Conference Presentation

SOMER HAND + YI-CHING LEE, PHD HUMAN FACTORS + APPLIED COGNITION | GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY

Background | PREVIOUS RESEARCH • Risks + benefits of adult use • Benefits are desirable • Significant safety concerns

• Gender differences • Men are more familiar, positive, willing to pay • Women more concerned about safety risks

• Influence of familiarity

• Increased familiarity = increased interest + comfort levels

Background | IMPORTANCE • Children’s use of AV’s

• Increased mobility • More time for parents • Avoid public transportation

• Concerns about safety V2gov.com

METHODS | RESEARCH QUESTIONS

• Willingness to use an AV to transport a child unaccompanied • Features that influence willingness

METHODS | QUESTIONNAIRE

Methods | QUESTIONNAIRE

DEMOGRAPHICS

FAMILIARITY

WILLINGNESS

DEMOGRAPHICS

WILLINGNESS

CAR FEATURES

METHODS | DATA COLLECTION • 1,893 respondents • 558 eliminated

• 287 non US residents • 271 invalid responses

RESULTS | SAMPLE STATISTICS 1,335 valid responses 42% male 58% female 18-82 years old (mean age 37, sd 11.1) 61% parents of children under 15 years

METHODS | RESEARCH QUESTIONS

• Willingness to use an AV to transport a child unaccompanied • Features that influence willingness

Results | OVERALL WILLINGNESS

Results | WILLINGNESS BY DEMOGRAPHIC

Results | WILLINGNESS BY DEMOGRAPHIC

Results | WILLINGNESS BY DEMOGRAPHIC

There were no significant effects for income, race, or education level on willingness to transport children unaccompanied in AVs.

METHODS | RESEARCH QUESTIONS

• Willingness to use an AV to transport a child unaccompanied

• Features that influence willingness

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Emergency features No significant difference between parents + non-parents (p = .563) More important to females than males (p < .0001) More important to participants with female children than to participants with male children (p = .002)

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES Importance rating for groups of similar features:

1 2 3 4

UNNECESARY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE

IMPORTANT TO HAVE REQUIRED

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Emergency features • Protect my child in an emergency • Signal distress to designated adult • Summon emergency personnel (call 911) • Release child from car in emergency • Summon maintenance (AAA)

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Emergency features No significant difference between parents + non-parents (p = .563) More important to females than males (p < .0001) More important to participants with female children than to participants with male children (p = .002)

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Child restraint features • Safely restrained while in transit • Prevent child from leaving car until they reach destination

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Child restraint features No significant difference between parents + non-parents (p = .185) More important to females than males (p < .0001) No significant difference (p = .082)

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Operation of + access to vehicle • Designated adult at destination • Designated adult received child • Child can communicate with designated adult • No one other than designated adult can get into car • Who is able to ride in the car • Who is able to operate the car

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Operation of + access to vehicle More important to parents than non-parents (p < .043) More important to females than males (p < .0001) More important to participants with female children than to participants with male children (p = .002)

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Gps + vehicle location • Control the destination • Know where the car is at all times • Designated adult can track car location • Control the route • Change destination / add a stop • Car will be at starting point of trip on time

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Gps + vehicle location No significant difference between parents + non-parents (p = .161) More important to females than males (p < .0001) More important to participants with female children than to participants with male children (p = .004)

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Auditory feedback of child • A microphone that lets you hear your child • A microphone that lets your child hear you

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Auditory feedback of child More important to parents than non-parents (p < .0001) More important to females than males (p < .0001) No significant difference (p = .087)

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Visual feedback of child • A camera that allows your child to see you • A camera that allows you to see your child

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES

Visual feedback of child More important to parents than non-parents (p < .0001) More important to females than males (p < .0001) More important to participants with female children than to participants with male children (p = .038)

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES Miscellaneous: A/C, windows, tv, car features • Control entertainment provided to child • Operation of car windows • Control climate control • Monitor fuel level, engine temperature, other indicators

RESULTS | CAR FEATURES Miscellaneous: A/C, windows, tv, car features More important to parents than non-parents (p < .0001) More important to females than males (p = .011) No significant difference (p = .69)

discussion | MAIN TAKEAWAYS Overall hesitance, but 58% maybe or yes Women most reluctant Parents significantly more reluctant than non-parents Socioeconomic factors did not influence willingness Most feature groups ranked “Important to Have” or “Required” Emergency safety features ranked most important, followed by child restraint + control of the child + the vehicle

discussion | AREAS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH Comparison with existing autonomous systems Comparison across countries / cultures Why concerns for girls higher than boys Language / terminology Children’s perceptions Comparison with teen drivers

THANK YOU!

references • • • • • • • • • •

Bansal, P., & Kockelman, K. M. (2017). Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies.

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice , 95 , 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.10.013 Bonnefon, J.-F., Shariff, A., & Rahwan, I. (2016). The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. Science , 352 (6293), 1573–1576.

Carlson, M., Desai, M., Drury, J., Kwak, H., & Yanco, H. (2013). Identifying Factors that Influence Trust in Automated Cars and Medical Diagnosis Systems. In The Intersection of Robust Intelligence and Trust in Autonomous Systems .

Fagnant, D. J., & Kockelman, K. (2015). Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations.

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice , 77 , 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.003 Gold, C., Körber, M., Hohenberger, C., Lechner, D., & Bengler, K. (2015). Trust in Automation – Before and After the Experience of Takeover Scenarios in a Highly Automated Vehicle. Procedia Manufacturing , 3 , 3025– 3032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.847 Haboucha, C. J., Ishaq, R., & Shiftan, Y. (2017). User preferences regarding autonomous vehicles. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies , 78 , 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2017.01.010 Hohenberger, C., Spörrle, M., & Welpe, I. M. (2016). How and why do men and women differ in their willingness to use automated cars?

The influence of emotions across different age groups. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice , 94 , 374–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.09.022 König, M., & Neumayr, L. (2017). Users’ resistance towards radical innovations: The case of the self-driving car. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour , 44 , 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.10.013 Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., & de Winter, J. C. F. (2015). Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour , 32 , 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.014 Lee, Y.-C., & Mirman, J. H. (under review). Parents’ perspectives on using autonomous vehicles to transport children. Transportation Research Part C.