IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v72y2023ics0160791x22003189.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framing the approval to test self-driving cars on public roads. The effect of safety and competitiveness on citizens' agreement

Author

Listed:
  • Hemesath, Sebastian
  • Tepe, Markus

Abstract

Regulating self-driving cars poses a dilemma for policy-makers. Early testing of self-driving cars on public roads is necessary to accumulate data and driving experience. While approval procedures with high safety standards could harm manufacturers' ability to innovate by delaying tests, low safety standards could put human lives at risk. This study presents an issue framing experiment that directly addresses how citizens evaluate the alleged trade-off between safety and economic competitiveness. The experiment was conducted on representative online samples of citizens in the USA, Japan, and Germany. Results show that citizens' agreement to pilot self-driving cars on public roads is significantly higher in a safety frame, even if safety is explicitly associated with a loss in competitiveness. Socio-demographic characteristics and technology attitudes affect citizens' agreement to pilot self-driving cars primarily in a competitiveness frame, while political attitudes have no impact. Finally, the results show few country differences, indicating room to harmonize self-driving cars' safety regulations internationally.

Suggested Citation

  • Hemesath, Sebastian & Tepe, Markus, 2023. "Framing the approval to test self-driving cars on public roads. The effect of safety and competitiveness on citizens' agreement," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:72:y:2023:i:c:s0160791x22003189
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102177
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X22003189
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102177?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ortwin Renn & Christina Benighaus, 2013. "Perception of technological risk: insights from research and lessons for risk communication and management," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3-4), pages 293-313, April.
    2. Peng Liu & Run Yang & Zhigang Xu, 2019. "How Safe Is Safe Enough for Self‐Driving Vehicles?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 315-325, February.
    3. Berkeley J. Dietvorst & Joseph P. Simmons & Cade Massey, 2018. "Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Imperfect Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1155-1170, March.
    4. Amsalem, Eran & Zoizner, Alon, 2022. "Real, but Limited: A Meta-Analytic Assessment of Framing Effects in the Political Domain," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(1), pages 221-237, January.
    5. Hemphill, Thomas A., 2020. "Autonomous vehicles: U.S. regulatory policy challenges," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    6. Hemphill, Thomas A., 2020. "“The innovation governance dilemma: Alternatives to the precautionary principle”," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Bansal, Prateek & Kockelman, Kara M., 2017. "Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 49-63.
    9. Chong, Dennis & Druckman, James N., 2010. "Dynamic Public Opinion: Communication Effects over Time," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(4), pages 663-680, November.
    10. Nastjuk, Ilja & Herrenkind, Bernd & Marrone, Mauricio & Brendel, Alfred Benedikt & Kolbe, Lutz M., 2020. "What drives the acceptance of autonomous driving? An investigation of acceptance factors from an end-user's perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    11. Blind, Knut, 2012. "The influence of regulations on innovation: A quantitative assessment for OECD countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 391-400.
    12. Hohenberger, Christoph & Spörrle, Matthias & Welpe, Isabell M., 2016. "How and why do men and women differ in their willingness to use automated cars? The influence of emotions across different age groups," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 374-385.
    13. Logg, Jennifer M. & Minson, Julia A. & Moore, Don A., 2019. "Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 90-103.
    14. Cunningham, Mitchell L. & Regan, Michael A. & Horberry, Timothy & Weeratunga, Kamal & Dixit, Vinayak, 2019. "Public opinion about automated vehicles in Australia: Results from a large-scale national survey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1-18.
    15. Graham Dixon & P. Sol Hart & Christopher Clarke & Nicole H. O’Donnell & Jay Hmielowski, 2020. "What drives support for self-driving car technology in the United States?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 275-287, March.
    16. Peng Liu & Run Yang & Zhigang Xu, 2019. "Public Acceptance of Fully Automated Driving: Effects of Social Trust and Risk/Benefit Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 326-341, February.
    17. Lee, Dasom & Hess, David J., 2020. "Regulations for on-road testing of connected and automated vehicles: Assessing the potential for global safety harmonization," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 85-98.
    18. Hainmueller, Jens & Mummolo, Jonathan & Xu, Yiqing, 2019. "How Much Should We Trust Estimates from Multiplicative Interaction Models? Simple Tools to Improve Empirical Practice," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 163-192, April.
    19. Dasom Lee & David J. Hess, 2022. "Public concerns and connected and automated vehicles: safety, privacy, and data security," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    20. Tania Leiman, 2021. "Law and tech collide: foreseeability, reasonableness and advanced driver assistance systems [Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS): A consideration of driver perceptions on training, usage & im," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(2), pages 250-271.
