Explaining acceptance and acceptability of connected automated vehicles: the impact of evaluations of attributes and traffic complexity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55329/hpix8038Keywords:
acceptability, acceptance, attitudes, Connected Automated Vehicles (CAVs), traffic complexityAbstract
Connected Automated Vehicles (CAVs) may, when available, be able to reduce greenhouse gasses emissions caused by the transport sector, and may increase traffic safety. In order for CAVs to be adopted by the public, they first need to be accepted (i.e., evaluated positively). Therefore, it is critical to identify the predictors of CAVs’ acceptability (general evaluation before experience) and acceptance (willingness to use after experience). We examined to what extent evaluations of different attributes of CAVs are related to acceptability and acceptance, and to what extent acceptability and acceptance are related. Specifically, we hypothesised that more positive evaluations of safety, trustworthiness, instrumental, and hedonic attributes would be related to higher acceptability before experiencing a CAV, and to acceptance after experiencing a CAV. To be able to assess acceptance, we conducted a driving simulator experiment (N = 46). This enabled participants to experience a CAV in both a low and high traffic complexity scenario, and we could examine to what extent experiencing a CAV influences the evaluation of CAVs. Our results show that experiencing a CAV can enhance perceived safety and trustworthiness of CAVs. Further, both acceptability and acceptance were higher when the CAV was evaluated more positively on the attributes before and after experiencing a CAV, respectively. Safety attributes were more strongly related to acceptability than acceptance, while hedonic and instrumental attributes were more strongly related to acceptance than acceptability. In contrast to our expectations, traffic complexity did not affect acceptance, perceived safety, or trustworthiness of CAVs after the simulated drive. These results suggest that policies aimed at enhancing safety, driving pleasure, trustworthiness of CAVs, and by ensuring that CAVs are able to meet people’s mobility needs could increase both acceptability and acceptance of CAVs.
Downloads
Author Biographies
Jorick M. M. Post, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
Jorick M. M. Post is a researcher of Traffic and Environmental Psychology from the University of Groningen, the Netherlands. His research interests include acceptability and acceptance of mobility innovations, sustainable mobility, and behaviour change.
CRediT contribution: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing.
Ayҫa Berfu Ünal, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
Ayҫa Berfu Ünal is an Associate Professor in Social and Environmental Psychology at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands. Her research interests include behaviour change, acceptability of innovations, and emission-free mobility.
CRediT contribution: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Validation, Writing—review & editing.
Janet L. Veldstra, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
Janet L. Veldstra is a researcher of Psychology at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands. Her research interests include behaviour change, acceptability of mobility innovations, and sustainable, inclusive mobility.
CRediT contribution: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Validation, Writing—review & editing.
Dick de Waard, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
Dick de Waard is an Associate Professor in Traffic Psychology and the Retention of Mobility at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands. His research interests include human behaviour in transportation, human error, and effects of Advanced Driving Assistance Systems.
CRediT contribution: Supervision, Validation, Writing—review & editing.
Linda Steg, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
Linda Steg is a Professor in Environmental Psychology at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands. She studies factors influencing sustainable behaviour, the effects and acceptability of strategies aimed at promoting sustainable behaviour, and public perceptions of technology and system changes.
CRediT contribution: Supervision, Validation, Writing—review & editing.
References
Alexandre, B., Reynaud, E., Osiurak, F., & Navarro, J. (2018). Acceptance and acceptability criteria: A literature review. Cognition, Technology & Work, 20(2), 165–177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0459-1
Arunasalam, S. (2023, February 22). Luminar, Mercedes-Benz expand deal for self-driving tech. Reuters.
Baldwin, C. L., & Coyne, J. T. (2003). Mental workload as a function of traffic density: Comparison of physiological, behavioural, and subjective indices. Proceedings of the Second International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training and Vehicle Design, 2, 19–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17077/drivingassessment.1084
Benleulmi, A. Z., & Ramdani, B. (2022). Behavioural intention to use fully autonomous vehicles: Instrumental, symbolic, and affective motives. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 86, 226–237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2022.02.013
Bjørner, T. (2017). Driving pleasure and perceptions of the transition from no automation to full self-driving automation. Applied Mobilities, 4(3), 1–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2017.1421289
Choi, J. K., & Ji, Y. G. (2015). Investigating the importance of trust on adopting an autonomous vehicle. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(10), 692–702. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1070549
De Waard, D., Jessurun, M., Steyvers, F. J. J. M., Raggatt, P. T. F., & Brookhuis, K. A. (1995). Effect of road layout and road environment on driving performance, drivers’ physiology and road appreciation. Ergonomics, 38, 1395–1407. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139508925197
European Commission. (2020). Sustainable and smart mobility strategy – Putting European transport on track for the future.
