Citation

Pyrialakou VD, Gkartzonikas C, Gatlin JD, Gkritza K. J. Saf. Res. 2020; 72: 249-258.

Affiliation

Lyles School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, United States. Electronic address: nadia@purdue.edu.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, U.S. National Safety Council, Publisher Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.jsr.2019.12.017

PMID

32199570

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: While improved safety is a highly cited potential benefit of autonomous vehicles (AVs), at the same time a frequently cited concern is the new safety challenges that AVs introduce. The literature lacks a rigorous exploration of the safety perceptions of road users who will interact with AVs, including vulnerable road users. Addressing this gap is essential because the successful integration of AVs into transportation systems hinges on an understanding of how all road users will react to their presence.

METHODS: A stated preference survey of the Phoenix, Arizona, metropolitan statistical area (Phoenix MSA) was conducted in July 2018. A series of ordered probit models was estimated to analyze the survey responses and identify differences between various population groups with respect to the perceived safety of driving, cycling, and walking near AVs.

RESULTS: Greater exposure to and awareness of AVs are not uniformly associated with increases in perceived safety. Various attitudinal factors, level of AV automation, and other intrinsic and extrinsic factors are related to safety perceptions of driving, walking, and cycling near AVs. Socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, such as gender, age, income, employment, and automobile usage and ownership, have various relationships with perceived safety.

CONCLUSIONS: Cycling near an AV was perceived as the least safe activity, followed by walking and then driving near an AV. Both similarities and differences were observed among the factors associated with the perceived safety of different travel alternatives. Practical Applications: Public perception will guide the development and adoption of AVs directly and indirectly. To help maintain control of public perception, transportation planners, decision makers, and other stakeholders should consider more deliberate and targeted messaging to address the concerns of different road users. In addition, more careful pilot testing and more direct attention to vulnerable road users may help avoid a backlash that could delay the rollout of this technology.

Copyright © 2020 National Safety Council and Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Language: en

Keywords

Attitudes; Autonomous vehicles; Ordered probit models; Perceived safety; Vulnerable road users