Areas for further research

The following sections outlines some noticeable gaps in literature around personal safety apps including: a lack of systematic evaluation; lack of intersectional research on their use; lack of research on how apps fit into public safety messaging; and a lack of understanding of how apps are used in the public space more generally, particularly on public transport. Importantly, there is no centralised platform to find information about the use of recommended personal safety apps on public transport, perhaps limiting the ability of the general public to learn about the existence of apps and to make informed decisions.

Lack of systematised evaluation

Globally, there has been a lack of systematised evaluation of digital technologies to tackle VAWG in both low and high income countries (Jewkes, 2019). Indeed, there has been very little evaluation of the effectiveness of personal safety apps in the UK (Maxwell et al., 2020; Ford et al., 2022). As has been shown in the discussion above, the majority of studies focus on user experiences of apps, rather than evaluating the before and after outcomes via baseline surveys or randomised control trials. This finding has been echoed by other scholars (Gekoski et al., 2015). Indeed, while health apps that promote behaviour change are subject to rigorous evidence-based testing, apps for personal safety do not have the same requirement (Ford et al., 2022). Blayney et al., (2018) suggests that the development of apps is faster than the ability to test them and often apps are developed without considering how they will be used in practice which is common with many new technologies. Evidence of app effectiveness is limited perhaps because personal safety apps are relatively new developments in higher income countries.

Evaluations often require proof of tangible outcomes; however, as Gekoski et al., (2015) note, measuring both short- and long-term success is challenging. Defining the parameters of measurement is not straight forward. Whilst app downloads can be measured, this only indicates a willingness to use an app and does not measure its effectiveness. Measuring a reduction in crime rates is possible, however it is difficult to establish a causal relationship between the use of apps and crime reduction (Ding et al., 2020). There is no universal measurement of VAWG (Doria et al., 2021) and measuring non-verbal sexual harassment like staring or intimidating is particularly difficult. Ison & Matthewson, (2023) argue that the reason for the limited evaluation of interventions to tackle VAWG is because most interventions are secondary and tertiary in nature, with elements of primary prevention. This ‘slippage’ they argue accounts for the lack of evaluation of interventions. Apps that have an education or awareness raising focus could be considered primary prevention, however it is difficult to assess the impact of long-term behaviour change (Ison & Matthewson, 2023).

A second issue in evaluation is that there is a plethora of apps available for different uses, some intended for primary prevention of VAWG, but most for secondary or tertiary prevention. Since there is not just one basic typology of app, evaluating the different functionalities is more challenging. As has been noted above, apps have five main purposes. Apps that are for use in an emergency and which rely on friends or family to intervene in the event of an incident are difficult to evaluate as they rely on retrospective reporting, which may be subject to memory bias (Blayney et al., 2018). Preventative/avoidance apps which identify hotspot areas are potentially problematic, as they are based on perceived fear of an area, not actual crime rates. Apps that have the aim to signpost users to organisations similarly are difficult to evaluate as they need the input from third sector organisations and even then, it is difficult to control for other factors which may influence users’ decisions to approach certain organisations.

Lack of intersectional research

Most studies looking at user experiences have focussed on Caucasian, heterosexual women. Less work has explored the use of apps by non-heteronormative groups, as well as different ethnic and racial groups (Doria et al., 2021). More intersectional research would be useful to understand how protected characteristics intersect to influence how women use and experience personal safety apps.

Citizen reporting: challenging the status quo

Maxwell et al., (2020) point to a lack of research on the usefulness of alarms to deter criminals and a lack of understanding of how apps that connect with emergency services work in practice (Maxwell et al., 2020). More scholarship is needed to understand how apps fit into the current messaging around dialling 999 in the event of an emergency. Similarly, there are gaps in knowledge about how technology and apps are used for surveillance (Ceccato, 2019). The use of apps to report hotspot areas brings up issues around whose responsibility is it to report crime (Ceccato, 2019). The idea of citizen policing and technologies that crowdsource data challenge traditional hierarchies of power and bring up issues around governance.

Safety apps in public spaces and on transport

There is scant literature looking at the use of apps in public spaces more generally and even less looking at the use of apps on public transport. Apps that rely on Wi-Fi connections may be hindered if they are used on public transport and more research is needed to understand how apps are used in practice on different modes of transport.