Environmental Protection Agency 

Fuel Economy Label 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report
 
Environmental Protection Agency 


Fuel Economy Label
 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report
 

Office of Transportation and Air Quality 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

and 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
 

United States Department of Transportation
 

Prepared for EPA by
 

PRR, Inc.
 

EPA Contract No. GS-23F-0364P
 

Task Order 0001
 

EPA-420-R-10-907 

August 2010 
 

 

Table of Contents 

Executive Summary ............................................................3
�

Introduction .......................................................................9
�

Demographic Profile..........................................................13
�

Vehicle Use......................................................................15
�

Vehicle Purchase Process ..................................................17
�

Role of Fuel Economy........................................................25 

Motivators and Barriers to Purchasing Fuel Efficient Vehicles ....33
�

Market Segments..............................................................37
�

Appendix - Phase 3 Survey Questions.................................39
�

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 1 
2 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Executive Summary 

Introduction and Methods 

In 2006, EPA updated how the city and highway fuel economy values 

are calculated to better reflect typical real-world driving patterns and 

provide more realistic fuel economy estimates. EPA is now initiating 

a new rulemaking to ensure that American consumers continue 

to have the most accurate, meaningful and useful information, as 

well as an understanding of how the labeled vehicle impacts the 

environment. With the introduction of advanced technology vehicles 

on the market the EPA must provide metrics that are relevant and 

useful for vehicles such as Electric Vehicles, Extended Range Electric 

Vehicles and Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles. 

To help inform the creation of the new label, EPA engaged PRR 

Inc. to work with them in the design and implementation of several 

information gathering tasks including: 

•	� Literature review 

•	� Focus groups in 3 phases, including pre-group online 

surveys 

•	� Expert panel 

•	� National online survey of new vehicle buyers and intenders 

The purpose of the pre-group online survey was to obtain additional 

information regarding their vehicle purchase process, the role of 

fuel economy in their purchase decision, how they used the current 

fuel economy label, and motivators and barriers to their purchasing 

alternative fuel vehicles. Data from all the three pre-group online 

surveys was merged into one database for analysis purposes since 

the survey questions were very similar across all three phases. A 

total of 404 of those recruited completed the online survey. 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This report presents a comprehensive summary of the findings 

from the three pre-group online surveys. It should be noted that the 

results of these surveys are not intended as representative of any 

larger group of new vehicle buyers and reflect only the experience 

of the focus group participants. Nonetheless, these results can 

provide important insights to be used in conjunction with the other 

research tasks connected with this overall project. 

Key Findings 

• Vehicle use: 

• Most (88.1%) were the principal drivers of their new 

vehicles and almost all drove their vehicles five to 

seven days a week (91.8%). 

• Over half (54.7%) reported that they planned to drive 

this new vehicle between 9,001 to 15,000 miles per 

year, with another fifth (20.1%) planning to drive 

between 15,001 to 20,000 miles per year. 

• Respondents mostly used their new vehicles for errands 

and shopping (93.1%), visiting family and friends 

(83.4%), for recreation (81.3%), and for travel to and 

from work (75%). 

• Vehicle purchase process: 

• Over a third (34.1%) purchased a new vehicle less 

frequently than every five years. Around a fifth reported 

purchasing a new vehicle every five years (17.5%), 

every four years (18.7%), or every three years (21.1%). 

• More than three-quarters (77.5%) had a specific 

vehicle in mind before they first started looking, and 

just over half (51.5%) started researching vehicle 

information about one to three months before buying. 

• More than half (53.6%) compared two to three 

vehicles before making their final decision, with only 

12.7% considering just one vehicle. 

4 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•	� More than three-fifths (62.8%) considered more than 

one vehicle type, with a third (32.9%) considering two 

vehicle types and another fifth (19.7%)considering 

three vehicle types. 

•	� More than half (52%) considered a sport utility (SUV) 

vehicle when they were first looking. 

•	� The top five most important factors they considered 

when buying their newest vehicle were driving comfort, 

price, safety, reliability, and gas mileage. 

•	� Over three-fourths (78%) reported that they compared 

common factors across the vehicles. The top five 

common factors were: size/seating capacity/cargo 

capacity (50%), gas mileage/fuel economy (39.8%), 

vehicle type/category (25.4%), vehicle price (21.2%), 

and make/model reputation (18.6%). 

•	� One-fourth (25.5%) relied on themselves the most 

when deciding which vehicle to purchase. A fifth 

(21.2%) reported that they relied on their spouse/ 

partner and/or their immediate family for their vehicle 

purchasing decision. 

• Role of fuel economy: 

•	� Fuel economy was fairly important when choosing 

a new vehicle. Three-fifths (60.4%) rated it a ‘9’ or 

above on a 10-point importance scale. 

•	� Over two-thirds (67.5%) indicated they searched for 

information about fuel economy before buying their 

most recent new vehicle. Most respondents looked for 

this information at manufacturer’s websites (67.1%), 

on the fuel economy label (59.5%), using Consumer 

Reports (56.3%), and/or at auto dealerships (31.3%). 