Farmer, D., Kim, H., & Lee, J. (2023). The relationship between exposure to and trust in automated transport technologies and intention to use a shared autonomous vehicle. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2247553
Gawron, J. H., Keoleian, G. A., De Kleine, R. D., Wallington, T. J., & Kim, H. C. (2019). Deep decarbonization from electrified autonomous taxi fleets: Life cycle assessment and case study in Austin, TX. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 73, 130–141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2019.06.007
Howard, D., & Dai, D. (2014). Public perceptions of self-driving cars: The case of Berkeley, California. In Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting (Vol. 14, Issue 4502, pp. 1–16). The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Kacperski, C., Kutzner, F., & Vogel, T. (2021). Consequences of autonomous vehicles: Ambivalent expectations and their impact on acceptance. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 81, 282–294. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2021.06.004
Kennedy, R. S., Lane, N. E., Berbaum, K. S., & Lilienthal, M. G. (1993). Simulator sickness questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3(3), 203–220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3
Keszey, T. (2020). Behavioural intention to use autonomous vehicles: Systematic review and empirical extension. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 119, 102732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2020.102732
Lu, C., Dong, J., Hu, L., & Liu, C. (2019). An ecological adaptive cruise control for mixed traffic and its stabilization effect. IEEE Access, 7, 81246–81256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2923741
Ma, F., Yang, Y., Wang, J., Liu, Z., Li, J., Nie, J., … Wu, L. (2019). Predictive energy-saving optimization based on nonlinear model predictive control for cooperative connected vehicles platoon with V2V communication. Energy, 189, 116120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116120
Matin, A., & Dia, H. (2022). Impacts of connected and automated vehicles on road safety and efficiency: A systematic literature review. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 24(3), 2705–2736. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2022.3227176
Noppers, E. H., Keizer, K., Bockarjova, M., & Steg, L. (2015). The adoption of sustainable innovations: The role of instrumental, environmental, and symbolic attributes for earlier and later adopters. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 44, 74–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.09.002
Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Haque, M. M., King, M., & Washington, S. (2017). Effects of road infrastructure and traffic complexity in speed adaptation behaviour of distracted drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 101, 67–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.01.018
Papadoulis, A., Quddus, M., & Imprialou, M. (2019). Evaluating the safety impact of connected and autonomous vehicles on motorways. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 124, 12–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.12.019
Patten, C. J., Kircher, A., Östlund, J., Nilsson, L., & Svenson, O. (2006). Driver experience and cognitive workload in different traffic environments. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 38(5), 887–894. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.02.014
Post, J. M. M., Ünal, A. B., Veldstra, J. L., de Waard, D., & Steg, L. (2024). Acceptability of connected automated vehicles: Attributes, perceived behavioural control, and perceived adoption norm. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 102, 411–423. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2024.03.012
Ribeiro, M. A., Gursoy, D., & Chi, O. H. (2022). Customer acceptance of autonomous vehicles in travel and tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 61(3), 620–636. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287521993578
SAE International. (2021). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles J3016_202104. SAE International.
Schade, J., & Schlag, B. (2003). Acceptability of urban transport pricing strategies. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 6(1), 45–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(02)00046-3
Seuwou, P., Chrysoulas, C., Banissi, E., & Ubakanma, G. (2020). Measuring consumer behavioural intention to accept technology: Towards autonomous vehicles technology acceptance model (AVTAM). Trends and Innovations in Information Systems and Technologies, 1(8), 507–516. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45688-7_51
Shi, X., Wang, Z., Li, X., & Pei, M. (2021). The effect of ride experience on changing opinions toward autonomous vehicle safety. Communications in Transportation Research, 1, 100003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commtr.2021.100003
Shladover, S. E. (2018). Connected and automated vehicle systems: Introduction and overview. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 22(3), 190–200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2017.1336053
Storsæter, A. D., Pitera, K., & McCormack, E. D. (2021). The automated driver as a new road user. Transport Reviews, 41(5), 533–555. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2020.1861124
Teh, E., Jamson, S., Carsten, O., & Jamson, H. (2014). Temporal fluctuations in driving demand: The effect of traffic complexity on subjective measures of workload and driving performance. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 22, 207–217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2013.12.005
Ünal, A. B., Steg, L., & Epstude, K. (2012). The influence of music on mental effort and driving performance. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 48, 271–278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2012.01.022
Xu, Z., Zhang, K., Min, H., Wang, Z., Zhao, X., & Liu, P. (2018). What drives people to accept automated vehicles? Findings from a field experiment. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 95, 320–334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.07.024
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jorick M. M. Post, Ayҫa Berfu Ünal, Janet L. Veldstra, Dick de Waard, Linda Steg
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Funding data
-
Horizon 2020
Grant numbers 814999
