IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v203y2026ics0965856425003969.html

Riding into the future: What drives the use of robotaxis in San Francisco?

Author

Listed:
  • Greifenstein, Marvin
  • Nordhoff, Sina
  • Wang, Xinyi
  • Atluri, Bhuvan

Abstract

Robotaxis are now available for consumer service in San Francisco. Yet, a notable research gap remains in examining behavioural intentions and use behaviour of robotaxis in areas where these services are commercially available. Using survey data collected from San Francisco residents (n = 517), this paper examines factors that influence individuals’ behavioural intentions and actual use of robotaxis in California. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied to test the measurement model, while partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) was used to test the hypothesized structural path relationships between the predictors, behavioural intention and actual use of robotaxis. Additionally, multi-group analysis allowed for the examination of differences between groups varying in socio-demographic factors (e.g., gender, age, income) and mobility behaviour (e.g., use of robotaxis, ride-hailing, private vehicle). Almost half of the respondents were undecided about robotaxis being good value for money, with the neutral response rate for this question being the highest among all surveyed (43 %). Notably, respondents showed the lowest level of agreement with the statement on the importance of robotaxis among people important to them (23 % agreement). This suggests that, even in an innovation hub like San Francisco, social acceptance may lag behind individual interest and policy enthusiasm. Our study further shows that intention to use robotaxis significantly affects actual use behaviour for those having already taken robotaxi rides while personal innovativeness, hedonic motivation and social influence are the strongest predictors of behavioural intention to use. Overall, robotaxis seem to already be integrating into the urban landscape of San Francisco residents.

