IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v46y2019i6d10.1007_s11116-019-10069-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of neighborhood environments on perceived risk of self-driving: evidence from the 2015 and 2017 Puget Sound Travel Surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Kailai Wang

    (University of California)

  • Gulsah Akar

    (The Ohio State University)

Abstract

Autonomous vehicles (AVs), with an expectation of improving road safety, are closer to becoming a reality. A large number of people are still concerned about how AVs would operate in real-life driving environments. The present paper investigates the factors that affect people’s views of the interactions between AVs and other road users based on a large sample from the 2015 and 2017 Puget Sound Travel Surveys. We specifically highlight the effects of the neighborhood environment and road infrastructure. We estimate a generalized ordered logit model to demonstrate the extent to which certain neighborhood environment and road infrastructure features affect individuals’ safety perceptions of AVs, controlling for demographics, daily travel patterns, and general interest in riding AVs. The results reveal that designated bicycle facilities are positively associated with individuals’ safety perceptions related to AVs. We find that residents from neighborhoods with more pedestrian facilities are more likely to express higher levels of concern on AVs’ capabilities to react to the environment. Our results also suggest that people living in mixed-use neighborhoods are more confident in sharing the road with AVs. The findings provide useful implications for effective policy interventions and infrastructure provisions that may affect the market penetration rates of AVs while keeping up the standards for other road users, such as bicyclists and pedestrians.

Suggested Citation

  • Kailai Wang & Gulsah Akar, 2019. "Effects of neighborhood environments on perceived risk of self-driving: evidence from the 2015 and 2017 Puget Sound Travel Surveys," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2117-2136, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:46:y:2019:i:6:d:10.1007_s11116-019-10069-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-019-10069-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-019-10069-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11116-019-10069-9?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. Reid Ewing & Robert Cervero, 2010. "Travel and the Built Environment," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(3), pages 265-294.
    2. 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.
    3. Wang, Kailai & Akar, Gulsah & Chen, Yu-Jen, 2018. "Bike sharing differences among Millennials, Gen Xers, and Baby Boomers: Lessons learnt from New York City’s bike share," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 1-14.
    4. Mark R. Stevens, 2017. "Response to Commentaries on “Does Compact Development Make People Drive Less?”," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 83(2), pages 151-158, April.
    5. Gopindra Sivakumar Nair & Sebastian Astroza & Chandra R. Bhat & Sara Khoeini & Ram M. Pendyala, 2018. "An application of a rank ordered probit modeling approach to understanding level of interest in autonomous vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1623-1637, November.
    6. Mark R. Stevens, 2017. "Does Compact Development Make People Drive Less?," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 83(1), pages 7-18, January.
    7. Gulsah Akar & Gregory D. Erhardt, 2018. "User response to autonomous vehicles and emerging mobility systems," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1603-1605, November.
    8. Karim W. F. Youssef, 2018. "The built environment and public health," Community Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(1), pages 121-122, January.
    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. 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).

    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. Kailai Wang & Xize Wang, 2022. "Generational Differences in Automobility: Comparing America's Millennials and Gen Xers Using Gradient Boosting Decision Trees," Papers 2206.11056, arXiv.org.
    2. Chetan Doddamani & M. Manoj, 2023. "Analysis of the influences of built environment measures on household car and motorcycle ownership decisions in Hubli-Dharwad cities," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 205-243, February.
    3. Mouratidis, Kostas & Ettema, Dick & Næss, Petter, 2019. "Urban form, travel behavior, and travel satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 306-320.
    4. Faizeh Hatami & Jean-Claude Thill, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Evaluation of the Built Environment’s Impact on Commuting Duration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Ding, Chuan & Cao, Xinyu (Jason) & Næss, Petter, 2018. "Applying gradient boosting decision trees to examine non-linear effects of the built environment on driving distance in Oslo," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 107-117.
    6. Bindong Sun & Rui Guo & Chun Yin, 2023. "Inequity on suburban campuses: University students disadvantaged in self‐improvement travel," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 404-420, June.
    7. Gao, Jiong & Ma, Shoufeng & Zou, Hongyang & Du, Huibin, 2023. "How does population agglomeration influence the adoption of new energy vehicles? Evidence from 290 cities in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    8. Guan, Xiaodong & Wang, Donggen, 2019. "Influences of the built environment on travel: A household-based perspective," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 710-724.
    9. Lorea Mendiola & Pilar González, 2021. "Urban Development and Sustainable Mobility: A Spatial Analysis in the Buenos Aires Metropolitan Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-23, February.
    10. Charles Raux & Ayana Lamatkhanova & Lény Grassot, 2021. "Does the built environment shape commuting? The case of Lyon (France)," Post-Print halshs-03010833, HAL.
    11. Aston, Laura & Currie, Graham & Kamruzzaman, Md. & Delbosc, Alexa & Teller, David, 2020. "Study design impacts on built environment and transit use research," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    12. Blaudin de Thé, Camille & Carantino, Benjamin & Lafourcade, Miren, 2021. "The carbon ‘carprint’ of urbanization: New evidence from French cities," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    13. Dubey, Subodh & Bansal, Prateek & Daziano, Ricardo A. & Guerra, Erick, 2020. "A Generalized Continuous-Multinomial Response Model with a t-distributed Error Kernel," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 114-141.
    14. Donggen Wang & Tao Lin, 2019. "Built environment, travel behavior, and residential self-selection: a study based on panel data from Beijing, China," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 51-74, February.
    15. Zhu, Pengyu & Tan, Xinying & Zhao, Songnian & Shi, Shuai & Wang, Mingshu, 2022. "Land use regulations, transit investment, and commuting preferences," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    16. Rahman, Mashrur & Sciara, Gian-Claudia, 2022. "Travel attitudes, the built environment and travel behavior relationships: Causal insights from social psychology theories," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 44-54.
    17. Ding, Chuan & Cao, Xinyu & Yu, Bin & Ju, Yang, 2021. "Non-linear associations between zonal built environment attributes and transit commuting mode choice accounting for spatial heterogeneity," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 22-35.
    18. Lussier-Tomaszewski, P. & Boisjoly, G., 2021. "Thinking regional and acting local: Assessing the joint influence of local and regional accessibility on commute mode in Montreal, Canada," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    19. Ghimire, Ramesh & Lancelin, Colby, 2019. "The relationship between financial incentives provided by employers and commuters' decision to use transit: Results from the Atlanta Regional Household Travel Survey," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 103-113.
    20. Martín, Belén & Páez, Antonio, 2019. "Individual and geographic variations in the propensity to travel by active modes in Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 103-113.

    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_s11116-019-10069-9. 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.