Previously, on Driving Like Ass, DLA researchers were struck by this question: why does Boston—a city known for the impatience and intolerance of its drivers—have one of the country's lowest adoption rates of electronic toll collection (ETC), or FAST LANE system? In Part Two, DLA heads to the RMV in search of answers. (Click here to see Part One)

It would be easy to pass off Boston’s FAST LANE disinclination as just another case of New England Luddism. But, at DLA, when in doubt, we like to head for the data which, more often than not, means “let’s conduct a survey.”

A DLA survey instrument was developed to collect data on drivers’ awareness of the FAST LANE systems, perceived benefits of the FAST LANE system, motivation, and pricing sensitivity.
Photo: FreeFoto.Com

THE DLA SURVEY METHODOLOGY
Since our target population was Boston drivers, we wanted a probability sample, that is: one with a known probability that every subject is a member of the desired population, i.e., Massachusetts drivers. Hence, the survey was conducted at the Watertown Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) and administered by DLA staffers on their lunch break. Data was collected in short intercept interviews. It was determined that subjects would be selected from exiting RMW patrons rather than entering or waiting patrons. Entering or waiting patrons were deemed too frantic about whether they had the proper insurance stamp or appropriate form to provide unbiased responses. Of all exiting patrons, it was assumed that approximately 48% would have learned that they did not have the proper insurance stamp or the appropriate form or that the RMW--unlike every other establishment or organization in the state--does not accept debit cards for payment. But, by eliminating any exiting patron seen to be kicking trash cans or yelling at the kids, DLA researchers were able to glean a participation rate of 52%.

THE SURVEY INSTRUMENT
The DLA Survey instrument was a simple, five element questionnaire using open-ended text and numeric questions, as shown below:

• Do you own a FAST LANE transponder
• If yes, what was the single most important reason for getting one?
• If no, what was the single most important reason for not getting one?
• If you do not presently own a transponder, did you know that FAST LANE members are eligible for: (a list of five FAST LANE benefits)
• If you cited cost as the single most important reason for not getting one, at what price would you be inclined to get one?
  

SURVEY RESULTS
The results of the survey are shown in Figures 1 - 5, below:

The sample results showed an equal number of respondents owning and not owning FAST LANE transponders (45% each). Not surprisingly, among transponder owners, “speed” was cited as the primary reason for ownership (76%). A surprising number of respondents cited other reasons including business expense (7%) and style (4%), although it should be noted that most of the Louis Vuitton Murakami transponders in Boston are believed to be knock-offs.

When questioned about motivation, those respondents who did NOT own FAST LANE transponders overwhelmingly (87%) were able to cite a specific reason, primarily cost, as the main objection. This indicates fairly emphatically that “awareness” of the program and its benefits is not an issue. Even among “non-owners,” respondents were aware of discounts at the Allston/Brighton tolls and in the Sumner and Williams Tunnels (96% and 92%, respectively.)

If price is the major stumbling block to FAST LANE ownership, at what price will non-owners be convinced of cost-benefit trade-off? According to the results, $5 seems to be the sweet spot with 51% responding that they would be inclined to become FAST LANE users if the transponder was priced at between $5 and $20. Still, the “Free” (26%) and “Frickin’ Free” (13%) segments will present a challenge to FAST LANE authorities, as they did to our survey statisticians who have struggled with how best to tabulate “Frickin’” as a quantitative measure.

THE SURVEY: CONCLUSIONS

Once again, the mind of the Boston driver is shown to be a much more complex structure than its demonstrated moronic behavior would suggest. At issue is how the Ass-like driver’s mind balances the usual “cost-benefit” analysis (which anyone would perform) with the unique behavioral motivations of the Ass-like mind:

1. Will get me there first or faster (if YES, go to #2; if NO, terminate)
2. Does it cost too much? (if YES, go to #4; if NO, go to #3)
3. Purchase transponder
4. Do you still want to get there first or faster? (if YES, go to #1; if NO, terminate)

Of course, Ass-like drivers always want to get there first or faster, so what to do? This is what Excel calls a “circular reference” which is irresolvable.

On another note, there is much evidence to suggest that driving behavior may be as influenced by historical factors as it is by how driving skills are taught. And there is further thinking among the driving research community that this means Boston drivers may be conflicted by the juxtaposition of their need to “get-there-fast-and-first” with New England’s well documented Puritan roots. New England suspicion and mistrust of things unknown and people unfamiliar has been widely studied and documented. (See: Miller, Arthur, The Crucible, 1953; Updike, John, The Witches of Eastwick, 1984; Mather, Cotton, Get Thee Out and Stay Out!, 1710; Bulger, Whitey, My Lawn Chair, My Parking Spot!, 1986; and others.) New Englanders often regard new technology with that same degree of suspicion.

The DLA Research staff—forever looking for reasons to get out of the office and away from answering fan mail—is all pumped for several follow-on studies. These may happen, but our research agenda is already packed and further inquiry may need to wait until a new budget year. So much bad driving…so little time.