Mobile communication, social presence, and perceived security on public transport

Abstract

Mobile phones have become a ubiquitous phenomenon on public transport. However, little attention has been given to the effect of mobile communication on perceived security on public transport. This paper develops a model of social presence and perceived security in order to understand the widespread use of mobile phones on public transport as well as its effects. The first part of the model suggests a mediating role of social presence to understand how perceived security motivates mobile communication. The respective hypotheses are tested with a representative survey ( N = 2,267), and the results support the mediating role of social presence. The second part of the model assumes that social presence is not only a motive to use mobile communication but also helps to improve perceived security. Based on a 2-week mobile experience sampling with 86 participants and 1,264 measurement points, the effect of mobile communication and social presence obtained, as well as individual and situational factors on perceived security were tested. The respective hypotheses were partially supported but also suggest that other coping strategies might be of relevance to fully understand the relationship between mobile communication and situational perceived security. Besides the academic insights, these results suggest that public transport operators should consider expanding mobile phone coverage in their vehicles and stations to improve perceived security and make their services more attractive.

The psychology of mobile technology and daily mobility.

“…(Figeac & Chaulet, 2018). Furthermore, Reichow and Friemel (2020) argued that perceived insecurity is more likely on public transportation, and users may utilize mobile technology to create a sense of social presence that dispels insecurity. The phone's status as a symbol of security, which was particularly relevant in the early days of mobile phone adoption (Aoki & Downes, 2003), may remain especially relevant in transit.…”

“…An example regarding perceived security illustrates this dynamic relationship. Reichow and Friemel (2020) found that traveling on an underground train was associated with perceived insecurity, hypothesizing that travelers would use their mobile devices to increase perceptions of social presence in order to reduce such feelings of insecurity (e.g., texting; Luo et al, 2021). But this behavior feeds back to influence perceptions of the environment itself.…”

Psychological perspectives on mobile media: A flyover review

“…Whereas mobile media contribute to the public health challenge of distracted driving (Panek et al, 2015), they also fundamentally affect how people behave in some public transportation settings (Figeac & Chaulet, 2018). Indeed, one article suggested that mobile media may affect how safe people feel during the ride (Reichow & Friemel, 2019), while another underlined how mobile devices can facilitate helping (or gawking) at accident scenes (Andersson & Sundin, 2021).…”

The Psychology of Mobile Technology and Daily Mobility

“…In terms of affect, usage of mobile technology is often driven by boredom, but perhaps more so while on-the-go due to the lack of available alternatives (Figeac & Chaulet, 2018). Furthermore, Reichow and Friemel (2020) argued that perceived insecurity is more likely on public transportation, and users may utilize mobile technology to create a sense of social presence that dispels insecurity. The phone's status as a symbol of security, which was particularly relevant in the early days of mobile phone adoption (Aoki & Downes, 2003), may remain especially relevant in transit.…”

“…An example regarding perceived security illustrates this dynamic relationship. Reichow and Friemel (2020) found that traveling on an underground train was associated with perceived insecurity, hypothesizing that travelers would use their mobile devices to increase perceptions of social presence in order to reduce such feelings of insecurity (e.g., texting; Luo et al, 2020). But this behavior feeds back to influence perceptions of the environment itself.…”