•	� Almost three-quarters (72%) reported that they trust 

the EPA for fuel economy information. 

•	� Close to one-third (31.1%) indicated in their 

qualitative comments that EPA is an unbiased, 

trustworthy, reliable and reputable agency that is 

regulated by the government. 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Another 15.6% said that it was EPA’s job to test 

vehicles and set standards for fuel economy. 

• About 11% said that EPA was committed to 

protecting the environment and fuel economy 

regulation was part of protecting the environment. 

• Of those who did not trust the EPA for fuel economy 

information: 

• Overone-fourth(27.2%)indicated intheirqualitative 

comments that they had not thought about EPA as a 

source of information on fuel economy. 

• Another 17.5% thought the EPA was biased towards 

its own agenda and did not think it was trustworthy. 

• About another 17% were unfamiliar with the 

EPA and about another 17% stated that EPA mpg 

estimates were not accurate and higher than reallife estimates. 

• Most (88.2%) remembered seeing the fuel economy 

label when they bought their most recent new vehicle 

(without the aid of seeing the label in the survey). Of 

those who did not remember unaided, when shown a 

copy of the label almost all (95.9%) then remembered 

seeing the label. 

• The fuel economy label played a fairly important 

role in helping respondents choose a vehicle (mean 

importance score = 7.41 on a scale of 1 to 10). The 

most helpful fuel economy label information was 

the highway mpg, city mpg, combined fuel economy 

compared to other vehicles, expected range for most 

drivers in regard to highway mpg, and expected range 

for most drivers in regards to city mpg. 

• Most (83.7%) did not think the fuel economy label was 

hard to understand or that it needed to be improved. Of 

those who thought that the fuel economy was hard to 

understand and needed to be improved, over one-fifth 

(21%) stated that they had difficulty understanding 

the combined fuel economy section of the label. 

6 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•	� Motivators and barriers to purchasing fuel efficient vehicles: 

•	� The top motivators that might persuade respondents 

to seriously consider buying an advanced technology 

vehicle include: lower alternative fuel cost or higher 

gas prices (73%), lower vehicle price (60.3%), better 

mileage than a gasoline fuel vehicle (34.9%), positive 

environmental impact (29%), and higher reliability and 

dependability of the vehicle and vehicle parts (17.1%). 

•	� The top barriers that prevent respondents from 

seriously considering buying an alternative fuel 

vehicle include high cost of vehicle (66.3%), expensive 

maintenance (45.8%), expensive cost of parts/battery 

(45%), and parts/vehicles are unreliable (36.8%). 

•	� The most compelling factors for buying a fuel efficient 

vehicle were ‘to save money’, followed closely by 

‘because it was better for the environment’, and ‘to 

reduce our dependency on other countries’. 

•	� When it came to environmental concerns, the top two 

environmental factors of most concern were toxic 

exhaust emissions and smog. 

•	� Market segments: A cluster analysis was performed to identify 

possible market segments from among the respondents to the 

online survey. Cluster analysis is an exploratory data analysis 

technique designed to reveal natural groupings within a collection 

of data. As such, cluster analysis can suggest potentially useful 

ways of grouping market segments.Three clusters were identified: 

•	� Cluster 1: ‘Care more about the environment than fuel 

economy’ - less concerned about fuel economy and other 

vehicle factors, but more concerned about environment 

(33%) 

•	� Cluster 2: ’Care most about fuel economy as well as the 

environment’ - most concerned about fuel economy, 

other vehicle factors, as well as environment” (44%) 

•	� Cluster 3: ’Care less about fuel economy and the 

environment’ - less concerned about fuel economy 

and other vehicle factors, and least concerned about 

environment” (23%) 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 7 
8 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction 

Background 

In 2006, EPA updated how the city and highway fuel economy 

values are calculated to better reflect typical real-world driving 

patterns and provide more realistic fuel economy estimates. In 

addition, EPA redesigned the fuel economy label to make it more 

informative for consumers. The redesigned label more prominently 

featured annual fuel cost information, provided contemporary and 

easy-to-use graphics for comparing the fuel economy of different 

vehicles, used clearer text, and included a Web site reference to 

www.fueleconomy.gov which provided additional information. 

EPA is now initiating a new rulemaking to ensure that American 

consumers continue to have the most accurate, meaningful 

and useful information, as well as an understanding of how the 

labeled vehicle impacts the environment. With the introduction of 

advanced technology vehicles on the market the EPA must provide 

metrics that are relevant and useful for vehicles such as Electric 

Vehicles, Extended Range Electric Vehicles and Plug-in Hybrid 

Electric Vehicles. 

