IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i8p3404-d1378404.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Proactive Interaction on Trust in Autonomous Vehicles

Author

Listed:
  • Jingyue Sun

    (Key Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design of Ministry of Education, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300354, China)

  • Yanqun Huang

    (Key Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design of Ministry of Education, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300354, China
    School of Intelligent Media and Design Arts, Tianjin Ren’ai College, Tianjin 301636, China)

  • Xueqin Huang

    (Key Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design of Ministry of Education, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300354, China)

  • Jian Zhang

    (Key Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design of Ministry of Education, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300354, China)

  • Hechen Zhang

    (Key Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design of Ministry of Education, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300354, China)

Abstract

With rapid advancements in autonomous vehicles (AVs), mistrust between humans and autonomous driving systems has become a focal concern for users. Meanwhile, proactive interaction (PI), as a means to enhance the efficiency and satisfaction of human–machine collaboration, is increasingly being applied in the field of intelligent driving. Our study investigated the influence of varying degrees of PI on driver trust in Level 4 (L4) AVs set against a virtual reality (VR)-simulated driving backdrop. An experiment with 55 participants revealed that, within an autonomous driving scenario without interference, elevated PI levels fostered increased trust in AVs among drivers. Within task scenarios, low PI resulted in enhanced trust compared to PI characterized by information provision. Compared to females, males demonstrated reduced trust in medium PIs. Drivers with elevated extroversion levels exhibited the highest trust in advanced PIs; however, the difference between excessively and moderately extroverted participants was not significant. Our findings provide guidance for interaction designs to increase trust, thereby enhancing the acceptance and sustainability of AVs.

Suggested Citation

  • Jingyue Sun & Yanqun Huang & Xueqin Huang & Jian Zhang & Hechen Zhang, 2024. "Effect of Proactive Interaction on Trust in Autonomous Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3404-:d:1378404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3404/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3404/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katarzyna Samson & Patrycjusz Kostyszyn, 2015. "Effects of Cognitive Load on Trusting Behavior – An Experiment Using the Trust Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-10, May.
    2. Kalra, Nidhi & Paddock, Susan M., 2016. "Driving to safety: How many miles of driving would it take to demonstrate autonomous vehicle reliability?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 182-193.
    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. Andrea Bertolini & Massimo Riccaboni, 2021. "Grounding the case for a European approach to the regulation of automated driving: the technology-selection effect of liability rules," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 243-284, April.
    2. Zoltan Ferenc Magosi & Christoph Wellershaus & Viktor Roland Tihanyi & Patrick Luley & Arno Eichberger, 2022. "Evaluation Methodology for Physical Radar Perception Sensor Models Based on On-Road Measurements for the Testing and Validation of Automated Driving," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-20, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Liu, Peng & Zhang, Yawen & He, Zhen, 2019. "The effect of population age on the acceptable safety of self-driving vehicles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 341-347.
    5. Cian Ryan & Finbarr Murphy & Martin Mullins, 2019. "Semiautonomous Vehicle Risk Analysis: A Telematics‐Based Anomaly Detection Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(5), pages 1125-1140, May.
    6. Hazel Si Min Lim & Araz Taeihagh, 2019. "Algorithmic Decision-Making in AVs: Understanding Ethical and Technical Concerns for Smart Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-28, October.
    7. Duffy, Sean & Naddeo, JJ & Owens, David & Smith, John, 2016. "Cognitive load and mixed strategies: On brains and minimax," MPRA Paper 71878, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Talebian, Ahmadreza & Mishra, Sabyasachee, 2022. "Unfolding the state of the adoption of connected autonomous trucks by the commercial fleet owner industry," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    9. Scott Le Vine & You Kong & Xiaobo Liu & John Polak, 2019. "Vehicle automation and freeway ‘pipeline’ capacity in the context of legal standards of care," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1215-1244, August.
    10. Mohamed Alawadhi & Jumah Almazrouie & Mohammed Kamil & Khalil Abdelrazek Khalil, 0. "Review and analysis of the importance of autonomous vehicles liability: a systematic literature review," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 0, pages 1-23.
    11. Makoto Fujiu & Yuma Morisaki & Jyunich Takayama, 2024. "Impact of Autonomous Vehicles on Traffic Flow in Rural and Urban Areas Using a Traffic Flow Simulator," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-15, January.
    12. Allred, Sarah & Duffy, Sean & Smith, John, 2016. "Cognitive load and strategic sophistication," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 162-178.
    13. 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.
    14. Kassens-Noor, Eva & Dake, Dana & Decaminada, Travis & Kotval-K, Zeenat & Qu, Teresa & Wilson, Mark & Pentland, Brian, 2020. "Sociomobility of the 21st century: Autonomous vehicles, planning, and the future city," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 329-335.
    15. Mohamed Alawadhi & Jumah Almazrouie & Mohammed Kamil & Khalil Abdelrazek Khalil, 2020. "Review and analysis of the importance of autonomous vehicles liability: a systematic literature review," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 11(6), pages 1227-1249, December.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Fabian Pütz & Finbarr Murphy & Martin Mullins, 2019. "Driving to a future without accidents? Connected automated vehicles’ impact on accident frequency and motor insurance risk," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 383-395, December.
    19. van den Akker, Olmo R. & van Assen, Marcel A.L.M. & van Vugt, Mark & Wicherts, Jelte M., 2020. "Sex differences in trust and trustworthiness: A meta-analysis of the trust game and the gift-exchange game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    20. Yilun Chen & Nirajan Shiwakoti & Peter Stasinopoulos & Shah Khalid Khan, 2022. "State-of-the-Art of Factors Affecting the Adoption of Automated Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-29, May.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3404-:d:1378404. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.