IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v49y2022i6d10.1007_s11116-021-10225-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Underlying dimensions of benefit and risk perception and their effects on people’s acceptance of conditionally/fully automated vehicles

Author

Listed:
  • Yukari Jessica Tham

    (The University of Tokyo
    Japan Society for the Promotion of Science)

  • Takaaki Hashimoto

    (Toyo University)

  • Kaori Karasawa

    (The University of Tokyo)

Abstract

Automated vehicles (AVs) have garnered increasing attention since they have the potential to dramatically reshape our lives in the near future. At the same time, people are concerned about various risks associated with the new technologies. Thus, people’s attitudes toward AVs pose a major challenge to the wider adoption of them. Previous studies examined the effect of benefit/risk perception on people’s acceptance of AVs, but they did not address the multidimensionality of benefit/risk perception. We conducted a survey (n = 840) to reveal the underlying dimensions of how people construe the benefits and risks of conditionally/fully automated vehicles. Our results showed that there were two dimensions underlying benefit perception (i.e., the perception that AVs would increase convenience and reduce harm) and three dimensions underlying risk perception (i.e., the perception of risk to physical safety and comfort, cybersecurity, and ease of use). The perception that AVs would reduce harm positively impacted people’s intention to use both fully automated vehicles and conditionally automated vehicles. The perception that AVs would increase convenience and the perception that AVs would pose a risk to ease of use had a positive and negative effect, respectively, on intention to use fully automated vehicles. This study makes theoretical contributions by questioning the assumption that benefit/risk perception is a one-dimensional factor that impacts people’s acceptance of AVs. This study also has practical implications as it suggests an effective method for automobile manufacturers and policymakers to communicate with the public regarding the new technologies and diffuse them safely.

Suggested Citation

  • Yukari Jessica Tham & Takaaki Hashimoto & Kaori Karasawa, 2022. "Underlying dimensions of benefit and risk perception and their effects on people’s acceptance of conditionally/fully automated vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1715-1736, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:49:y:2022:i:6:d:10.1007_s11116-021-10225-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-021-10225-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-021-10225-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11116-021-10225-0?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. Greenwald, Judith M. & Kornhauser, Alain, 2019. "It’s up to us: Policies to improve climate outcomes from automated vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 445-451.
    2. Teresa Brell & Ralf Philipsen & Martina Ziefle, 2019. "sCARy! Risk Perceptions in Autonomous Driving: The Influence of Experience on Perceived Benefits and Barriers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 342-357, February.
    3. 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.
    4. John Horn, 1965. "A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 30(2), pages 179-185, June.
    5. Nielsen, Thomas Alexander Sick & Haustein, Sonja, 2018. "On sceptics and enthusiasts: What are the expectations towards self-driving cars?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 49-55.
    6. Azim Shariff & Jean-François Bonnefon & Iyad Rahwan, 2017. "Psychological roadblocks to the adoption of self-driving vehicles," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(10), pages 694-696, October.
    7. Chen, Yuche & Gonder, Jeffrey & Young, Stanley & Wood, Eric, 2019. "Quantifying autonomous vehicles national fuel consumption impacts: A data-rich approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 134-145.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. Liu, Peng & Xu, Zhigang & Zhao, Xiangmo, 2019. "Road tests of self-driving vehicles: Affective and cognitive pathways in acceptance formation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 354-369.
    4. Guo, Yuntao & Souders, Dustin & Labi, Samuel & Peeta, Srinivas & Benedyk, Irina & Li, Yujie, 2021. "Paving the way for autonomous Vehicles: Understanding autonomous vehicle adoption and vehicle fuel choice under user heterogeneity," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 364-398.
    5. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Griffiths, Steve, 2020. "The cultural barriers to a low-carbon future: A review of six mobility and energy transitions across 28 countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    6. Martina Raue & Lisa A. D'Ambrosio & Carley Ward & Chaiwoo Lee & Claire Jacquillat & Joseph F. Coughlin, 2019. "The Influence of Feelings While Driving Regular Cars on the Perception and Acceptance of Self‐Driving Cars," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 358-374, February.
    7. 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.
    8. Andreja Pucihar & Iztok Zajc & Radovan Sernec & Gregor Lenart, 2019. "Living Lab as an Ecosystem for Development, Demonstration and Assessment of Autonomous Mobility Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-21, July.
    9. Agnieszka Dudziak & Monika Stoma & Andrzej Kuranc & Jacek Caban, 2021. "Assessment of Social Acceptance for Autonomous Vehicles in Southeastern Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-16, September.
    10. Pettigrew, Simone & Dana, Liyuwork Mitiku & Norman, Richard, 2019. "Clusters of potential autonomous vehicles users according to propensity to use individual versus shared vehicles," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 13-20.
    11. Du, Manqing & Zhang, Tingru & Liu, Jinting & Xu, Zhigang & Liu, Peng, 2022. "Rumors in the air? Exploring public misconceptions about automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 237-252.
    12. Kenichiro Chinen & Yang Sun & Mitsutaka Matsumoto & Yoon-Young Chun, 2020. "Towards a Sustainable Society through Emerging Mobility Services: A Case of Autonomous Buses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, November.
    13. Yoo, Sunbin & Kumagai, Junya & Kawabata, Yuta & Keeley, Alexander & Managi, Shunsuke, 2021. "Willingness to Buy and/or Pay Disparity: Evidence from Fully Autonomous Vehicles," MPRA Paper 108882, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Ljubi, Klara & Groznik, Aleš, 2023. "Role played by social factors and privacy concerns in autonomous vehicle adoption," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1-15.
    15. Dai, Jingchen & Wang, Xiaokun Cara & Ma, Wenxin & Li, Ruimin, 2023. "Future transport vision propensity segments: A latent class analysis of autonomous taxi market," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    16. Elena García-Jiménez & Sara Poveda-Reyes & Gemma Dolores Molero & Francisco Enrique Santarremigia & Andrea Gorrini & Yvonne Hail & Augustus Ababio-Donkor & Maria Chiara Leva & Filomena Mauriello, 2020. "Methodology for Gender Analysis in Transport: Factors with Influence in Women’s Inclusion as Professionals and Users of Transport Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-32, May.
    17. Wei Wei & Jie Sun & Wei Miao & Tong Chen & Hanchu Sun & Shuyuan Lin & Chao Gu, 2024. "Using the Extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology to explore how to increase users’ intention to take a robotaxi," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    18. Meyer-Waarden, Lars & Cloarec, Julien, 2022. "“Baby, you can drive my car”: Psychological antecedents that drive consumers’ adoption of AI-powered autonomous vehicles," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    19. 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).
    20. 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.

    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:kap:transp:v:49:y:2022:i:6:d:10.1007_s11116-021-10225-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.