To help inform the creation of the new label, EPA engaged PRR 

Inc. to work with them in the design and implementation of several 

information gathering tasks including: 

•	� Literature review 

•	� Focus groups (in 3 phases, including pre-group online 

surveys) 

•	� Expert panel 

•	� National online survey of new vehicle buyers and intenders 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It was decided to use a three-phase approach for the focus groups 

in order to accommodate the sheer amount of information required 

to be covered in the focus groups, as well as to use each phase to 

inform the next phase on overall label design in regard to both 

content and look. The three phases were designed to address the 

following issues: 

• Phase I – Use of the current fuel economy label, as well 

as content and design of the label for internal combustion 

engine vehicles 

• Phase II – Understandability of and preference for metrics 

for advanced technology vehicle labels 

• Phase III – Assessment of full label designs for conventional 

and advanced technology vehicles in regard to content and 

look 

Methodology 

This document provides an overview of the results of the pre-group 

online surveys from all three focus group phases. (See Appendix A 

for the survey questions from Phase 31.) The data was merged into 

one database for analysis purposes since the survey questions were 

very similar across all three phases. In those cases where a question 

was not asked in all three phases of the survey, it is noted in the 

body of the report. 

A total of 32 focus groups were conducted between February 22nd 

and May 27th, 2010 in the cities of Seattle, Chicago, Houston and 

Charlotte. Groups were gender specific, were conducted in English, 

and each lasted two hours. 

Participants were recruited from within panels developed and 

maintained by the focus group facility used in each city. In order to 

screen out ‘professional focus group participants,’ only those who 

had not participated in a focus group in the last six months were 

included. In addition, participants were required to demonstrate 

evidence that they had purchased a new vehicle (not a used or preowned vehicle; not a motorcycle; not a‘Cash for Clunkers’ purchase) 

in the last 12 months. In addition, participants must have been the 

sole or primary decision maker with regard to this new vehicle 

1 Although the survey questions 

were similar across the three 

phases of focus groups, the Phase 

3 survey questions provides the 

most complete set of questions 

and is provided in Appendix A. 

10 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

purchase. Having internet access was also a requirement so that 

they could complete the pre-group online survey. To ensure a good 

cross-section of participants, each focus group included individuals 

representing diversity in: type of new vehicle, price range of new 

vehicle, distance they typically travelled daily in this new vehicle, 

if they had seriously considered an advanced technology vehicle 

before purchasing their vehicle, and demographic characteristics. 

Recruits were asked to complete an online survey before they 

took part in the focus group discussions. The purpose of the 

online survey was to obtain additional information regarding their 

vehicle purchase process, the role of fuel economy in their purchase 

decision, how they used the current fuel economy label, and 

motivators and barriers to their purchasing alternative fuel vehicles. 

The survey questions were developed by PRR, with input from the 

EPA, NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) 

and OMB (Office of Management and Budget). 

Those recruited were sent a link to the pre-group online survey 

approximately one week in advance of the scheduled focus groups. 

They were instructed to complete the online survey at least 2 days 

prior to their group. Follow-up reminder calls were made to those 

who had not completed the survey in the specified timeframe. 

A total of 404 of those recruited completed the online survey. It 

should be noted that not all those who completed the online survey 

participated in the subsequent focus groups. It should also be noted 

that the results of these surveys are not intended as representative 

of any larger group of new vehicle buyers and reflect only the 

experience of the focus group participants. Nonetheless, these 

results can provide important insights to be used in conjunction 

with the other research tasks connected with this overall project. 

Data Processing and Analysis 

Data processing consisted of coding and entering quantitative and 

qualitative responses. Open-ended question responses were coded 

to allow for inclusion in the quantitative analysis. Response range 

and logic checks (with the use of frequency tables) were performed 

in order to check for miscoded variables thereby cleaning the 

final data file. Data analysis was conducted with SPSS software 

(Statistical Package for the Social Sciences). 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Cramer’s V is a measure of 

the relationship between two 

variables and is appropriate to 

use when one or both of the 

variables are at the nominal level 

of measurement. Cramer’s V 

ranges from 0 to +1 and indicates 

the strength of a relationship. 

The closer to +1, the stronger 

the relationship between the 

two variables. Kendall’s tau-c is 

a measure of the relationship 

between two variables and is 

appropriate to use when both of 

the variables are at the ordinal 

level of measurement. Tau-c 

ranges from ‐1 to +1 and indicates 

the strength and direction of a 

relationship. The accompanying 

“p” scores presented in this report 

for Cramer’s V and tau‐c indicate 

the level of statistical significance 

reported if they are at the .o5 

level or less. 

Data analysis involved the use of appropriate descriptive statistical 

techniques (frequencies, percentages and means) and explanatory 

statistical techniques (in this case Cramer’s V and Kendall’s tau-c) 

to test for the statistical significance of relationships between 

variables.2 A cluster analysis was also performed to identify possible 

market segments from among the respondents to the online survey. 

Throughout this report, relationships between variables that 

are statistically significant at the .05 level or less, and that are 

meaningful to an understanding of the data are reported. It 

should also be noted that some of the charts presented in the report 

are for “multiple response variables”, meaning that the survey 

respondent could select more than one answer. In such charts the 

percentages will add up to more than 100 percent. 

12 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

Demographic Profile
�

Sample demographics as a percentage of the total sample. 

