Yapay zekâ kontrollü uçuş operasyonlarının yolcular tarafından kabulü: Güven ve risk algısı

Abstract

Havacılık ve uzay teknolojileri, modern çağın en ileri yeniliklerinden bazılarını temsil etmektedir. Yapay Zekâ (YZ), bu sektörde dönüştürücü bir güç hâline gelmiş ve gelecekte tamamen otonom uçakların hava taşımacılığını gerçekleştirebileceği bir dönemin yolunu açmıştır. Bu olasılık, özellikle yolcu kabulü gibi sosyo-teknik zorlukları da beraberinde getirmektedir. Bu çalışma, YZ kontrollü uçaklarda uçma niyetini incelemek için teknoloji kabul modelinden yararlanmaktadır. 258 katılımcıdan toplanan veriler yapısal eşitlik modellemesi (YEM) ile analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, güvenin algılanan faydayı önemli ölçüde artırırken algılanan riski azalttığını ve modelde merkezi bir rol oynadığını göstermektedir. Buna karşılık, algılanan risk algılanan faydayı olumsuz etkilemektedir. Algılanan fayda, kullanım niyetinin en güçlü belirleyicisi olarak ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bir diğer önemli bulgu ise, algılanan kullanım kolaylığının modelde işlevsel olmamasıdır. Bu durum, doğrudan deneyimlenmemiş yüksek riskli teknolojilerde değerlendirmelerin, kullanışlılıktan çok güven ve risk algısına dayandığını göstermektedir. Önerilen model, algılanan kullanışlılık ve kullanma niyetini güçlü biçimde açıklamaktadır. Bulgular, YZ tabanlı havacılığın toplumsal kabulü için güvenin kritik önemini vurgulamakta ve geliştiriciler, havayolu şirketleri ve politika yapıcılar için uygulanabilir içgörüler sunmaktadır.

Keywords

• Teknoloji kabulü
• yapay zeka kontrollü havaaraçları
• güven
• risk algısı

Passenger acceptance of AI-controlled flight operations: Trust and risk perspectives

Abstract

Aerospace technologies represent some of the most advanced innovations of the modern age. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a transformative force in this sector, paving the way for a future where fully autonomous aircraft may carry out air transport. This possibility also brings with it socio-technical challenges, particularly regarding passenger acceptance. This study utilizes a technology acceptance model to examine the intention to fly in AI-controlled aircraft. Data collected from 258 participants were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM). The findings show that trust significantly increases perceived usefulness while decreasing perceived risk, playing a central role in the model. Conversely, perceived risk negatively affects perceived usefulness. Perceived usefulness emerges as the strongest predictor of intention to use. Another important finding is that perceived ease of use is not functional in the model. This suggests that in high-risk technologies that have not been directly experienced, evaluations are based more on trust and risk perception than on usability. The proposed model strongly explains both perceived usefulness and intention to use. The findings highlight the critical importance of trust for societal acceptance of AI-based aviation and offer actionable insights for developers, airlines, and policymakers.

Keywords

• Technology acceptance
• ai-controlled aircraft
• trust
• perceived risk

Ethical Statement

This study has been found to be in compliance with research and publication ethics by the İskenderun Technical University Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Board's decision with number 10, dated 03.11.2025. This article meets the standards of research and publication ethics.

References

1. Abuhassna, H., Yahaya, N., Zakaria, M. A. Z. M., Zaid, N. M., Samah, N. A., Awae, F., Nee, C. K., & Alsharif, A. H. (2023). Trends on using the technology acceptance model (TAM) for online learning: A bibliometric and content analysis. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 13(1), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.1.1788
2. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
3. Avetisyan, L., Abolarin, E., Zakarian, V., Yang, X. J., & Zhou, F. (2025). The mediating effects of emotions on trust through risk perception and system performance in automated driving. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103642
4. Bağlıbel, M., Samancıoğlu, M., & Summak, M. S. (2010). Okul yöneticileri tarafından e-okul uygulamasının genişletilmiş teknoloji kabul modeline göre değerlendirilmesi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(13), 331–348.
5. Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00122
6. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
7. Belton, O., & Dillon, S. (2021). Futures of autonomous flight: Using a collaborative storytelling game to assess anticipatory assumptions. Futures, 128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2020.102688
8. Bliss, T. J., & Wise, A. J. (2023). Examining the future of automation in commercialized flight and its impact on airline pilots. The Collegiate Aviation Review, 41(2). https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.24.100205