Suggested Citation

  • Greifenstein, Marvin & Nordhoff, Sina & Wang, Xinyi & Atluri, Bhuvan, 2026. "Riding into the future: What drives the use of robotaxis in San Francisco?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:203:y:2026:i:c:s0965856425003969
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2025.104763
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856425003969
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2025.104763?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Singha Chaveesuk & Wornchanok Chaiyasoonthorn & Nayika Kamales & Zdzislawa Dacko-Pikiewicz & Wiesław Liszewski & Bilal Khalid, 2023. "Evaluating the Determinants of Consumer Adoption of Autonomous Vehicles in Thailand—An Extended UTAUT Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-22, January.
    2. Haimanti Bala & Sabreena Anowar & Samuel Chng & Lynette Cheah, 2023. "Review of studies on public acceptability and acceptance of shared autonomous mobility services: past, present and future," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(5), pages 970-996, September.
    3. Lawrence W. Sherman, 2003. "Misleading Evidence and Evidence-Led Policy: Making Social Science more Experimental," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 589(1), pages 6-19, September.
    4. Biggar, Matt & Ardoin, Nicole M., 2017. "Community context, human needs, and transportation choices: A view across San Francisco Bay Area communities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 189-199.
    5. Dai, Jingchen & Wang, Xiaokun Cara & Ma, Wenxin & Li, Ruimin, 2023. "Future transport vision propensity segments: A latent class analysis of autonomous taxi market," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    6. Tzu-Hsin Chu & Cheng-Min Chao & Hsieh-Hsi Liu & Der-Fa Chen, 2022. "Developing an Extended Theory of UTAUT 2 Model to Explore Factors Influencing Taiwanese Consumer Adoption of Intelligent Elevators," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    7. Agrawal, Shubham & Schuster, Amy M. & Britt, Noah & Mack, Elizabeth A. & Tidwell, Michael L. & Cotten, Shelia R., 2023. "Building on the past to help prepare the workforce for the future with automated vehicles: A systematic review of automated passenger vehicle deployment timelines," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    8. Ritu Agarwal & Jayesh Prasad, 1998. "A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 204-215, June.
    9. Wu, Min & Wang, Nanxi & Yuen, Kum Fai, 2023. "Can autonomy level and anthropomorphic characteristics affect public acceptance and trust towards shared autonomous vehicles?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    10. Jonas Wanner & Lukas-Valentin Herm & Kai Heinrich & Christian Janiesch, 2022. "The effect of transparency and trust on intelligent system acceptance: Evidence from a user-based study," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(4), pages 2079-2102, December.
    11. Adnan, Nadia & Md Nordin, Shahrina & bin Bahruddin, Mohamad Ariff & Ali, Murad, 2018. "How trust can drive forward the user acceptance to the technology? In-vehicle technology for autonomous vehicle," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 819-836.
    12. 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.
    13. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    14. Mao, Wei & Shepherd, Simon & Harrison, Gillian & Xu, Meng, 2024. "Autonomous vehicle market development in Beijing: A system dynamics approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    15. Amy Luers & Jonathan Koomey & Eric Masanet & Owen Gaffney & Felix Creutzig & Juan Lavista Ferres & Eric Horvitz, 2024. "Will AI accelerate or delay the race to net-zero emissions?," Nature, Nature, vol. 628(8009), pages 718-720, April.
    16. Nunes, Ashley & Hernandez, Kristen D., 2020. "Autonomous taxis & public health: High cost or high opportunity cost?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 28-36.
    17. Heuser, Katie L., 2024. "“Don’t Keep Us Out of the Revolution!”: Accessibility and Autonomous Rideshare in California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt3pp8k71h, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    18. Ho, Shirley S. & Cheung, Justin C., 2024. "Trust in artificial intelligence, trust in engineers, and news media: Factors shaping public perceptions of autonomous drones through UTAUT2," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    19. 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.
    20. Keming Yang & Ahmad Banamah, 2014. "Quota Sampling as an Alternative to Probability Sampling? An Experimental Study," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 19(1), pages 56-66, February.
    21. Wei Wei & Jie Sun & Wei Miao & Tong Chen & Hanchu Sun & Shuyuan Lin & Chao Gu, 2024. "Using the Extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology to explore how to increase users’ intention to take a robotaxi," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    22. Jerome S. Engel & Jasmina Berbegal-Mirabent & Josep M. Piqué, 2018. "The renaissance of the city as a cluster of innovation," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1532777-153, January.
    23. Rosseel, Yves, 2012. "lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i02).
    24. 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.
    25. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    26. 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.
    27. Rejali, Sina & Aghabayk, Kayvan & Esmaeli, Saeed & Shiwakoti, Nirajan, 2023. "Comparison of technology acceptance model, theory of planned behavior, and unified theory of acceptance and use of technology to assess a priori acceptance of fully automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    28. Pieters, R. & Verplanken, B., 1995. "Intention-Behaviour consistency : Effects of consideration set size, involvement and need for cognition," Other publications TiSEM 3c86be3d-66f5-4f17-abc0-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    29. Kenesei, Zsófia & Ásványi, Katalin & Kökény, László & Jászberényi, Melinda & Miskolczi, Márk & Gyulavári, Tamás & Syahrivar, Jhanghiz, 2022. "Trust and perceived risk: How different manifestations affect the adoption of autonomous vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 379-393.
    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. Liu, Yuan Xiong & Li, HanXi & Pan, Younghwan, 2025. "Why do users trust Robotaxi? Analyzing user differences and adoption behavior from a socio-technical perspective," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    2. Gansser, Oliver Alexander & Reich, Christina Stefanie, 2021. "A new acceptance model for artificial intelligence with extensions to UTAUT2: An empirical study in three segments of application," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    3. Nastjuk, Ilja & Herrenkind, Bernd & Marrone, Mauricio & Brendel, Alfred Benedikt & Kolbe, Lutz M., 2020. "What drives the acceptance of autonomous driving? An investigation of acceptance factors from an end-user's perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    4. Gao, Tao (Tony) & Rohm, Andrew J. & Sultan, Fareena & Pagani, Margherita, 2013. "Consumers un-tethered: A three-market empirical study of consumers' mobile marketing acceptance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2536-2544.
    5. Zhang, Xiang & Sun, Haojie & Pei, Xiaoyang & Guan, Linghui & Wang, Zihao, 2024. "Evolution of technology investment and development of robotaxi services," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    6. Molinillo, Sebastian & Caballero-Galeote, Lidia & Liébana-Cabanillas, Francisco & Ruiz-Montañez, Miguel, 2024. "Understanding users’ willingness to travel on autonomous buses: The moderating effect of experience," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    7. Kim, Jiyeon & Forsythe, Sandra, 2008. "Adoption of Virtual Try-on technology for online apparel shopping," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 45-59.
    8. Iviane Ramos-de-Luna & Francisco Montoro-Ríos & Francisco Liébana-Cabanillas, 2016. "Determinants of the intention to use NFC technology as a payment system: an acceptance model approach," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-314, May.
    9. Muhammad Riaz & Sherani, 2021. "Investigation of information sharing via multiple social media platforms: a comparison of Facebook and WeChat adoption," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(5), pages 1751-1773, October.
    10. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13000 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Jui-Che Tu & Chi-Ling Hu, 2018. "A Study on the Factors Affecting Consumers’ Willingness to Accept Clothing Rentals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-30, November.
    12. Christopher R. Plouffe & John S. Hulland & Mark Vandenbosch, 2001. "Research Report: Richness Versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology Adoption Decisions—Understanding Merchant Adoption of a Smart Card-Based Payment System," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 208-222, June.
    13. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13613 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Eccarius, Timo & Chen, Ching-Fu, 2024. "Examining trust as a critical factor for the adoption of electric vehicle sharing via necessary condition analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    15. Hart O. Awa & Ojiabo Ukoha & Bartholomew C. Emecheta, 2016. "Using T-O-E theoretical framework to study the adoption of ERP solution," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1196571-119, December.
    16. Ioanna Roussou & Emmanouil Stiakakis & Angelo Sifaleras, 2019. "An empirical study on the commercial adoption of digital currencies," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 223-259, December.
    17. Schmidthuber, Lisa & Maresch, Daniela & Ginner, Michael, 2020. "Disruptive technologies and abundance in the service sector - toward a refined technology acceptance model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    18. Enkel, Ellen & Wintgens, Sander, 2025. "Understanding mass-market electric vehicle adoption: Integrating diffusion of innovation theory with risk mitigation strategy in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    19. August Francesc Corrons Giménez & Lluís Garay Tamajón, 2019. "An Analysis of the Process of Adopting Local Digital Currencies in Support of Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-19, February.
    20. Qian Wang & Michael Myers & David Sundaram, 2013. "Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(6), pages 409-419, December.
    21. Wu, Jiangling & He, Qiang & Singh, Amit Kumar & Tian, Linjie, 2024. "What drives users to accept flying cars for urban air mobility? Findings from an empirical study," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    22. Riffat Ara Zannat Tama & Md Mahmudul Hoque & Ying Liu & Mohammad Jahangir Alam & Mark Yu, 2023. "An Application of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to Examining Farmers’ Behavioral Attitude and Intention towards Conservation Agriculture in Bangladesh," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-22, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    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:eee:transa:v:203:y:2026:i:c:s0965856425003969. 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.