IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v129y2019icp1-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public opinion about automated vehicles in Australia: Results from a large-scale national survey

Author

Listed:
  • Cunningham, Mitchell L.
  • Regan, Michael A.
  • Horberry, Timothy
  • Weeratunga, Kamal
  • Dixit, Vinayak

Abstract

Public acceptability, and ultimately acceptance, of automated vehicles (AVs) is critical in order to ensure that drivers utilise them and thus realise their predicted safety and other benefits. The aim of this study was to gauge public acceptability and opinions of AVs within an Australian context, for which there is currently a scarcity of empirical research. The study employed a national sample of 5089 respondents who responded to a large online survey (including 45 items specifically targeting aspects of AV acceptability). Survey items gauged demographic and other sample characteristics, and probed responses to questions on key issues including (a) the perceived benefits of AVs, (b) sources, and degree, of concerns regarding AV-related issues, and (c) willingness to pay for AV technology. Overall, it was found that, even though Australian respondents tended to agree with many of the potential benefits of AVs probed in the survey, they have considerable concerns regarding many AV-related issues. Furthermore, a majority of Australians are currently not willing to pay any more for a fully autonomous vehicle than for a manually operated vehicle. Results also showed that a number of sample demographic and characteristic variables (e.g., gender, self-classification as an early vs. late adopter of technology) have unique associations with aspects of AV acceptability. Important theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Cunningham, Mitchell L. & Regan, Michael A. & Horberry, Timothy & Weeratunga, Kamal & Dixit, Vinayak, 2019. "Public opinion about automated vehicles in Australia: Results from a large-scale national survey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1-18.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:129:y:2019:i:c:p:1-18
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2019.08.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856419302745
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2019.08.002?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. Arun Vishwanath, 2005. "Impact of personality on technology adoption: An empirical model," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 56(8), pages 803-811, June.
    2. Schuitema, Geertje & Steg, Linda & Forward, Sonja, 2010. "Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 99-109, February.
    3. Porter, Constance Elise & Donthu, Naveen, 2006. "Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine Internet usage: The role of perceived access barriers and demographics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(9), pages 999-1007, September.
    4. Felix Becker & Kay W. Axhausen, 2017. "Literature review on surveys investigating the acceptance of automated vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1293-1306, 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. Wang, Song & Li, Zhixia & Wang, Yi & Aaron Wyatt, Daniel, 2022. "How do age and gender influence the acceptance of automated vehicles? – Revealing the hidden mediating effects from the built environment and personal factors," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 376-394.
    2. Fahimeh Golbabaei & Tan Yigitcanlar & Alexander Paz & Jonathan Bunker, 2023. "Perceived Opportunities and Challenges of Autonomous Demand-Responsive Transit Use: What Are the Socio-Demographic Predictors?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-18, August.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. Phakphum Sakuljao & Wichuda Satiennam & Thaned Satiennam & Nopadon Kronprasert & Sittha Jaensirisak, 2023. "Understanding Intention to Use Conditionally Automated Vehicles in Thailand, Based on an Extended Technology Acceptance Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, January.
    7. Wali, Behram & Santi, Paolo & Ratti, Carlo, 2023. "Are californians willing to use shared automated vehicles (SAV) & renounce existing vehicles? An empirical analysis of factors determining SAV use & household vehicle ownership," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    8. Krügel, Sebastian & Uhl, Matthias, 2022. "Autonomous vehicles and moral judgments under risk," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1-10.
    9. Rosell, Jordi & Allen, Jaime, 2020. "Test-riding the driverless bus: Determinants of satisfaction and reuse intention in eight test-track locations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 166-189.
    10. Shaojie Liu & Jing Teng & Yue Gong, 2020. "Extraction Method and Integration Framework for Perception Features of Public Opinion in Transportation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    11. Hemesath, Sebastian & Tepe, Markus, 2023. "Framing the approval to test self-driving cars on public roads. The effect of safety and competitiveness on citizens' agreement," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    12. Leminen, Seppo & Rajahonka, Mervi & Wendelin, Robert & Westerlund, Mika & Nyström, Anna-Greta, 2022. "Autonomous vehicle solutions and their digital servitization business models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    13. Yan, Yingying & Zhong, Shiquan & Tian, Junfang & Li, Tong, 2022. "Continuance intention of autonomous buses: An empirical analysis based on passenger experience," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 85-95.
    14. Weina Qu & Hongli Sun & Yan Ge, 2021. "The effects of trait anxiety and the big five personality traits on self-driving car acceptance," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2663-2679, October.
    15. Dasom Lee & David J. Hess, 2022. "Public concerns and connected and automated vehicles: safety, privacy, and data security," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    16. Yue Ding & Ruimin Li & Xiaokun Wang & Joshua Schmid, 2022. "Heterogeneity of autonomous vehicle adoption behavior due to peer effects and prior-AV knowledge," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1837-1860, December.