9. Carlsson, L. (2024). Technology acceptance of virtual reality for aircraft maintenance training. Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.
10. Çetin, E., Cano, A., Deransy, R., Tres, S., & Barrado, C. (2022). Implementing mitigations for improving societal acceptance of urban air mobility. Drones, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/drones6020028
11. Chalermpong, S., Thaithatkul, P., & Ratanawaraha, A. (2024). Trust and intention to use autonomous vehicles in Bangkok, Thailand. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2024.101185
12. Chan, E. T. H., Li, T. E., & Schwanen, T. (2025). Societal acceptance of advanced aerial mobility in China’s Greater Bay Area among young- and middle-aged adults. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2025.02.008
13. Çınar, E., & Tuncal, A. (2023a). A comprehensive analysis of society’s perspective on urban air mobility. Journal of Aviation, 7(3), 317–328. https://doi.org/10.30518/jav.1324997
14. Çınar, E., & Tuncal, A. (2023b). The future of UAVs in urban air mobility: Public perception and concerns. Türkiye İnsansız Hava Araçları Dergisi, 5(2), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.51534/tiha.1381175
15. Clarke, L., & Beck, U. (1994). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. Social Forces, 73(1). https://doi.org/10.2307/2579937
16. Clothier, R. A., Greer, D. A., Greer, D. G., & Mehta, A. M. (2015). Risk perception and the public acceptance of drones. Risk Analysis, 35(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12330
17. Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. Management, Ph.D. https://doi.org/oclc/56932490
18. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
19. Dhagarra, D., Goswami, M., & Kumar, G. (2020). Impact of trust and privacy concerns on technology acceptance in healthcare: An Indian perspective. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104164
20. Dieter, M., Sprenger, E., Pasnicu, O., Staudt, J., & Ellenrieder, N. (2024). Virtual flight deck crew assistance utilizing artificial intelligence methods to interpret NOTAMs: a user acceptance study. CEAS Aeronautical Journal, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13272-024-00767-1
21. Djartov, B., & Würfel, J. (2025). Navigating decisions in the cockpit: The intelligent pilot advisory system. In Progress in IS: Part F820, 305–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-83512-4_18
22. Fondevila-Gascón, J. F., Gutiérrez-Aragón, Ó., Lopez-Lopez, D., Curiel-Barrios, G., & Alabart-Algueró, J. (2025). Passenger perceptions of artificial intelligence in airline operations: Implications for air transport management. Journal of Air Transport Management, 129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2025.102874
23. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
24. Gao, S., Lu, Z., Luan, H., Yin, M., & Wang, L. (2025). AI pilot in the cockpit: An investigation of public acceptance. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 41(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2301856
25. Halawi, L., Miller, M. D., & Holley, S. J. (2024). Artificial intelligence in aviation: A path analysis. Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research, 33(4). https://doi.org/10.58940/2329-258x.2061
26. Hoff, K. A., & Bashir, M. (2015). Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human Factors, 57(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720814547570
27. Holley, S., Miller, M., & Halawi, L. (2024). Artificial intelligence on the digital flight deck: A continuum with parallel trajectories. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 68(1), 1260–1264. https://doi.org/10.1177/10711813241260403
28. Johnson, R. A., Miller, E. E., & Conrad, S. (2022). Technology adoption and acceptance of urban air mobility systems: Identifying public perceptions and integration factors. International Journal of Aerospace Psychology, 32(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/24721840.2022.2100394
29. Kenesei, Z., Ásványi, K., Kökény, L., Jászberényi, M., Miskolczi, M., Gyulavári, T., & Syahrivar, J. (2022). Trust and perceived risk: How different manifestations affect the adoption of autonomous vehicles. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2022.08.022
30. Kim, S. D. (2024). Application and challenges of the technology acceptance model in elderly healthcare: Insights from ChatGPT. Technologies, 12(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies12050068
31. Kirwan, B. (2024). The impact of artificial intelligence on future aviation safety culture. Future Transportation, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/futuretransp4020018
32. Komasová, S., Tesař, J., & Soukup, P. (2020). Perception of drone related risks in Czech society. Technology in Society, 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101252
33. Lee, C., Bae, B., Lee, Y. L., & Pak, T. Y. (2023). Societal acceptance of urban air mobility based on the technology adoption framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122807
34. Macsween-George, S. L. (2003). Will the public accept UAVs for cargo and passenger transportation? IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings, 1. https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2003.1235066
35. Marangunić, N., & Granić, A. (2015). Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-014-0348-1
36. Martins, C., Oliveira, T., & Popovič, A. (2014). Understanding the internet banking adoption: A unified theory of acceptance and use of technology and perceived risk application. International Journal of Information Management, 34(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.06.002
37. McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.3.334.81
38. Menig, A., Becker, N., & Kleudgen, J. P. (2025). Investigating the role of an AI-based assistance system for the decision-making process of pilots- an interview study. Transportation Research Procedia, 88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2025.05.021
39. Molesworth, B. R. C., & Koo, T. T. R. (2016). The influence of attitude towards individuals’ choice for a remotely piloted commercial flight: A latent class logit approach. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2016.06.017
40. Mustafa, A. S., & Garcia, M. B. (2021). Theories integrated with technology acceptance model (TAM) in Online learning acceptance and continuance intention: A systematic review. 2021 1st Conference on Online Teaching for Mobile Education, OT4ME 2021. https://doi.org/10.1109/OT4ME53559.2021.9638934
