IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i14p7828-d593554.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sharing Anxiety Is in the Driver’s Seat: Analyzing User Acceptance of Dynamic Ridepooling and Its Implications for Shared Autonomous Mobility

Author

Listed:
  • Sigma Dolins

    (Mobility and Systems, RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Lindholmspiren 3A, 41756 Göteborg, Sweden
    Design & Human Factors, Chalmers University of Technology, 41296 Göteborg, Sweden)

  • Helena Strömberg

    (Design & Human Factors, Chalmers University of Technology, 41296 Göteborg, Sweden)

  • Yale Z. Wong

    (Institute of Transport & Logistics Studies, University of Sydney Business School, Darlington, NSW 2006, Australia)

  • MariAnne Karlsson

    (Design & Human Factors, Chalmers University of Technology, 41296 Göteborg, Sweden)

Abstract

As connected, electric, and autonomous vehicle (AV) services are developed for cities, the research is conclusive that the use of these services must be shared to achieve maximum efficiency. Yet, few agencies have prioritised designing an AV system that focuses on dynamic ridepooling, and there remains a gap in the understanding of what makes people willing to share their rides. However, in 2017, the Australian transport authority Transport for New South Wales launched over a dozen trials for on-demand, shared public transport, including AVs. In this paper, we investigate the user willingness-to-share, based on experiences from one of these trials. Four focus groups (19 participants in total) were held in New South Wales with active users of either the trialled on-demand dynamic ridepooling service (Keoride) or commercial ridepooling (UberPool). Through thematic analysis of the focus group conversations, the cost, comfort, convenience, safety, community culture, and trust in authority emerged as factors that influenced the willingness-to-share. When presented with driverless scenarios, the focus group participants had significant concerns about the unknown behaviour of their co-passengers, revealing sharing anxiety as a significant barrier to the adoption of shared AVs. This paper identifies previously disregarded factors that influence the adoption of AVs and dynamic ridepooling and offers insights on how potential users’ sharing anxiety can be mitigated.