Sample

 Gender (n = 404) 

Female 45.0% 

Male 42.3% 

Did not answer 12.6%

 Age (n =404) 

20 - 24 3.2% 

25 - 34 20.5% 

35 - 44 21.8% 

45 - 54 22.0% 

55 - 64 15.6% 

65 or older 5.7% 

Did not answer 11.1%

 Household income before taxes (n = 404) 

$15,000-$25,000 2.0% 

$25,000-$50,000 10.4% 

$50,000-$75,000 19.3% 

$75,000-$100,000 17.1% 

$100,000-$125,000 12.9% 

$125,000-$150,000 5.4% 

$150,000 and more 6.9% 

Did not answer 26.0%

 Education (n = 404) 

HS diploma or GED 4.5% 

Some college/AA/Technical degree 25.0% 

College graduate 40.8% 

Post graduate 17.8% 

Did not answer 11.9% 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 13 
 

Sample 

Vehicles per household (n = 404) 

1 15.3% 

2 41.1% 

3 12.4% 

4 5.0% 

5 or more 2.5% 

Did not answer 23.8% 

Licensed drivers in household (n = 404) 

1 14.9% 

2 46.5% 

3 9.9% 

4 4.0% 

5 or more 0.7% 

Did not answer 24.0% 

14 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vehicle Use 

Respondents were asked if they were the principle driver of the new 

vehicle, how many days their new vehicle was driven, approximate 

annual mileage, and for what trip purposes the vehicle was used. 

More than half drive their new vehicle 

between 9,001 and 15,000 miles per year 

Most of the respondents (88.1%) were the principle drivers of their 

new vehicles and almost all drove their vehicles five to seven days 

a week (91.8%). Over half (54.7%) reported that they planned to 

drive this new vehicle between 9,001 to 15,000 miles per year, with 

another fifth (20.1%) planning to drive between 15,001 to 20,000 

miles per year. Only 7% planned to drive more than 20,000 miles 

per year. 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 15 
 

 

 

 

Most used new vehicles for errands, 

visiting family/friends, recreation, and/or 

commuting to work 

Respondents mostly used their new vehicles for errands and 

shopping (93.1%), visiting family and friends (83.4%), for 

recreation (81.3%), and for travel to and from work (75%). 

16 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vehicle Purchase Process 

Respondents were asked how often they purchased a new vehicle 

and to describe the process they used for purchasing their most 

recent new vehicle, including who or what they relied on the most 

when deciding which vehicle to purchase. Additional questions 

focused on the importance that various factors played in their final 

purchase decision, as well as the number and types of vehicles they 

had seriously considered before making their final choice. 

Many reported a fairly systematic purchase 

process involving research before visiting a 

dealership 

More than three-quarters (77.5%) had a specific vehicle in mind 

before they first started looking, and just over half (51.5%) started 

researching vehicle information about one to three months before 

buying. 

When they were asked to describe the process they used to buy 

their most recent vehicle, many said that they started with online 

research to learn more about vehicles that fit their needs and 

preferences (such as particular vehicle type/category, manufacturer 

preference, price range,etc.).They visited websites such as Edmunds. 

com, manufacturers’ websites, auto-dealer websites, auto-blogs, 

consumer review websites, etc. to create a list of comparable 

vehicles to consider further. Many also said that they read Consumer 

Reports and found it to be a reliable source of information on 

vehicles. As a part of this search process, they gathered information 

on specific factors such gas mileage, safety, reliability, warranty, etc. 

that they thought were important for each vehicle that was in their 

consideration set. Subsequently, they visited auto-dealers based on 

their preference for particular makes, availability of vehicle model, 

consumer reviews of dealers, price quotes, financing options, etc. 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 17 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They then test drove the vehicles at these dealerships, bargained for 

price and financing, and subsequently bought the vehicle that they 

liked the most during the test drive and that best fit their needs, 

preferences and price range. 

Most considered more than one vehicle and shopped across 

vehicle types 

More than half (53.6%) compared two to three vehicles before making 

their final decision, with only 12.7% considering just one vehicle. 

However, when it came to the types of vehicles seriously considered, 

more than three-fifths (62.8%) considered more than one vehicle 

type, with a third (32.9%) considering two vehicle types and 

another fifth (19.7%)considering three vehicle types. 

18 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Most popular vehicle types shopped for included SUVs, 

midsize cars, crossovers and compact cars 

More than half (52%) considered a sport utility (SUV) vehicle when 

they were first looking. Almost as many considered midsize cars 

(44%), with about a third (31.1%) considering crossover vehicles, 

and about a quarter (27.4%) considering compact cars. 

*Multiple responses allowed; percents can add up to more than 100% 

Seventy-eight percent of the respondents reported common factors 

across the vehicles compared. The following are top five common 

factors across the vehicles they compared: size/seating capacity/ 

cargo capacity (50%), gas mileage/fuel economy (39.8%), vehicle 

type/category (25.4%), vehicle price (21.2%), and make/model 

reputation (18.6%). 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 19 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of those who did not purchase the vehicle(s) that they first 

considered, close to one-third (30%) said that they had changed 

their decision based on their changed need at that time. For 

example, participants were now looking for a bigger vehicle, a 

more fuel efficient car such as a hybrid, etc. as compared to when 

they initially considered a particular vehicle. Twenty percent 

said that they changed their decision after they test-drove the 

vehicles. Another 16.7% found the vehicle that they had originally 

considered to be more expensive than they could afford. 