41. Piera, M. A., Munoz, J. L., Gil, D., Martin, G., & Manzano, J. (2022). A socio-technical simulation model for the design of the future single pilot cockpit: An opportunity to improve pilot performance. IEEE Access, 10. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3153490
42. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. In Journal of Applied Psychology (Vol. 88, Number 5). https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
43. Rice, S., Winter, S. R., Mehta, R., & Ragbir, N. K. (2019). What factors predict the type of person who is willing to fly in an autonomous commercial airplane? Journal of Air Transport Management, 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2018.12.008
44. Sagnier, C., Loup-Escande, E., Lourdeaux, D., Thouvenin, I., & Valléry, G. (2020). User acceptance of virtual reality: An extended technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 36(11). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2019.1708612
45. Savaş, T., On, M., & Özdemir, U. (2025). A systematic literature analysis of the public perception of UAVs. Türkiye İnsansız Hava Araçları Dergisi, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.51534/tiha.1623582
46. Schon, J., Bruder, C., Liebherr, M., & Theis, S. (2025). Cleared for takeoff - artificial intelligence acceptance in air traffic control. CHIWORK 2025 - Proceedings of the 4th Annual Symposium on Human-Computer Interaction for Work. https://doi.org/10.1145/3729176.3729185
47. Schwesig, R., Brich, I., Buder, J., Huff, M., & Said, N. (2023). Using artificial intelligence (AI)? Risk and opportunity perception of AI predict people’s willingness to use AI. Journal of Risk Research, 26(10). https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2249927
48. Shao, C., Nah, S., Makady, H., & McNealy, J. (2025). Understanding user attitudes towards ai-enabled technologies: An integrated model of self-efficacy, TAM, and AI ethics. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 41(5). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2331858
49. Strong, R., Samu, J., Pan, B. D., & Liu, D. (2025). Pilot Acceptance of wearable fatigue monitoring technology using extended technology acceptance model. Journal of Air Transportation. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.d0462
50. Sun, H., & Zhang, P. (2006). The role of moderating factors in user technology acceptance. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 64(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.04.013
51. Tang, D., & Chen, L. (2011). A review of the evolution of research on information technology acceptance model. BMEI 2011 - Proceedings 2011 International Conference on Business Management and Electronic Information, 2. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICBMEI.2011.5917980
52. Tarhini, A., Elyas, T., Akour, M. A., & Al-Salti, Z. (2016). Technology, demographic characteristics and e-learning acceptance: A conceptual model based on extended technology acceptance model. Higher Education Studies, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v6n3p72
53. Tokadlı, G., Dorneich, M. C., & Matessa, M. (2021). Toward human–autonomy teaming in single-pilot operations: Domain analysis and requirements. Journal of Air Transportation, 29(4). https://doi.org/10.2514/1.D0240
54. Vance, S. M., & Malik, A. S. (2015). Analysis of factors that may be essential in the decision to fly on fully autonomous passenger airliners. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 49(7). https://doi.org/10.1002/atr.1308
55. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
56. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 36(1). https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
57. Vu, K. P. L., Lachter, J., Battiste, V., & Strybel, T. Z. (2018). Single pilot operations in domestic commercial aviation. Human Factors, 60(6). https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720818791372
58. Weerasinghe, S., & Hindagolla, M. (2017). Technology acceptance model in the domains of LIS and education: A review of selected literature. Library Philosophy and Practice, 2017.
59. Winter, S. R., Rice, S., & Lamb, T. L. (2020). A prediction model of consumer’s willingness to fly in autonomous air taxis. Journal of Air Transport Management, 89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101926
60. Wongyai, P. H., Suwannawong, K., Wannakul, P., Thepchalerm, T., & Arreras, T. (2024). The adoption of self-service check-in kiosks among commercial airline passengers. Heliyon, 10(19). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38676
61. Yavaş, V., & Yavaş Tez, Ö. (2021). Kentsel hava taşımacılığı kabul ve kullanım modeli: Bir ölçek geliştirme çalışması. Journal of Aviation Research, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.51785/jar.962735
62. Yılmaz-Halıcı, Ö., Yıldız, E., Çeken, S., Beyhan-Acar, A., & Özveren, C. G. (2025). Understanding Public perceptions of unmanned aerial vehicles in Türkiye. Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors. https://doi.org/10.1027/2192-0923/a000303
63. Yoo, J., Choe, Y., & Rim, S. I. (2022). Risk perceptions using urban and advanced air mobility (UAM/AAM) by applying a mixed method approach. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(24). https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416338
64. Zhang, G., & Yu, T. (2025). Association between generative AI self-efficacy and generative AI acceptance: The mediating role of generative AI trust and the moderating role of generative AI risk perception. Acta Psychologica, 261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105791
65. Zhang, K. (2021). Application of data mining based on machine learning in automobile power prediction. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. https://doi.org/10.1145/3501409.3501532
66. Zhang, T., Tao, D., Qu, X., Zhang, X., Lin, R., & Zhang, W. (2019). The roles of initial trust and perceived risk in public’s acceptance of automated vehicles. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.11.018
67. Zhu, W., Huang, L., Zhou, X., Li, X., Shi, G., Ying, J., & Wang, C. (2025). Could AI Ethical anxiety, perceived ethical risks and ethical awareness about AI influence university students’ use of generative AI products? An ethical perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 41(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2323277