Cross-National Focus Group Response to Autonomous Vehicles

被引:1
|
作者
Norton, Thomas A. [1 ]
Ruhl, Melissa [1 ]
Armitage, Tim [1 ]
Matthews, Brian [2 ]
Miles, John [3 ]
机构
[1] Arup, London, England
[2] Civ Off City Milton Keynes, Milton Keynes, Bucks, England
[3] Univ Cambridge, Dept Engn, Cambridge, England
关键词
D O I
10.1177/0361198121992363
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
The development of autonomous vehicles (AVs) is advancing quickly in some enclaves around the world. Consequently, AVs exist in the public consciousness, featuring regularly in mainstream media. As the form and function of AVs emerge, the attitudes of potential users become more important. The extent to which the public trusts AV technology and anticipates benefits, will drive consumer willingness to use AVs. Broadly, public attitudes will determine whether AVs can attract public investment in infrastructure and become a feature of the future transport mix or fail to realize the potential their developers assert. As part of UK Autodrive, a program trialing the introduction of AVs in the United Kingdom, researchers conducted focus groups in five UK cities, and a comparison focus group in San Francisco (December 2017 to September 2018) using representative samples (total n = 137). Focus group facilitators guided discussions in three areas considered central to usage decisions: trust in the technology, ownership models, and community benefit. This paper describes findings from a quasi-quantitative study supported with qualitative insights. This research provides three key takeaways centering on trust in the technology and in delivering benefit. First, some participants gain trust through experience and others through evidence. Second, participants had difficulty discriminating between AV developers, indicating a need for industry cooperation. Third, partnerships were found to demonstrate trust, highlighting the need for more and deeper partnerships moving forward. Generally, participants had positive attitudes toward AVs and expect AVs to provide benefits. However, these attitudes and expectations could change as AV development progresses.
引用
收藏
页码:339 / 351
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] A CROSS-NATIONAL LOOK AT AGED
    不详
    [J]. GERIATRICS, 1966, 21 (08) : 78 - &
  • [32] INEQUALITY - CROSS-NATIONAL ANALYSIS
    CUTRIGHT, P
    [J]. AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1967, 32 (04) : 562 - 578
  • [33] CROSS-NATIONAL DIMENSIONS OF ETHNOCENTRISM
    MAPP, RE
    [J]. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF AFRICAN STUDIES, 1972, 6 (01): : 73 - 96
  • [34] A Cross-National Perspective on Bullying
    Borntrager, Cameo
    Davis, Joanne L.
    Bernstein, Adam
    Gorman, Heather
    [J]. CHILD & YOUTH CARE FORUM, 2009, 38 (03) : 121 - 134
  • [35] COMPARATIVE CROSS-NATIONAL METHODOLOGY
    ELDER, JW
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, 1976, 2 : 209 - 230
  • [36] CROSS-NATIONAL COMPARISONS OF FACTORY
    GLASER, WA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE ADMINISTRATION, 1971, 3 (01) : 83 - 117
  • [37] A WHO cross-national study
    Sheps, S
    [J]. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH-REVUE CANADIENNE DE SANTE PUBLIQUE, 1997, 88 (02): : 143 - 143
  • [38] Cross-national measures of punitiveness
    Blumstein, A
    Tonry, M
    Van Ness, A
    [J]. CRIME AND PUNISHMENT IN WESTERN COUNTRIES, 1980-1999, 2005, 33 : 347 - 376
  • [39] A Cross-National Perspective on Bullying
    Cameo Borntrager
    Joanne L. Davis
    Adam Bernstein
    Heather Gorman
    [J]. Child & Youth Care Forum, 2009, 38 : 121 - 134
  • [40] THOUGHTS ON A CROSS-NATIONAL PROGRAM
    ALDRICH, JL
    [J]. EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP, 1969, 27 (02) : 131 - 136