IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v46y2019i6d10.1007_s11116-019-10032-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigating user perception on autonomous vehicle (AV) based mobility-on-demand (MOD) services in Singapore using the logit kernel approach

Author

Listed:
  • Yutong Cai

    (National University of Singapore)

  • Hua Wang

    (National University of Singapore)

  • Ghim Ping Ong

    (National University of Singapore)

  • Qiang Meng

    (National University of Singapore)

  • Der-Horng Lee

    (National University of Singapore)

Abstract

The rapid development of autonomous vehicles (AV) in recent years has drawn the attention of numerous countries in terms of its feasibility for use and deployment as individually-owned vehicles or for large-scale fleet planning and deployment as a mobility-on-demand (MOD) service. Singapore is no exception to this global trend and in her pursuit to be smart and car-lite, numerous efforts are made to have AV trials in place and test out their potential deployment in the city state. As one of the many prerequisites of AV planning, public perception on AV plays a vital role when designing any potential AV deployment scheme. As such, a stated preference survey comprising both online survey and field interviews/surveys, was performed island-wide to understand how commuters in Singapore perceive about different AV-based MOD modes. The logit kernel model is adopted to determine how different preference attributes and key demographic indicators can affect the use of AV-based MOD services over other existing first- and last-mile connection modes. The model results have identified how demographics such as gender, age, housing type, education level and income level can influence the travel mode choice. Also, the impacts brought by individuals’ stated preferences over convenience, privacy and familiarity of ride-hailing apps are also investigated. Such findings can provide useful insight in planning future car-lite towns and implementing AV-based MOD services in these towns.

Suggested Citation

  • Yutong Cai & Hua Wang & Ghim Ping Ong & Qiang Meng & Der-Horng Lee, 2019. "Investigating user perception on autonomous vehicle (AV) based mobility-on-demand (MOD) services in Singapore using the logit kernel approach," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2063-2080, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:46:y:2019:i:6:d:10.1007_s11116-019-10032-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-019-10032-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-019-10032-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11116-019-10032-8?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. Wadud, Zia & MacKenzie, Don & Leiby, Paul, 2016. "Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon impacts of highly automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-18.
    2. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    3. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    4. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    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. Samuel Chng & Sabreena Anowar & Lynette Cheah, 2022. "Understanding Shared Autonomous Vehicle Preferences: A Comparison between Shuttles, Buses, Ridesharing and Taxis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Charli Sitinjak & Zurinah Tahir & Mohd Ekhwan Toriman & Novel Lyndon & Vladimir Simic & Charles Musselwhite & Wiyanti Fransisca Simanullang & Firdaus Mohamad Hamzah, 2023. "Assessing Public Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles for Smart and Sustainable Public Transportation in Urban Areas: A Case Study of Jakarta, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Bat-Hen Nahmias-Biran & Gabriel Dadashev & Yedidya Levi, 2023. "Sustainable Automated Mobility-On-Demand Strategies in Dense Urban Areas: A Case Study of the Tel Aviv Metropolis in 2040," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-19, November.
    4. Aghaabbasi, Mahdi & Shekari, Zohreh Asadi & Shah, Muhammad Zaly & Olakunle, Oloruntobi & Armaghani, Danial Jahed & Moeinaddini, Mehdi, 2020. "Predicting the use frequency of ride-sourcing by off-campus university students through random forest and Bayesian network techniques," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 262-281.
    5. Mori, Kentaro & Miwa, Tomio & Abe, Ryosuke & Morikawa, Takayuki, 2022. "Equilibrium analysis of trip demand for autonomous taxi services in Nagoya, Japan," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 476-498.

    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. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    2. Fosgerau, Mogens & Bierlaire, Michel, 2007. "A practical test for the choice of mixing distribution in discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 784-794, August.
    3. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    4. Frick, Bernd & Barros, Carlos Pestana & Prinz, Joachim, 2010. "Analysing head coach dismissals in the German "Bundesliga" with a mixed logit approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 151-159, January.
    5. Ju-Hee Kim & Younggew Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2021. "Using a choice experiment to explore the public willingness to pay for the impacts of improving energy efficiency of an apartment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(5), pages 1775-1793, October.
    6. Tong Wu & Shida Rastegari Henneberry & John N. Ng’ombe & Richard T. Melstrom, 2020. "Chinese Demand for Agritourism in Rural America," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-11, April.
    7. Deka, Devajyoti & Carnegie, Jon, 2021. "Predicting transit mode choice of New Jersey workers commuting to New York City from a stated preference survey," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    8. Shimokawa, S. & Niiyama, Y. & Kito, Y. & Kudo, H. & Yamaguchi, M., 2018. "No-tolerant Consumers, Information Treatments, and Demand for Stigmatized Foods: the Case of Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident in Japan," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277198, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Useche, Pilar & Barham, Bradford & Foltz, Jeremy, 2006. "A Trait Specific Model of GM Crop Adoption by Minnesota and Wisconsin Corn Farmers," Working Papers 201525, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Food System Research Group.
    10. Manhique, Henrique & Wätzold, Frank, 2023. "Effects of Institutional Setting on Value Estimates of Stated Preference Surveys in Developing Economies: A Discrete Choice Experiment on Conserving Biodiversity in The Cape Floristic Region," MPRA Paper 118750, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Christian A. Oberst & Reinhard Madlener, 2015. "Prosumer Preferences Regarding the Adoption of Micro†Generation Technologies: Empirical Evidence for German Homeowners," Working Papers 2015.07, International Network for Economic Research - INFER.
    12. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Bartczak, Anna & Giergiczny, Marek & Navrud, Stale & Żylicz, Tomasz, 2014. "Providing preference-based support for forest ecosystem service management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-12.
    13. Stefania Troiano & Daniel Vecchiato & Francesco Marangon & Tiziano Tempesta & Federico Nassivera, 2019. "Households’ Preferences for a New ‘Climate-Friendly’ Heating System: Does Contribution to Reducing Greenhouse Gases Matter?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, July.
    14. Stephane Hess & John W. Polak, 2004. "An analysis of parking behaviour using discrete choice models calibrated on SP datasets," ERSA conference papers ersa04p60, European Regional Science Association.
    15. Koo, Yoonmo & Kim, Chang Seob & Hong, Junhee & Choi, Ie-Jung & Lee, Jongsu, 2012. "Consumer preferences for automobile energy-efficiency grades," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 446-451.
    16. Fiebig, Denzil G. & Haas, Marion & Hossain, Ishrat & Street, Deborah J. & Viney, Rosalie, 2009. "Decisions about Pap tests: What influences women and providers?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 1766-1774, May.
    17. Staus, Alexander, 2008. "Standard and Shuffled Halton Sequences in a Mixed Logit Model," Working Papers 93856, Universitaet Hohenheim, Institute of Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Markets.
    18. Michael P. Keane & Nada Wasi, 2013. "The Structure of Consumer Taste Heterogeneity in Revealed vs. Stated Preference Data," Economics Papers 2013-W10, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    19. Gillespie Rob & Kragt Marit E., 2012. "Accounting for Nonmarket Impacts in a Benefit-Cost Analysis of Underground Coal Mining in New South Wales, Australia," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-29, May.
    20. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.

    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:46:y:2019:i:6:d:10.1007_s11116-019-10032-8. 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.