THE ROLE OF DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC VARIABLES IN PERCEPTIONS TOWARDS AUTONOMOUS CARS

Abstract

This study examines the socio-demographic and economic factors that affect consumers’ perceptions and usage intentions toward autonomous vehicles. The effects of variables such as age, gender, marital status, education level, and vehicle ownership on consumer attitudes were analysed. The results show that younger individuals, 34 years and under, have a more positive and innovative attitude towards autonomous vehicles. In contrast, men have a higher intention to use autonomous vehicles in the future than women. Regarding marital status, it was found that single individuals have higher perceptions of innovativeness and anthropomorphism than married individuals. While vehicle ownership creates a difference in the perception of innovativeness, income level did not significantly affect perceptions. In terms of education level, individuals with lower education levels have higher perceptions of anthropomorphism and positive attitudes. The study emphasizes that demographic factors such as age and education should be focused on to increase the adoption of autonomous vehicles.

Keywords

• Autonomous Vehicle
• Consumer Perception
• Socio-Demographic Factors
• Anthropomorphism
• Innovativeness.

Otonom Araçlara Yönelik Algılarda Demografik ve Ekonomik Değişkenlerin Rolü

Abstract

Bu çalışma, tüketicilerin otonom araçlara yönelik algılarını ve kullanım niyetlerini etkileyen sosyodemografik ve ekonomik faktörleri incelemektedir. Yaş, cinsiyet, medeni durum, eğitim düzeyi ve araç sahipliği gibi değişkenlerin tüketici tutumları üzerindeki etkileri analiz edilmiştir. Sonuçlar, 34 yaş ve altındaki daha genç bireylerin otonom araçlara yönelik daha olumlu ve yenilikçi bir tutuma sahip olduklarını göstermektedir. Buna karşılık, erkeklerin gelecekte otonom araç kullanma niyetleri kadınlara göre daha yüksektir. Medeni durum açısından, bekâr bireylerin evli bireylere kıyasla daha yüksek yenilikçilik ve antropomorfizm algılarına sahip oldukları bulunmuştur. Araç sahipliği yenilikçilik algısında bir farklılık yaratırken, gelir düzeyinin algılar üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi olmadığı belirlenmiştir. Eğitim düzeyi açısından ise, daha düşük eğitim düzeyine sahip bireylerin daha yüksek antropomorfizm algılarına ve daha olumlu tutumlara sahip oldukları tespit edilmiştir. Çalışma, otonom araçların benimsenmesini artırmak için yaş ve eğitim gibi demografik faktörlere odaklanılması gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır.

Keywords

• Otonom Araçlar
• Tüketici Algısı
• Sosyo-Demografik Faktörler
• İnsanbiçimcilik
• Yenilikçilik.

References

1. Asadi-Shekari, Z., Saadi, I., & Cools, M. (2022). Applying machine learning to explore feelings about sharing the road with autonomous vehicles as a bicyclist or as a pedestrian. Sustainability, 14(3), 1898. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031898
2. Baccarella, C., Wagner, T., Scheiner, C., Maier, L., & Voigt, K. (2020). Investigating consumer acceptance of autonomous technologies: the case of self-driving automobiles. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(4), 1210-1232. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejim-09-2019-0245
3. Bilici, F. (2024). Tüketim Psikolojisi ve Pazarlama: Güncel Trendler. Bursa: Ekin Yayınevi.
4. Bilici, F., & Türkoğlu, İ. K. (2024). Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Technology Acceptance: The Role of Technological Readiness on Consumers' Attitudes Towards Driverless Cars and Intention to Use in the Future. Fırat Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 36(1), 383-407.
5. Burgos-Benavides, L. (2023). Instruments of child-to-parent violence: systematic review and meta-analysis. Healthcare, 11(24), 3192. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11243192
6. Burns, C., Oliveira, L., Thomas, P., Iyer, S., & Birrell, S. (2019). Pedestrian decision-making responses to external human-machine interface designs for autonomous vehicles. https://doi.org/10.1109/ivs.2019.8814030
7. Coppock, A. and McClellan, O. (2019). Validating the demographic, political, psychological, and experimental results obtained from a new source of online survey respondents. Research & Politics, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168018822174
8. Dixit, A., Kumar, C., & Allam, Z. (2021). Safety and risk analysis of autonomous vehicles using computer vision and neural networks. Vehicles, 3(3), 595-617. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles3030036

