26. Hassan, H. M., Ferguson, M. R., Vrkljan, B., Newbold, B., & Razavi, S. (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 Go to original source...
    27. Herrenkind, B., Brendel, A. B., Nastjuk, I., Greve, M., & Kolbe, L. M. (2019). Investigating end-user acceptance of autonomous electric buses to accelerate diffusion. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 74, 255-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2019.08.003 Go to original source...
    28. Hulse, L. M., Xie, H., & Galea, E. R. (2018). Perceptions of autonomous vehicles: Relationships with road users, risk, gender and age. Safety Science, 102, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.10.001 Go to original source...
    29. Hussain, Q., Alhajyaseen, W. K. M., Adnan, M., Almallah, M., Almukdad, A., & Alqaradawi, M. (2021). Autonomous vehicles between anticipation and apprehension: Investigations through safety and security perceptions. Transport Policy, 110, 440-451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.07.001 Go to original source...
    30. Hwang, J., Li, W., Stough, L. M., Lee, C., & Turnbull, K. (2021). People with disabilities' perceptions of autonomous vehicles as a viable transportation option to improve mobility: An exploratory study using mixed methods. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 15(12), 924-942. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2020.1833115 Go to original source...
    31. Jacobi, J., Llanque, A., Mukhovi, S. M., Birachi, E., von Groote, P., Eschen, R., Hilber-Schöb, I., Kiba, D. I., Frossard, E., & Robledo-Abad, C. (2022). Transdisciplinary co-creation increases the utilization of knowledge from sustainable development research. Environmental Science & Policy, 129, 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.12.017 Go to original source...
    32. Jukiæ, T., Pevcin, P., Benèina, J., Deèman, M., & Vrbek, S. (2019). Collaborative Innovation in Public Administration: Theoretical Background and Research Trends of Co-Production and Co-Creation. Administrative Sciences, 9(4), 90. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci9040090 Go to original source...
    33. Kett, M., Cole, E., & Turner, J. (2020). Disability, Mobility and Transport in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Thematic Review. Sustainability, 12(2), 589. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020589 Go to original source...
    34. Kovacs, F. S., McLeod, S., & Curtis, C. (2020). Aged mobility in the era of transportation disruption: Will autonomous vehicles address impediments to the mobility of ageing populations? Travel Behaviour and Society, 20, 122-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2020.03.004 Go to original source...
    35. Krath, J., Schürmann, L., & von Korflesch, H. F. O. (2021). Revealing the theoretical basis of gamification: A systematic review and analysis of theory in research on gamification, serious games and game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 125, 106963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106963 Go to original source...
    36. Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., & de Winter, J. C. F. (2015). Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 32, 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.014 Go to original source...
    37. Lamanna, M., Klinger, C. A., Liu, A., & Mirza, R. M. (2020). The Association between Public Transportation and Social Isolation in Older Adults: A Scoping Review of the Literature. Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue Canadienne Du Vieillissement, 39(3), 393-405. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980819000345 Go to original source...
    38. Leino, H., & Puumala, E. (2021). What can co-creation do for the citizens? Applying co-creation for the promotion of participation in cities. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 39(4), 781-799. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399654420957337 Go to original source...
    39. Martínez-Díaz, M., & Soriguera, F. (2018). Autonomous vehicles: theoretical and practical challenges. Transportation Research Procedia, 33, 275-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2018.10.103 Go to original source...
    40. McAslan, D., Gabriele, M., & Miller, T. R. (2021). Planning and Policy Directions for Autonomous Vehicles in Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in the United States. Journal of Urban Technology, 28(3-4), 175-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2021.1944751 Go to original source...
    41. Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & Sicilia, M. (2017). Varieties of Participation in Public Services: The Who, When, and What of Coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766-776. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12765 Go to original source...
    42. Ohnemus, M., & Perl, A. (2016). Shared Autonomous Vehicles: Catalyst of New Mobility for the Last Mile? Built Environment, 42(4), 589-602. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.42.4.589 Go to original source...
    43. Panagiotidou, G., Görücü, S., Nofal, E., Akkar Ercan, M., & Vande Moere, A. (2022a). Co-gnito: a Participatory Physicalization Game for Urban Mental Mapping. Creativity and Cognition, 284-297. https://doi.org/10.1145/3527927.3532803 Go to original source...
    44. Panagiotidou, G., Görücü, S., Nofal, E., Akkar Ercan, M., & Vande Moere, A. (2022b). Co-gnito: a Participatory Physicalization Game for Urban Mental Mapping. Creativity and Cognition, 284-297. https://doi.org/10.1145/3527927.3532803 Go to original source...
