IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v140y2023icp85-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do first responders trust connected and automated vehicles (CAVs)? A national survey

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Jun
  • Xu, Ningzhe
  • Shi, Yangming
  • Rahman, MD Mizanur
  • Barnett, Timothy
  • Jones, Steven

Abstract

Connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) leverage emerging vehicle connectivity and automation technologies to enhance traffic safety. Extensive research has been done to examine the safety impacts of CAVs on road users (including vehicle occupants and vulnerable road users). Still, the impacts on first responders, who respond to traffic incidents and assist road users, are under-discussed. Road users show growing interest in CAVs, but it is uncertain whether first responders would feel the same way. First responders face the risk of being struck by passing vehicles when they perform their duties on road or roadside. In addition, it is unknown whether CAVs can or will do a better job than human drivers in conventional vehicles when passing an incident scene. This study conducted a national survey among first responders in the US to understand their knowledge and incident management experiences related to CAVs, as well as their attributes and concerns towards CAV technologies, including advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), connected vehicle (CV) and self-driving or autonomous vehicle (AV) technologies. Over 1000 first responders participated in the survey, and the survey had representation from all 50 states, Washington DC, and US Territories. The survey results showed that 82% of first responders have not received any CAV-related safety training, and 41% of first responders self-reported having little knowledge about CAVs. Regarding the roles of AVs in emergency responses, only a tiny portion (3%) of first responders would trust AVs more than human drivers passing an incident scene, and the majority (86%) of first responders do not think AVs will outperform human drivers. Only 1% of first responders said they trust AVs, and 44% stated that they do not trust AVs at all. A statistical model was developed to identify the correlates of first responders’ trust in AVs. Modeling results showed that education positively correlates to the likelihood of trusting AVs. This study found significant differences in perceptions towards CAVs across emergency response agencies and geographic regions. Law enforcement officers exhibit higher trust in AVs compared to firefighters; responders from DOT or public works are associated with the lowest levels of trust among all emergency response agencies. FEMA Region 3, which includes Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, shows the lowest levels of trust in AVs compared to human drivers among all regions in the country. This study provides valuable information for stakeholders to prepare responders for next-generation transportation emergency responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Jun & Xu, Ningzhe & Shi, Yangming & Rahman, MD Mizanur & Barnett, Timothy & Jones, Steven, 2023. "Do first responders trust connected and automated vehicles (CAVs)? A national survey," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 85-99.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:140:y:2023:i:c:p:85-99
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.06.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X23001646
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.06.012?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.

    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:trapol:v:140:y:2023:i:c:p:85-99. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    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.