9. Faisal, A., Yigitcanlar, T., Kamruzzaman, M., & Currie, G. (2019). Understanding autonomous vehicles. Journal of transport and land use, 12(1), 45-72.
10. Gardner, B. and Abraham, C. (2010). Going green? modeling the impact of environmental concerns and perceptions of transportation alternatives on decisions to drive. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(4), 831-849. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00600.x
11. Garidis, K., Ulbricht, L., Rossmann, A., & Schmäh, M. (2020). Toward a user acceptance model of autonomous driving. https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2020.170
12. Gursoy, D., Chi, O. H., Lu, L., & Nunkoo, R. (2019). Consumers' acceptance of artificially intelligent (AI) device use in service delivery. International Journal of Information Management, 49, 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.03.008
13. Huang, T. (2023). Psychological factors affecting potential users’ intention to use autonomous vehicles. Plos One, 18(3), e0282915. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282915
14. Huch, S., Ongel, A., Betz, J., & Lienkamp, M. (2021). Multi-task end-to-end self-driving architecture for cav platoons. Sensors, 21(4), 1039. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21041039
15. Huszár, S. and Majó-Petri, Z. (2020). What drives you to use a driverless car ? https://doi.org/10.14232/eucrge.2020.proc.3
16. Iortyom, E., Mazinyo, S., & Nel, W. (2018). Analysis of the economic impact of rural enterprise development hub project on maize farmers in mqanduli, south africa. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, (00). https://doi.org/10.18805/ijare.a-319
17. Iqbal, J., Kousar, S., & Hameed, W. (2018). Antecedents of sustainable social entrepreneurship initiatives in pakistan and outcomes: collaboration between quadruple helix sectors. Sustainability, 10(12), 4539. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124539
18. Jager, J., Putnick, D., & Bornstein, M. (2017). Ii. more than just convenient: the scientific merits of homogeneous convenience samples. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 82(2), 13-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/mono.12296
19. Jeong, M., Zhang, D., Morgan, J., Ross, J., Osman, A., Boynton, M., … & Brewer, N. (2018). Similarities and differences in tobacco control research findings from convenience and probability samples. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 53(5), 476-485. https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kay059
20. Jing, P., Huang, H., Ran, B., Zhan, F., & Shi, Y. (2019). Exploring the factors affecting mode choice intention of autonomous vehicle based on an extended theory of planned behavior—a case study in china. Sustainability, 11(4), 1155. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041155
21. Kim, H. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52
22. Klein, J., Kofahl, C., & Ziegler, E. (2022). Development and psychometric properties of a brief generic cancer knowledge scale for patients (bcks-10). Cancer Causes & Control, 33(9), 1173-1179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-022-01601-x
23. Landers, R. and Behrend, T. (2015). An inconvenient truth: arbitrary distinctions between organizational, mechanical turk, and other convenience samples. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 142-164. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2015.13
24. Lazaro, J., Coves, M., Sarmiento, S., Altabas, J., & Lerin, A. (2018). 5g connected vehicles supported by optical fiber access. https://doi.org/10.1109/icton.2018.8473836
25. Li, S., Xue, Q., Shi, D., Li, X., & Zhang, W. (2022). Recursive least squares based refinement network for vehicle trajectory prediction. Electronics, 11(12), 1859. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11121859
26. Li, Z., Niu, J., Li, Z., Chen, Y., Wang, Y., & Jiang, B. (2022). The impact of individual differences on the acceptance of self-driving buses: A case study of Nanjing, China. Sustainability, 14(18), 11425.
27. Meidutė‐Kavaliauskienė, I., Yıldız, B., Çiğdem, Ş., & Činčikaitė, R. (2021). Do people prefer cars that people don’t drive? a survey study on autonomous vehicles. Energies, 14(16), 4795. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14164795
28. Mesch, G. and Dodel, M. (2023). The acceptance of driverless cars: the roles of perceived outcomes and technology usefulness. American Behavioral Scientist, 67(14), 1736-1754. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642221127250
29. Mujakachi, T. C. and Tsvere, M. (2023). A study on externally driven costs for road freight transportation in zimbabwe. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 12(3), 12-17. https://doi.org/10.59160/ijscm.v12i3.6180
30. Mullinix, K., Leeper, T., Druckman, J., & Freese, J. (2015). The generalizability of survey experiments. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 2(2), 109-138. https://doi.org/10.1017/xps.2015.19