    45. Pattinson, J.-A., & Chen, H. (2020). A barrier to innovation: Europe's ad-hoc cross-border framework for testing prototype autonomous vehicles. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 34(1), 108-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2019.1696651 Go to original source...
    46. Penmetsa, P., Adanu, E. K., Wood, D., Wang, T., & Jones, S. L. (2019). Perceptions and expectations of autonomous vehicles - A snapshot of vulnerable road user opinion. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 143, 9-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.02.010 Go to original source...
    47. Pereira, J., Premebida, C., Asvadi, A., Cannata, F., Garrote, L., & Nunes, U. J. (2019). Test and Evaluation of Connected and Autonomous Vehicles in Real-world Scenarios. 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 14-19. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2019.8814032 Go to original source...
    48. Piao, J., McDonald, M., Hounsell, N., Graindorge, M., Graindorge, T., & Malhene, N. (2016a). Public Views towards Implementation of Automated Vehicles in Urban Areas. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 2168-2177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.05.232 Go to original source...
    49. Piao, J., McDonald, M., Hounsell, N., Graindorge, M., Graindorge, T., & Malhene, N. (2016b). Public Views towards Implementation of Automated Vehicles in Urban Areas. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 2168-2177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.05.232 Go to original source...
    50. Piatkowski, D. P. (2021). Autonomous Shuttles: What Do Users Expect and How Will They Use Them? Journal of Urban Technology, 28(3-4), 97-115. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2021.1896345 Go to original source...
    51. Pigeon, C., Alauzet, A., & Paire-Ficout, L. (2021). Factors of acceptability, acceptance and usage for non-rail autonomous public transport vehicles: A systematic literature review. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 81, 251-270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2021.06.008 Go to original source...
    52. Portouli, E., Karaseitanidis, G., Lytrivis, P., Amditis, A., Raptis, O., & Karaberi, C. (2017). Public attitudes towards autonomous mini buses operating in real conditions in a Hellenic city. 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 571-576. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2017.7995779 Go to original source...
    53. Regeer, B. J., & Bunders, J. F. G. (2009). Knowledge co-creation: Interaction between science and society. A Transdisciplinary Approach to Complex Societal Issues. Den Haag: Advisory Council for Research on Spatial Planning, Nature and the Environment/Consultative Committee of Sector Councils in the Netherlands [RMNO/COS].
    54. Roche-Cerasi, I. (2019). Public acceptance of driverless shuttles in Norway. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 66, 162-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.09.002 Go to original source...
    55. Rodriguez Müller, A. P., Casiano Flores, C., Albrecht, V., Steen, T., & Crompvoets, J. (2021). A Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence on (Digital) Public Services Co-Creation. Administrative Sciences, 11(4), 130. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11040130 Go to original source...
    56. Shrestha, B. P., Millonig, A., Hounsell, N. B., & McDonald, M. (2017). Review of Public Transport Needs of Older People in European Context. Journal of Population Ageing, 10(4), 343-361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12062-016-9168-9 Go to original source...
    57. T. O'Brien, D. (2016). Lamp Lighters and Sidewalk Smoothers: How Individual Residents Contribute to the Maintenance of the Urban Commons. American Journal of Community Psychology, 58(3-4), 391-409. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12093 Go to original source...
    58. Torfing, J., Ferlie, E., Jukiæ, T., & Ongaro, E. (2021). A theoretical framework for studying the co-creation of innovative solutions and public value. Policy & Politics, 49(2), 189-209. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16108172803520 Go to original source...
    59. Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Røiseland, A. (2019). Transforming the Public Sector Into an Arena for Co-Creation: Barriers, Drivers, Benefits, and Ways Forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 795-825. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399716680057 Go to original source...
    60. Wade, J. L. (1989). Felt Needs and Anticipatory Needs: Reformulation of a Basic Community Development Principle. Community Development Society. Journal, 20(1), 116-123. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575338909489998 Go to original source...
    61. Yigitcanlar, T., Kamruzzaman, M., Foth, M., Sabatini-Marques, J., da Costa, E., & Ioppolo, G. (2019). Can cities become smart without being sustainable? A systematic review of the literature. Sustainable Cities and Society, 45, 348-365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.11.033 Go to original source...
    62. Zandieh, R., & Acheampong, R. A. (2021). Mobility and healthy ageing in the city: Exploring opportunities and challenges of autonomous vehicles for older adults' outdoor mobility. Cities, 112, 103135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103135 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content