20 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comfort, price, safety, reliability, and gas mileage top the list 

of influencing factors 

The top five most important factors they considered when buying 

their newest vehicle were driving comfort, price, safety, reliability, 

and gas mileage.3 But, as can be seen in the table below, many other 

factors were also important, including, but not limited to: interior& 

exterior appearance, performance/handling/power/, warranty, size/ 

interior volume, and seating capacity. 

3 Based on phases 2 and 3 data 

where the question was asked as 

a rating question (as opposed to a 

ranking question as in phase 1). 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 21 
It was further found that: 

• Comfort was more important for women4 

• Price was more important for those with lower incomes5 

• Safety was more important to those who were younger6 

and with less education7 

• Reliability/repair costs was more important to those with 

less education8 

• Gas mileage was more important for those with less 

education9 and lower income10 

• Interior & exterior appearance was more important 

for those in Houston and Chicago11 and for those who 

purchase new vehicles more frequently12 

• Performance/handling/power was more important to those 

with less education13 

• Warranty was more important for those with less education14 

and those from Charlotte, Houston and Chicago15 

• Size/interior volume was more important to those with 

less education16 and those with more licensed drivers in the 

household17 

• Seating capacity was more important to females18 

• Brand was more important to those who compared fewer 

vehicles before making a purchase decision19 

• Low emissions was more important for women20 and those 

with less education21 

• Alternative fuels were more important for younger buyers22 

• Towing capacity was more important to those who were 

younger23, those with more working motor vehicles in the 

household24, and those with more licensed drivers in the 

household25 

22 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

10

15

20

25

4 Cramer’s V = .239, p = .026 

Tau-c = -.119, p = .008 

6 Tau-c = -.1-9, p = .013 

7 Tau-c = -.155, p = .001 

8 Tau-c = -.116, p = .019 

9 Tau-c = -.180, p = .000 

Tau-c = -.149, p = .001 

11 Cramer’s V = ,246, p = .006 

12 Tau-c = -.122, p = .009 

13 Tau-c = -.149, p = .003 

14 Tau-c = -.199, p = .000 

Cramer’s V = .236, p = .014 

16 Tau-c = -.136, p = .009 

17 Tau-c = .130, p = .004 

18 Cramer’s V = .265, p = .041 

19 Tau-c = -.165, p = .001 

Cramer’s V = .297, p = .009 

21 Tau-c = -.164, p = .001 

22 Tau-c = -.154, p = .001 

23 Tau-c = -.104, p = .020 

24 Tau-c = .143, p = .001 

Tau-c = .124, p = .002 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Almost half relied on themselves or family members when 

making a vehicle choice 

One-fourth (25.5%) said that they relied on themselves the most 

when deciding which vehicle to purchase. A little more than a fifth 

(21.2%) reported that they relied on their spouse/partner and/ 

or their immediate family for their vehicle purchasing decision. 

Another 19.3% said that they relied on online vehicle reviews and 

research, with another 18.5% relying most on checking for factors 

such as vehicle price, looks, mileage, reliability, size, comfort, safety, 

features, etc. when deciding which vehicle to purchase. 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

About a third purchased new vehicles less frequently than 

every 5 years 

Just over a third (34.1%) of the respondents purchased a new 

vehicle less frequently than every five years. Around a fifth reported 

purchasing a new vehicle every five years (17.5%), every four years 

(18.7%), or every three years (21.1%). Only 8.6% purchased new 

vehicles more frequently than every three years. 

24 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Role of Fuel Economy 

Respondents were asked how important fuel economy was to their 

vehicle buying decision, if they searched for information about 

fuel economy, where they searched for this information, and if 

they trusted fuel economy information provided by the EPA. They 

were also asked if they remembered seeing the fuel economy label 

on the vehicle window, how important this label was in helping 

them choose their new vehicle, and lastly how helpful specific label 

information was in their vehicle buying decision. 

Fuel economy was fairly important when 

choosing a new vehicle 

The average city mpg of respondents’ new vehicles was 23 mpg, and 

the average highway mpg was 28 mpg. In regard to the importance 

of fuel economy, the average importance score was 8.07 (on a scale 

of 1 to 10, where 10 meant fuel economy was very important), with 

60.4% rating the importance of fuel economy a 9 or 10. 

Further, it was found that the lower the education level26 and the 

lower the household income,27 the more likely one was to attach 

more importance to fuel economy in a vehicle choice. In addition, 

the higher the concern about environmental factors,28 the more likely 

one was to attach more importance to fuel economy in a vehicle.29 

26 Tau-c = - .105, p = .013 

27 Tau-c = -.129, p = .003 

28 Concern about environmental 

factors was based on an index 

constructed by adding up the 

individual responses to each of 

the environmental concern items. 