    21. Nicholas A. Ashford & Ralph P. Hall, 2011. "The Importance of Regulation-Induced Innovation for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-23, January.
    22. Nelson, Thomas E. & Clawson, Rosalee A. & Oxley, Zoe M., 1997. "Media Framing of a Civil Liberties Conflict and Its Effect on Tolerance," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(3), pages 567-583, September.
    23. Liu, Peng, 2020. "Positive, negative, ambivalent, or indifferent? Exploring the structure of public attitudes toward self-driving vehicles on public roads," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 27-38.
    24. Genus, Audley & Stirling, Andy, 2018. "Collingridge and the dilemma of control: Towards responsible and accountable innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 61-69.
    25. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Heidary Dahooie, Jalil & Mohammadian, Ayoub & Qorbani, Ali Reza & Daim, Tugrul, 2023. "A portfolio selection of internet of things (IoTs) applications for the sustainable urban transportation: A novel hybrid multi criteria decision making approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xing, Yingying & Zhou, Huiyu & Han, Xiao & Zhang, Meng & Lu, Jian, 2022. "What influences vulnerable road users’ perceptions of autonomous vehicles? A comparative analysis of the 2017 and 2019 Pittsburgh surveys," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    2. Hussain, Qinaat & Alhajyaseen, Wael K.M. & Adnan, Muhammad & Almallah, Mustafa & Almukdad, Abdulkarim & Alqaradawi, Mohammed, 2021. "Autonomous vehicles between anticipation and apprehension: Investigations through safety and security perceptions," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 440-451.
    3. Dasom Lee & David J. Hess, 2022. "Public concerns and connected and automated vehicles: safety, privacy, and data security," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Bryce McLaughlin & Jann Spiess, 2022. "Algorithmic Assistance with Recommendation-Dependent Preferences," Papers 2208.07626, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    5. Weina Qu & Hongli Sun & Yan Ge, 2021. "The effects of trait anxiety and the big five personality traits on self-driving car acceptance," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2663-2679, October.
    6. Li, Dun & Huang, Youlin & Qian, Lixian, 2022. "Potential adoption of robotaxi service: The roles of perceived benefits to multiple stakeholders and environmental awareness," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 120-135.
    7. Foroughi, Behzad & Nhan, Pham Viet & Iranmanesh, Mohammad & Ghobakhloo, Morteza & Nilashi, Mehrbakhsh & Yadegaridehkordi, Elaheh, 2023. "Determinants of intention to use autonomous vehicles: Findings from PLS-SEM and ANFIS," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    8. Peng Jing & Gang Xu & Yuexia Chen & Yuji Shi & Fengping Zhan, 2020. "The Determinants behind the Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, February.
    9. Awtrey, Eli & Thornley, Nico & Dannals, Jennifer E. & Barnes, Christopher M. & Uhlmann, Eric Luis, 2021. "Distribution neglect in performance evaluations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 213-227.
    10. Liu, Peng & Ma, Yanjiao & Zuo, Yaqing, 2019. "Self-driving vehicles: Are people willing to trade risks for environmental benefits?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 139-149.
    11. Chong Li & Yingqi Li, 2023. "Factors Influencing Public Risk Perception of Emerging Technologies: A Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-37, February.
    12. Yue Ding & Ruimin Li & Xiaokun Wang & Joshua Schmid, 2022. "Heterogeneity of autonomous vehicle adoption behavior due to peer effects and prior-AV knowledge," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1837-1860, December.
    13. dos Santos, Fabio Luis Marques & Duboz, Amandine & Grosso, Monica & Raposo, María Alonso & Krause, Jette & Mourtzouchou, Andromachi & Balahur, Alexandra & Ciuffo, Biagio, 2022. "An acceptance divergence? Media, citizens and policy perspectives on autonomous cars in the European Union," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 224-238.
    14. Berrada, Jaâfar & Mouhoubi, Ilyes & Christoforou, Zoi, 2020. "Factors of successful implementation and diffusion of services based on autonomous vehicles: users’ acceptance and operators’ profitability," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    15. Behnood, Ali & Haghani, Milad & Golafshani, Emadaldin Mohammadi, 2022. "Determinants of purchase likelihood for partially and fully automated vehicles: Insights from mixed logit model with heterogeneity in means and variances," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 119-139.
    16. Lindgren, Thomas & Pink, Sarah & Fors, Vaike, 2021. "Fore-sighting autonomous driving - An Ethnographic approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    17. Dubey, Subodh & Sharma, Ishant & Mishra, Sabyasachee & Cats, Oded & Bansal, Prateek, 2022. "A General Framework to Forecast the Adoption of Novel Products: A Case of Autonomous Vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 63-95.
    18. Markus Jung & Mischa Seiter, 2021. "Towards a better understanding on mitigating algorithm aversion in forecasting: an experimental study," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 495-516, December.
    19. Ekaterina Jussupow & Kai Spohrer & Armin Heinzl & Joshua Gawlitza, 2021. "Augmenting Medical Diagnosis Decisions? An Investigation into Physicians’ Decision-Making Process with Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 713-735, September.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:3:p:449-451 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Kevin Bauer & Andrej Gill, 2024. "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Algorithmic Assessments, Transparency, and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 226-248, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:72:y:2023:i:c:s0160791x22003189. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.