Suggested Citation

  • Sigma Dolins & Helena Strömberg & Yale Z. Wong & MariAnne Karlsson, 2021. "Sharing Anxiety Is in the Driver’s Seat: Analyzing User Acceptance of Dynamic Ridepooling and Its Implications for Shared Autonomous Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7828-:d:593554
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7828/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7828/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greenblatt, Jeffery & Shaheen, Susan PhD, 2015. "Automated Vehicles, On-Demand Mobility and Environmental Impacts," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt23r1h80t, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    2. Felipe F. Dias & Patrícia S. Lavieri & Venu M. Garikapati & Sebastian Astroza & Ram M. Pendyala & Chandra R. Bhat, 2017. "A behavioral choice model of the use of car-sharing and ride-sourcing services," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1307-1323, November.
    3. Suresh Malodia & Harish Singla, 2016. "A study of carpooling behaviour using a stated preference web survey in selected cities of India," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(5), pages 538-550, July.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Clewlow, Regina R. & Mishra, Gouri S., 2017. "Disruptive Transportation: The Adoption, Utilization, and Impacts of Ride-Hailing in the United States," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt82w2z91j, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    7. Natasha Merat & Ruth Madigan & Sina Nordhoff, 2017. "Human Factors, User Requirements, and User Acceptance of Ride-Sharing in Automated Vehicles," International Transport Forum Discussion Papers 2017/10, OECD Publishing.
    8. Aarhaug, Jørgen & Olsen, Silvia, 2018. "Implications of ride-sourcing and self-driving vehicles on the need for regulation in unscheduled passenger transport," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 573-582.
    9. Hall, Jonathan D. & Palsson, Craig & Price, Joseph, 2018. "Is Uber a substitute or complement for public transit?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 36-50.
    10. Wong, Yale Z. & Hensher, David A. & Mulley, Corinne, 2020. "Mobility as a service (MaaS): Charting a future context," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 5-19.
    11. Fraedrich, Eva & Heinrichs, Dirk & Bahamonde-Birke, Francisco J. & Cyganski, Rita, 2019. "Autonomous driving, the built environment and policy implications," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 162-172.
    12. Sanguinetti, Angela & Kurani, Ken & Ferguson, Beth, 2019. "Is It OK to Get in a Car with a Stranger? Risks and Benefits of Ride-pooling in Shared Automated Vehicles," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt1cb6n6r9, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    13. Jun Guan Neoh & Maxwell Chipulu & Alasdair Marshall, 2017. "What encourages people to carpool? An evaluation of factors with meta-analysis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 423-447, March.
    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. Sigma Dolins & Yale Z. Wong & John D. Nelson, 2021. "The ‘Sharing Trap’: A Case Study of Societal and Stakeholder Readiness for On-Demand and Autonomous Public Transport in New South Wales, Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Hugo Guyader & Margareta Friman & Lars E. Olsson, 2021. "Shared Mobility: Evolving Practices for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, November.
    3. Sophia Hick & Hannah Biermann & Martina Ziefle, 2024. "How deep is your trust? A comparative user requirements’ analysis of automation in medical and mobility technologies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, 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. Prateek Bansal & Akanksha Sinha & Rubal Dua & Ricardo Daziano, 2019. "Eliciting Preferences of Ridehailing Users and Drivers: Evidence from the United States," Papers 1904.06695, arXiv.org.
    2. Sigma Dolins & Yale Z. Wong & John D. Nelson, 2021. "The ‘Sharing Trap’: A Case Study of Societal and Stakeholder Readiness for On-Demand and Autonomous Public Transport in New South Wales, Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, August.
    3. Wang, Jinghui & Yang, Hao, 2023. "Low carbon future of vehicle sharing, automation, and electrification: A review of modeling mobility behavior and demand," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    4. Rick Grahn & Corey D. Harper & Chris Hendrickson & Zhen Qian & H. Scott Matthews, 2020. "Socioeconomic and usage characteristics of transportation network company (TNC) riders," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 3047-3067, December.
    5. Tirachini, Alejandro & del Río, Mariana, 2019. "Ride-hailing in Santiago de Chile: Users’ characterisation and effects on travel behaviour," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 46-57.
    6. Xiaowei Chen & Hongyu Zheng & Ze Wang & Xiqun Chen, 2021. "Exploring impacts of on-demand ridesplitting on mobility via real-world ridesourcing data and questionnaires," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1541-1561, August.
    7. Wenyuan Zhou & Xuanrong Li & Zhenguo Shi & Bingjie Yang & Dongxu Chen, 2023. "Impact of Carpooling under Mobile Internet on Travel Mode Choices and Urban Traffic Volume: The Case of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-15, April.
    8. Alejandro Tirachini, 2020. "Ride-hailing, travel behaviour and sustainable mobility: an international review," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 2011-2047, August.
    9. Lazarus, Jessica R. & Caicedo, Juan D. & Bayen, Alexandre M. & Shaheen, Susan A., 2021. "To Pool or Not to Pool? Understanding opportunities, challenges, and equity considerations to expanding the market for pooling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 199-222.
    10. Qing Shen & Yiyuan Wang & Casey Gifford, 2021. "Exploring partnership between transit agency and shared mobility company: an incentive program for app-based carpooling," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2585-2603, October.
    11. Dean, Matthew D. & Kockelman, Kara M., 2021. "Spatial variation in shared ride-hail trip demand and factors contributing to sharing: Lessons from Chicago," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    12. Nair, Gopindra S. & Bhat, Chandra R. & Batur, Irfan & Pendyala, Ram M. & Lam, William H.K., 2020. "A model of deadheading trips and pick-up locations for ride-hailing service vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 289-308.
    13. Muhammad Zudhy Irawan & Prawira Fajarindra Belgiawan & Tri Basuki Joewono & Nurvita I. M. Simanjuntak, 2020. "Do motorcycle-based ride-hailing apps threaten bus ridership? A hybrid choice modeling approach with latent variables," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 207-231, March.
    14. Quirós, Cipriano & Portela, Javier & Marín, Raquel, 2021. "Differentiated models in the collaborative transport economy: A mixture analysis for Blablacar and Uber," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    15. Simon J. Berrebi & Kari E. Watkins, 2020. "Whos Ditching the Bus?," Papers 2001.02200, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2020.
    16. Scott B. Kelley & Bradley W. Lane & John M. DeCicco, 2019. "Pumping the Brakes on Robot Cars: Current Urban Traveler Willingness to Consider Driverless Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-15, September.
    17. Yan, Xiang & Liu, Xinyu & Zhao, Xilei, 2020. "Using machine learning for direct demand modeling of ridesourcing services in Chicago," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    18. Wang, Hai & Yang, Hai, 2019. "Ridesourcing systems: A framework and review," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 122-155.
    19. Soria, Jason & Stathopoulos, Amanda, 2021. "Investigating socio-spatial differences between solo ridehailing and pooled rides in diverse communities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    20. Aguilera-García, Álvaro & Gomez, Juan & Velázquez, Guillermo & Vassallo, Jose Manuel, 2022. "Ridesourcing vs. traditional taxi services: Understanding users’ choices and preferences in Spain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 161-178.

    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:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7828-:d:593554. 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.