The items were weighted equally. 

Overall, females scored higher on 

this index than males (Tau-c = 

.277, p = .000) 

29 Tau-c = .190, p = .000 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 25 
 

 

 

 

Majority searched for fuel economy 

information 

Just about two-thirds (67.5%) indicated they searched for information 

about fuel economy before buying their most recent new vehicle. Most 

respondents looked for this information at manufacturer’s websites 

(67.1%), on the fuel economy label (59.5%), using Consumer 

Reports (56.3%), and/or at auto dealerships (31.3%). Males were 

more likely than females to search for such information,30 as were 

those who compared more vehicles before making a final vehicle 

choice31 and those who had higher environmental concerns.32 

30 Cramer’s V = .163, p = .009 

31 Tau-c = .228, p = .000 

32 Tau-c = .106, p = .035 

26 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Most trust the EPA for fuel economy information 

Almost three-quarters (72%) trust the EPA for fuel economy 

information. Females33 and those who were younger34 were more 

likely to trust the EPA fuel economy information. 

Of those who reported that they trusted the EPA for fuel economy 

information, close to one-third (31.1%) indicated in their 

qualitative comments that EPA is an unbiased, trustworthy, reliable 

and reputable agency that is regulated by the government. Another 

15.6% said that it was EPA’s job to test vehicles and set standards 

for fuel economy. About 11% said that EPA was committed to 

protecting the environment and fuel economy regulation was part 

of protecting the environment. 

33 Cramer’s V = ,119, p = .026 

34 Tau-c = -.158, p = .002 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 27 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of those who did not trust the EPA for fuel economy information, 

over one-fourth (27.2%) indicated in their qualitative comments 

that they had not thought about EPA as a source of information on 

fuel economy. Another 17.5% thought the EPA was biased towards 

its own agenda and did not think it was trustworthy. About another 

17% were unfamiliar with the EPA and about another 17% stated 

that EPA mpg estimates were not accurate and higher than real-life 

estimates. Ten percent indicated that the EPA is responsible for 

providing accurate fuel economy and auto industry information. 

28 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Most saw the fuel economy label and 

thought the label was fairly important 

When asked if they remembered seeing the fuel economy label 

when they bought their most recent new vehicle, most (88.2%) did 

remember without the aid of seeing the label in the survey. Of those 

who did not remember unaided, when shown a copy of the label 

almost all (95.9%) then remembered seeing the label. 

In regard to how important the fuel economy label was in helping to 

choose a vehicle, the average importance score was 7.41 out of 10 (on 

a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 meant the fuel economy label was very 

important).

35 The fuel economy label was more important to those: 

•	� The higher their new vehicle city mpg was36 

•	� The higher their new vehicle highway mpg was37 

•	� The more important gas mileage/fuel economy was in 

vehicle choice38 

•	� The more important low emissions was in vehicle choice39 

•	� The more important alternate fuels was in vehicle choice40 

•	� The higher their environmental concerns were41 

Most of the respondents (83.7%) did not think the fuel economy 

label was hard to understand or that it needed to be improved. The 

most helpful fuel economy label information was:42 

•	� Highway mpg (more so for those with less education43) 

•	� City mpg 

•	� Combined fuel economy compared to other vehicles 

•	� Expected range for most drivers in regard to highway mpg 

•	� Expected range for most drivers in regards to city mpg 

Other findings regarding the helpfulness of specific fuel economy 

label information include: 

•	� Estimated annual fuel costs information was more helpful 

to those who were younger44 and those with less education45 

•	� Statement about ‘your actual mileage will vary’ was more 

helpful to those with lower income46 

•	� Those with higher environmental concerns were more likely 

to think that all the information on the fuel economy label 

was more helpful47 

35 Based on phases 2 and 3 data 

where the question was asked as 

a rating question (as opposed to a 

ranking question as in phase 1). 

36 Tau-c = .252, p = .000 

37 Tau-c = .207, p = .000 

38 Tau-c = .448, p = .000 

39 Tau-c = .206, p = .000 

40 Tau-c = .190, p = .000 

41 Tau-c = .169, p = .000 

42 Based on phases 2 and 3 data 

where the question was asked as 

a rating question (as opposed to a 

ranking question as in phase 1). 

43 Tau-c = -.108, p = .030 

44 Tau-c = -.114, p = .018 

45 Tau-c = -.111, p = .034 

46 Tau-c = -.144, p = .003 

47 Tau-c ranging from .144 to .234, 

p < .05 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 29 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of those who thought that the fuel economy was hard to understand 

and needed to be improved (n=62),48 over one-fifth (21%) stated 

that they had difficulty understanding the combined fuel economy 

section of the label. About 15% reported that the annual fuel cost 

estimate reported on the label was not accurate (as gas prices 

changed over time and across different locations in the county). 

