IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

How experience of use influences mass-market drivers’ willingness to consider a battery electric vehicle: A randomised controlled trial

Listed author(s):
  • Skippon, Stephen M.
  • Kinnear, Neale
  • Lloyd, Louise
  • Stannard, Jenny
Registered author(s):

    Uptake of electric vehicles (EVs) by consumers could reduce CO2 emissions from light duty road transport, but little is known about how mass-market consumer drivers will respond to them. Self-Congruity theory proposes that products are preferred whose symbolic meanings are congruent with personal identity. Further, Construal Level theory suggests that only those who are psychologically close to a new product category through direct experience with it can make concrete construals related to their lifestyles; most drivers lack this for EVs. For instance, potential performance benefits of EVs might offset range limitations for consumers who have such direct experience. The effect of direct experience was tested in a randomised controlled trial with 393 mass-market consumer drivers. An experimental group were given direct experience of a modern battery electric vehicle (BEV), and a control group an equivalent conventional car. Despite rating the performance of the BEV more highly than that of the conventional car, willingness to consider a BEV declined after experience, particularly if the range of the BEV considered was short. The participants willing to consider a short-range BEV were those high in self-congruity, for whom the BEV could act as a strong symbol of personal identity.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice.

    Volume (Year): 92 (2016)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 26-42

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:92:y:2016:i:c:p:26-42
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2016.06.034
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Axsen, Jonn & Kurani, Kenneth S., 2013. "Hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or electric—What do car buyers want?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 532-543.
    2. Jonn Axsen & Kenneth S Kurani, 2012. "Interpersonal influence within car buyers' social networks: applying five perspectives to plug-in hybrid vehicle drivers," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 44(5), pages 1047-1065, May.
    3. Dimitropoulos, Alexandros & Rietveld, Piet & van Ommeren, Jos N., 2013. "Consumer valuation of changes in driving range: A meta-analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 27-45.
    4. Jonn Axsen & Kenneth S Kurani, 2012. "Interpersonal Influence within Car Buyers' Social Networks: Applying Five Perspectives to Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle Drivers," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(5), pages 1047-1065, May.
    5. Bunce, Louise & Harris, Margaret & Burgess, Mark, 2014. "Charge up then charge out? Drivers’ perceptions and experiences of electric vehicles in the UK," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 278-287.
    6. Caperello, Nicolette & Kurani, Kenneth S. & TyreeHageman, Jennifer, 2013. "Do You Mind if I Plug-in My Car? How etiquette shapes PEV drivers’ vehicle charging behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 155-163.
    7. Ziegler, Andreas, 2012. "Individual characteristics and stated preferences for alternative energy sources and propulsion technologies in vehicles: A discrete choice analysis for Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1372-1385.
    8. Steg, Linda, 2005. "Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(2-3), pages 147-162.
    9. Franke, Thomas & Krems, Josef F., 2013. "Interacting with limited mobility resources: Psychological range levels in electric vehicle use," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 109-122.
    10. Axsen, Jonn & Orlebar, Caroline & Skippon, Stephen, 2013. "Social influence and consumer preference formation for pro-environmental technology: The case of a U.K. workplace electric-vehicle study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 96-107.
    11. Graham-Rowe, Ella & Skippon, Stephen & Gardner, Benjamin & Abraham, Charles, 2011. "Can we reduce car use and, if so, how? A review of available evidence," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 401-418, June.
    12. Golob, Thomas F. & Gould, Jane, 1998. "Projecting use of electric vehicles from household vehicle trials," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 441-454, September.
    13. Schuitema, Geertje & Anable, Jillian & Skippon, Stephen & Kinnear, Neale, 2013. "The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 39-49.
    14. Sirgy, M. Joseph, 1985. "Using self-congruity and ideal congruity to predict purchase motivation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 195-206, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:92:y:2016:i:c:p:26-42. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.