Is Awareness of Public Charging Associated with Consumer Interest in Plug-in Electric Vehicles?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Policymakers often seek to increase the visibility of plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) chargers in public locations in effort to build familiarity and interest in PEVs. However, it is not clear if the visibility of public charging stations actually has an impact on PEV demand. The purposes of the present study are to (1) assess the current levels of visibility for public PEV charging infrastructure within Canada and (2) identify whether or not a statistically significant relationship exists between consumer awareness of public charging infrastructure and interest in purchasing a PEV. We use data collected from a sample of 1739 Canadian new-vehicle buyers in 2013. About 18% of Canadian respondents have seen at least one public charger, while the proportion is highest in British Columbia (31%). We find a significant bivariate relationship between public charger awareness and PEV interest. However, when controlling for multiple explanatory variables in regression analyses, the relationship is weak or non-existent. While perceived existence of at least one charger exhibits no significant relationship with PEV interest, perceived existence of multiple chargers can have a weak but significant relationship. Thus, public charger awareness is not a strong predictor of PEV interest; other variables are more important, such as the availability of level 1 (110/120-volt) charging at home.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".