Another 13% reported that the expected range estimate was unclear 

and ambiguous. According to them, the label needed to provide 

information on the factors that were considered to calculate the 

range and who represented “most drivers”. About 10% indicated 

that the statement about the free fuel economy guide needed to be 

more prominent on the label. 

48 This was especially more so the 

case among those who compared 

five or more vehicles (Tau-c = 

.196, p = .000) 

30 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 31 
32 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Motivators and Barriers to 

Purchasing Fuel Efficient 

Vehicles 

Respondents were asked to rate how serious certain environmental 

concerns were to them, what were the top motivators and barriers 

to purchasing advanced technology vehicles, and how compelling 

specific factors were to buying a fuel efficient vehicle. 

The biggest environmental concerns were 

for toxic exhaust emissions and smog 

In regard to environmental concerns, the top two environmental 

factors of most concern were toxic exhaust emissions and smog 

(on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 means a serious concern). Carbon 

dioxide, greenhouse gasses, and climate change/global warming 

came in closely tied for third.49 Women were more concerned about 

all these environmental factors,50 except for smog and greenhouse 

gases where there were no significant gender differences. 

Lower fuel costs, lower vehicle prices, and better mileage 

were top motivators for purchasing alternative fuel vehicles 

When asked in an open-ended question, the following were the 

top things mentioned that would motivate respondents to seriously 

consider buying an alternative fuel vehicle: lower alternative fuel 

cost or higher gas prices (73%), lower vehicle price (60.3%), better 

mileage than a gasoline fuel vehicle (34.9%), positive environmental 

impact (29%), and higher reliability and dependability of the 

vehicle and vehicle parts (17.1%). 

49 Based on phases 2 and 3 data 

where the question was asked as 

a rating question (as opposed to 

a ranking question as in phase 1). 

50 Cramer’s V ranging from .262 

to .320, p <.05. 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 33 
34 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 

 

 

 

 

 

The following are the top things that were reportedly preventing 

respondents from seriously considering buying an alternative 

fuel vehicle: high cost of vehicle (66.3%), expensive maintenance 

(45.8%), expensive cost of parts/battery (45%), and parts/vehicles 

are unreliable (36.8%). 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 35 
‘Saving money’ and ‘better for environment’ the most 

compelling reasons or buying fuel efficient vehicles 

The most compelling factors for buying a fuel efficient vehicle were 

to save money, followed closely by because it was better for the 

environment, and to reduce our dependency on other countries. 

Females found all of the items in the chart below more compelling 

than males,51 except for ‘better for the environment’ and to ‘reduce 

our dependency on other countries’, where there were no significant 

gender differences. 

Other findings include: 

• Those from Charlotte, Houston and Chicago found ‘better 

for the environment’ more compelling than those from 

Seattle.52 

• Those with less education found ‘makes our oil supplies 

last longer’ more compelling.53 

• Those who drove their vehicles more days per week54 or 

more miles per year55 found ‘to reduce the number of trips 

to the gas station’ more compelling. 

• Those who were younger56 or who drove their vehicles 

more miles per year57 found ‘to reduce our dependency on 

other countries’ more compelling. 

36 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

51 Cramer’s V ranging from .353 

to .461, p < .05 

52 Cramer’s V = .313, p = .001 

53 Tau-c = -.123, p = .047 

54 Tau-c = .107, p = .044 

55 Tau-c = .120, p = .036 

56 Tau-c = -.188, p = .000 

57 Tau-c = .115, p = .038 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

’

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Market Segments 

58 The variables in the cluster 

analysis included those dealing 

with: reported city and highway 

A cluster analysis was performed58 mpg of new vehicle, importance to identify possible market of specific factors in the segments from among the respondents to the online survey. Since new vehicle buying process, 

the respondents were comprised of persons specifically recruited for importance of fuel economy 

in vehicle buying process, the focus groups in four cities, the results of this cluster analysis do importance of fuel economy 

not represent new vehicle buyer segments in the general population.	� label and its specific metrics 

in vehicle buying process, Nonetheless, these results may shed some additional light on the trust in EPA for fuel economy 

overall issue of the content and design of fuel economy label.	� information, level of concern 

with environmental threats, and 

how compelling specific factors Cluster analysis is an exploratory data analysis technique designed are in motivation to buy fuel 

to reveal natural groupings within a collection of data59. As such,	� efficient vehicles Because these 

different variables are measured cluster analysis can suggest potentially useful ways of grouping on different scales (for example, 

market segments. Three clusters were identified:	� some 10 point scales, some 

dichotomous, some interval 

as in the case of city mpg), the 

•	� Cluster 1: ‘Care more about the environment than fuel variables were standardized 

through the use of Z-score economy’ - less concerned about fuel economy and other conversion prior to the cluster

vehicle factors, but more concerned about environment (33%) analysis being performed. 

59 The K-means cluster analysis • Cluster 2: ’Care most about fuel economy as well as the procedure was used. This 

environment’ - most concerned about fuel economy, other procedure attempts to identify 

relatively homogeneous vehicle factors, as well as environment” (44%) groups of cases based on 

selected characteristics, using 

•	� Cluster 3: ’Care less about fuel economy and the environment’ an algorithm that can handle 

large numbers of cases. - less concerned about fuel economy and other vehicle Distances are computed using 

factors, and least concerned about environment” (23%) simple Euclidean distance. 