    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. Lindgren, Thomas & Pink, Sarah & Fors, Vaike, 2021. "Fore-sighting autonomous driving - An Ethnographic approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    2. Iaia, Lea & Leonelli, Simona & Masciarelli, Francesca & Christofi, Michael & Cooper, Sir Cary, 2022. "The malevolent side of masstige consumers’ behavior: The role of dark triad and technology propensity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 954-966.
    3. Benoît Lécureux & Adrien Bonnet & Ouassim Manout & Jaâfar Berrada & Louafi Bouzouina, 2022. "Acceptance of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Literature Review of stated choice experiments," Working Papers hal-03814947, HAL.
    4. Andrea Baranzini & Stefano Carattini & Linda Tesauro, 2021. "Designing Effective and Acceptable Road Pricing Schemes: Evidence from the Geneva Congestion Charge," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 417-482, July.
    5. He, Mingwei & He, Chengfeng & Shi, Zhuangbin & He, Min, 2022. "Spatiotemporal heterogeneous effects of socio-demographic and built environment on private car usage: An empirical study of Kunming, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. Yoshida, Masayuki & James, Jeffrey D. & Cronin, J. Joseph, 2013. "Sport event innovativeness: Conceptualization, measurement, and its impact on consumer behavior," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 68-84.
    7. Brenda Mak & Paul Beckman & Nicole Bohn, 2016. "Perceived Usefulness and Satisfaction of Mobile Phone for Users with Disabilities," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(02), pages 1-16, April.
    8. Barbour, Natalia & Menon, Nikhil & Zhang, Yu & Mannering, Fred, 2019. "Shared automated vehicles: A statistical analysis of consumer use likelihoods and concerns," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 86-93.
    9. Sohn, Stefanie, 2017. "A contextual perspective on consumers' perceived usefulness: The case of mobile online shopping," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 22-33.
    10. Vonk Noordegraaf, Diana & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2014. "Policy implementation lessons from six road pricing cases," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 172-191.
    11. Dan Ma & Hao Yuan, 2021. "Neighborhood Environment, Internet Use and Mental Distress among Older Adults: The Case of Shanghai, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-12, March.
    12. Brunelli, Matteo & Ditta, Chiara Caterina & Postorino, Maria Nadia, 2023. "SP surveys to estimate Airport Shuttle demand in an Urban Air Mobility context," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 129-139.
    13. Milenković, Marina & Glavić, Draženko & Maričić, Milica, 2019. "Determining factors affecting congestion pricing acceptability," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 58-74.
    14. Weina Qu & Hongli Sun & Yan Ge, 2021. "The effects of trait anxiety and the big five personality traits on self-driving car acceptance," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2663-2679, October.
    15. Sanal Kumar Velayudhan, 2019. "Factors influencing online shopping in rural India: A review," Working papers 314, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.
    16. Ruhrort, Lisa & Allert, Viktoria, 2021. "Conceptualizing the Role of Individual Agency in Mobility Transitions: Avenues for the Integration of Sociological and Psychological Perspectives," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12, pages 1-1.
    17. Perrine, Kenneth A. & Kockelman, Kara M. & Huang, Yantao, 2020. "Anticipating long-distance travel shifts due to self-driving vehicles," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Tiezzi, Silvia & Xiao, Erte, 2016. "Time delay, complexity and support for taxation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 117-141.
    20. Tom Brandsma & Jol Stoffers & Ilse Schrijver, 2020. "Advanced Technology Use by Care Professionals," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-16, 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:eee:transa:v:129:y:2019:i:c:p:1-18. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/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.