IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jbecon/v88y2018i5d10.1007_s11573-018-0897-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Anticipating acceptance of emerging technologies using twitter: the case of self-driving cars

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher Kohl

    (Technical University of Munich)

  • Marlene Knigge

    (Technical University of Munich)

  • Galina Baader

    (Technical University of Munich)

  • Markus Böhm

    (Technical University of Munich)

  • Helmut Krcmar

    (Technical University of Munich)

Abstract

In an early stage of developing emerging technologies, there is often great uncertainty regarding their future success. Companies can reduce this uncertainty by listening to the voice of customers as the customer eventually decides to accept an emerging technology or not. We show that risk and benefit perceptions are central determinants of acceptance of emerging technologies. We present an analysis of risk and benefit perception of self-driving cars from March 2015 until October 2016. In this period, we analyzed 1,963,905 tweets using supervised machine learning for text classification. Furthermore, we developed two new metrics, risk rate (RR) and benefit rate (BR), which allow analyzing risk and benefit perceptions on social media quantitatively. With our results, we provide impetus for further research on acceptance of self-driving cars and a methodological contribution to acceptance of emerging technologies research. Furthermore, we identify crucial issues in the public perception of self-driving cars and provide guidance for the management of emerging technologies to increase the likelihood of their acceptance.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher Kohl & Marlene Knigge & Galina Baader & Markus Böhm & Helmut Krcmar, 2018. "Anticipating acceptance of emerging technologies using twitter: the case of self-driving cars," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(5), pages 617-642, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jbecon:v:88:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s11573-018-0897-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11573-018-0897-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11573-018-0897-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11573-018-0897-5?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. Kuhn, Max, 2008. "Building Predictive Models in R Using the caret Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 28(i05).
    2. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    3. Michael Siegrist, 2000. "The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 195-204, April.
    4. Kleijnen, Mirella & Lee, Nick & Wetzels, Martin, 2009. "An exploration of consumer resistance to innovation and its antecedents," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 344-357, June.
    5. Feinerer, Ingo & Hornik, Kurt & Meyer, David, 2008. "Text Mining Infrastructure in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 25(i05).
    6. 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..
    7. Lawrence D. Burns, 2013. "A vision of our transport future," Nature, Nature, vol. 497(7448), pages 181-182, May.
    8. Stefanie Haustein & Timothy D. Bowman & Kim Holmberg & Andrew Tsou & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière, 2016. "Tweets as impact indicators: Examining the implications of automated “bot” accounts on Twitter," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(1), pages 232-238, January.
    9. Abbie Griffin & John R. Hauser, 1993. "The Voice of the Customer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27.
    10. 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.
    11. Yap, Menno D. & Correia, Gonçalo & van Arem, Bart, 2016. "Preferences of travellers for using automated vehicles as last mile public transport of multimodal train trips," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-16.
    12. Daniel J. Hopkins & Gary King, 2010. "A Method of Automated Nonparametric Content Analysis for Social Science," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 229-247, January.
    13. Ali Siddiq Alhakami & Paul Slovic, 1994. "A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 1085-1096, December.
    14. Norman Spinrad, 2014. "Google car takes the test," Nature, Nature, vol. 514(7523), pages 528-528, October.
    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. Nick Lin-Hi & Marlene Reimer & Katharina Schäfer & Johanna Böttcher, 2023. "Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: an empirical analysis of the role of organizational factors," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(4), pages 707-746, May.
    2. Franziska Schlichte & Sebastian Junge & Jan Mammen, 2019. "Being at the right place at the right time: does the timing within technology waves determine new venture success?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(8), pages 995-1021, December.
    3. Chiarello, Filippo & Giordano, Vito & Spada, Irene & Barandoni, Simone & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2024. "Future applications of generative large language models: A data-driven case study on ChatGPT," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    4. Gogoll, Jan & Uhl, Matthias, 2018. "Rage against the machine: Automation in the moral domain," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 97-103.
