4.5 Article

How the older population perceives self-driving vehicles

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2019.08.002

关键词

Autonomous vehicle; Older adult; Mobility; Technology acceptance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Self-driving vehicles (SAE Level 5) are driven by automated vehicle technology and without any human driver input. These vehicles will especially be helpful to people who cannot drive, whether for medical- or age-related reasons. Since the current population of older Americans is the largest it has ever been, it is important to study transportation needs for older population and the potential of self-driving vehicles to solve their mobility problems. This study investigated older adults' (aged 60 and over) perception of self-driving vehicles from the perspective of users and pedestrians. Five factors were measured to assess older adults' perception including attitude, perceived usefulness, social norm, trust, and compatibility. Older adults' willingness to use a self-driving vehicle, defined as acceptance, was also assessed. Data collection (N = 173) was done using an online survey approach. The results show that older adults perceive self-driving vehicles with positive attitude, perceived usefulness, trust, social norm, and acceptance as users. However, as pedestrians, the perception was either neutral or negative, except for the positive perceived usefulness. The results also revealed that if the older adults are familiar with self-driving vehicles, they are more likely to have a favorable perception of them. These results indicate great potential for the adoption of self-driving vehicles by older adults. However, they also raise concern about the interaction between older pedestrians and self-driving vehicles. The findings of this study will be helpful to developers in designing vehicles that meet the transportation needs of older adults and allow effective interaction between them and the vehicles. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据