The algorithm requires one to 

specify the number of clusters. 

The following were some factors that differentiated one cluster It provides cluster membership, 

distance information, final from another, as can be seen in the table below. cluster centers, and analysis 

of variance F statistics. While 

these statistics are opportunistic 

(the procedure tries to form 

groups that do differ), the 

relative size of the statistics 

provides information about each 

variable’s contribution to the 

separation of the groups. 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 37 
 

Cluster 1 –‘Care more about theenvironment than fuel economy’ (n= 127, 33%) 

Cluster 2 –‘Care most about fueleconomy as well as the environment’(n= 169, 44%) 

Cluster 3 –‘Care less about fueleconomy and the environment’(n=92, 23%) 

• Most likely to consider SUVs (57%), mid-size

cars (38%), crossover vehicles (35%), and/orcompact cars (20%).

• Place more importance on safety, price, 

emissions, seating capacity, towing capacity, and alternative fuels when choosing a newvehicle, as compared to Cluster 3.

• Place least importance on fuel economy and 

the fuel economy label when choosing a newvehicle as compared to the other clusters.

• More likely to find the reference to the ‘Free 

Fuel Economy Guide’ on the fuel economy label to be helpful as compared to Cluster 3.

• Most likely to consider EPA a trusted source 

of fuel economy information as compared tothe other clusters.

• Were more concerned about CO2, global 

warming, green house gases, smog, toxicexhaust emissions, drilling for oil, andburning coal for electricity, as compared to Cluster 3; more likely to find ‘better for theenvironment’ and ‘reduces climate change’ as compelling in regard to buying a fuel efficientvehicle, as compared to Cluster 3.

• Get lower than average reported city and 

highway mpg.

• More likely to be female (54%) than male

(46%). 

• More likely to be from Seattle (35%) and

least likely to be from Houston (18%). 

• Most likely to consider mid-size cars (54%),

SUVs (53%), compact cars (37%), and/orcrossover vehicles (34%).

• Place more importance on safety, price, 

performance, comfort, emissions, size/interior volume, seating capacity, towing capacity, appearance, features, reliability, brand, warranty, and alternative fuels when choosing a new vehicle, as compared to other clusters.

• Place most importance on fuel economy and 

the fuel economy label when choosing a newvehicle as compared to the other clusters.

• Most likely to find estimated annual fuel

costs, city mpg, highway mpg, combined fueleconomy comparison scale, expected citympg range, expected highway mpg range,the statement about ‘your actual mileage will vary’ and the reference to the ‘Free Fuel Economy Guide’ on the fuel economy label tobe helpful as compared to the other clusters.

• More likely to consider EPA a trusted source 

of fuel economy information as compared toCluster 3. 

• Were most concerned about CO2, global 

warming, green house gases, smog, toxicexhaust emissions, drilling for oil, andburning coal for electricity, as compared to the other clusters; most likely to find ‘betterfor the environment’ and ‘reduces climate change’ as compelling in regard to buying afuel efficient vehicle, as compared to otherclusters. 

• Get higher than average reported city mpg 

and somewhat higher than average reported highway mpg.

• More likely to be female (57%) than

male (43%).

• Most likely to be from Chicago (31%) and

least likely to be from Seattle (15%). 

• Most likely to consider SUVs (47%), mid-size

cars (39%), crossover vehicles (24%), and/orcompact cars (23%).

• Place more importance on performance, 

comfort, appearance, and brand when choosing a new vehicle, as compared toCluster 1. 

• Place more importance on fuel economy and 

the fuel economy label when choosing a newvehicle as compared to Cluster 1.

• More likely to find city mpg, highway mpg,

combined fuel economy comparison scale,expected city mpg range, expected highwaympg range, and the statement about ‘your actual mileage will vary’ on the fuel economy label to be helpful as compared to Cluster 1.

• Least likely to consider EPA a trusted source 

of fuel economy information as compared tothe other clusters.

• Were least concerned about CO2, global 

warming, green house gases, smog, toxicexhaust emissions, drilling for oil, andburning coal for electricity, as compared to the other clusters; least likely to find ‘betterfor the environment’ and ‘reduces climate change’ as compelling in regard to buying afuel efficient vehicle, as compared to otherclusters. 

• Get higher than average reported city mpg 

and somewhat higher than average reported highway mpg.

• More likely to be male (62%) than female

(38%). 

• Most likely to be from Charlotte (32%) and

about equally likely to be from Houston(25%), Chicago (22%), or Seattle (22%). 

38 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
 Appendix - Phase 3 Survey Questions 

Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 39 
40 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 41 
42 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 43 
44 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 45 
46 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 47 
48 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 49 
50 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 51 
52 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 53 
54 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 55 
56 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 57 
58 EPA Fuel Economy Label Redesign 
Pre-Focus Groups Online Survey Report 59