    5. McLeay, Fraser & Olya, Hossein & Liu, Hongfei & Jayawardhena, Chanaka & Dennis, Charles, 2022. "A multi-analytical approach to studying customers motivations to use innovative totally autonomous vehicles," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    6. Giordano, Vito & Spada, Irene & Chiarello, Filippo & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2024. "The impact of ChatGPT on human skills: A quantitative study on twitter data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 203(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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Michael Greenberg & Charles Haas & Anthony Cox & Karen Lowrie & Katherine McComas & Warner North, 2012. "Ten Most Important Accomplishments in Risk Analysis, 1980–2010," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 771-781, May.
    5. Fatemeh Nazari & Mohamadhossein Noruzoliaee & Abolfazl Mohammadian, 2023. "Behavioral acceptance of automated vehicles: The roles of perceived safety concern and current travel behavior," Papers 2302.12225, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    6. Stotz, Tamara & Bearth, Angela & Ghelfi, Signe Maria & Siegrist, Michael, 2022. "The perceived costs and benefits that drive the acceptability of risk-based security screenings at airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    7. Hung‐Chih Hung & Tzu‐Wen Wang, 2011. "Determinants and Mapping of Collective Perceptions of Technological Risk: The Case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 668-683, April.
    8. Yawson, Robert M. & Kuzma, Jennifer, 2010. "Evidence review and experts’ opinion on consumer acceptance of agrifood nanotechnology," MPRA Paper 40807, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Nel, Jacques & Boshoff, Christo, 2021. "“I just don't like digital-only banks, and you should not use them either†: Traditional-bank customers' opposition to using digital-only banks," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    10. Petschnig, Martin & Heidenreich, Sven & Spieth, Patrick, 2014. "Innovative alternatives take action – Investigating determinants of alternative fuel vehicle adoption," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 68-83.
    11. Peter M. Wiedemann & Holger Schuetz & Franziska Boerner & Martin Clauberg & Rodney Croft & Rajesh Shukla & Toshiko Kikkawa & Ray Kemp & Jan M. Gutteling & Barney de Villiers & Flavia N. da Silva Medei, 2013. "When Precaution Creates Misunderstandings: The Unintended Effects of Precautionary Information on Perceived Risks, the EMF Case," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(10), pages 1788-1801, October.
    12. Kum Fai Yuen & Do Thi Khanh Huyen & Xueqin Wang & Guanqiu Qi, 2020. "Factors Influencing the Adoption of Shared Autonomous Vehicles," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-17, July.
    13. Saeed, Tariq Usman & Burris, Mark W. & Labi, Samuel & Sinha, Kumares C., 2020. "An empirical discourse on forecasting the use of autonomous vehicles using consumers’ preferences," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    14. Ganesh Prasad Neupane, 2017. "Heuristics as an Aid to Inter-organizational Value Creation," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 7(1), pages 238-244.
    15. Helena Hansson & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2014. "Decision Making for Animal Health and Welfare: Integrating Risk‐Benefit Analysis with Prospect Theory," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(6), pages 1149-1159, June.
    16. Casaló, Luis V. & Flavián, Carlos & Guinalíu, Miguel & Ekinci, Yuksel, 2015. "Avoiding the dark side of positive online consumer reviews: Enhancing reviews' usefulness for high risk-averse travelers," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(9), pages 1829-1835.
    17. Xiaoqin Zhu & Xiaofei Xie, 2015. "Effects of Knowledge on Attitude Formation and Change Toward Genetically Modified Foods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(5), pages 790-810, May.
    18. Seoyong Kim & Sunhee Kim, 2015. "The role of value in the social acceptance of science-technology," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 305-322, July.
    19. Hudson, John & Orviska, Marta & Hunady, Jan, 2019. "People’s attitudes to autonomous vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 164-176.
    20. Chulmo Koo & Namho Chung & Juyeon Ham, 2017. "Assessing the User Resistance to Recommender Systems in Exhibition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-16, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Acceptance; Benefit perception; Risk perception; Self-driving cars; Text mining; Voice of customer;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C38 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Classification Methdos; Cluster Analysis; Principal Components; Factor Analysis
    • M30 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - General
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:jbecon:v:88:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s11573-018-0897-5. 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.