31. Mulyono, H., Fikri, M. H., & Syamsuri, A. R. (2023). Servicecape analysis to customer satisfaction in delivery service company with customer trust as intervening variable. Jurnal Manajemen Industri Dan Logistik, 7(1), 01-10. https://doi.org/10.30988/jmil.v7i1.1023
32. Oduro, C. Y., Atta-Boateng, F., Owusu-Ansah, J. K., & Amoako, C. (2024). Residents’ awareness and attitude towards urban wetlands in accra, ghana: implications for sustainable urban development. Journal of Science and Technology (Ghana), 42(2), 93-123. https://doi.org/10.4314/just.v42i2.7
33. Orçan, F. (2020). Parametric or non-parametric: skewness to test normality for mean comparison. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 7(2), 255-265. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.656077
34. Othman, K. (2021). Public acceptance and perception of autonomous vehicles: a comprehensive review. Ai and Ethics, 1(3), 355-387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00041-8
35. Özdemir, E., Kılıç, S. & Çakırer, M. A., (2019). Satış Promosyonları ve Kredi Kartı Kullanımının Tüketicilerin Plansız Satın Alma ve Satın Alma Sonrası Pişmanlık Davranışı Üzerindeki Etkileri. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, vol.11, no.4, 2528-2545.
36. Paden, B., Ćáp, M., Yong, S., Yershov, D., & Frazzoli, E. (2016). A survey of motion planning and control techniques for self-driving urban vehicles. Ieee Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 1(1), 33-55. https://doi.org/10.1109/tiv.2016.2578706
37. Paluri, R. and Mehra, S. (2016). Financial attitude based segmentation of women in india: an exploratory study. The International Journal of Bank Marketing, 34(5), 670-689. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijbm-05-2015-0073
38. Parasuraman, A., & Colby, C. L. (2015). An updated and streamlined technology readiness index: TRI 2.0. Journal of service research, 18(1), 59-74.
39. Rese, A., Schreiber, S., & Baier, D. (2014). Technology acceptance modeling of augmented reality at the point of sale: Can surveys be replaced by an analysis of online reviews? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(5), 869–876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.02.011
40. Rosário, S., Azevedo, L., Fonseca, J., Nienhaus, A., Nübling, M., & Costa, J. (2017). The portuguese long version of the copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire ii (copsoq ii) – a validation study. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-017-0170-9
41. Ruslim, T., Setiawan, K., Hapsari, C. G., & Herwindiati, D. E. (2023). Factors that increase purchase intention of electric cars in Jakarta. IJAEB, 1(3), 968-977. https://doi.org/10.24912/ijaeb.v1i3.968-977
42. Schöller, C., Aravantinos, V., Lay, F., & Knoll, A. (2020). What the constant velocity model can teach us about pedestrian motion prediction. Ieee Robotics and Automation Letters, 5(2), 1696-1703. https://doi.org/10.1109/lra.2020.2969925
43. Speak, A., Escobedo, F., Russo, A., & Zerbe, S. (2018). Comparing convenience and probability sampling for urban ecology applications. Journal of Applied Ecology, 55(5), 2332-2342. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13167
44. Ssekakubo, J. L., Namukasa, J. (2023). Attitude and intention to adopt eco-cars in uganda: the moderating effect of culture orientation. Business Management Review, 26(2), 20-35. https://doi.org/10.56279/bmrj.v26i2.2
45. Tanwir, N. and Hamzah, M. (2020). Predicting purchase intention of hybrid electric vehicles: evidence from an emerging economy. World Electric Vehicle Journal, 11(2), 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/wevj11020035
46. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144
47. Tian, Y. and Wang, X. (2022). A study on psychological determinants of users' autonomous vehicles adoption from anthropomorphism and utaut perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.986800
48. Useche, S. A., Peñaranda-Ortega, M., Gonzalez-Marin, A., & Llamazares, F. J. (2022). Assessing the effect of drivers’ gender on their intention to use fully automated vehicles. Applied Sciences, 12(1), 103.
49. Wang, J., Zhang, L., Huang, Y., & Zhao, J. (2020). Safety of autonomous vehicles. Journal of advanced transportation, 2020(1), 8867757.
50. Weng, J., Kuek, M. S. W., Hock, R. L. T., Kasuma, J., Palaneeswaran, E., & Panarina, E. (2023). Purchase behaviour towards proton and perodua cars in Malaysia: a preliminary study of the what and why. MAJCAFE, 31(1), 530-553. https://doi.org/10.60016/majcafe.v31.20
51. Widyanti, A., Erlangga, R., Sutarto, A. P., Trapsilawati, F., Ansori, N., Woodman, R., Pawitra, T. A., & Rifai, A. P. (2024). Driving forward together: The common intention of Indonesians in different residential areas to use autonomous vehicles. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 24, 101049.
52. Zheng, Y., Wang, J., & Li, K. (2020). Smoothing traffic flow via control of autonomous vehicles. Ieee Internet of Things Journal, 7(5), 3882-3896. https://doi.org/10.1109/jiot.2020.2966506
53. Zortul, M., Waqar, T., & Ersoy, S. (2020). Game theory-based autonomous vehicle control via image processing. In Autonomous Vehicle and Smart Traffic. IntechOpen https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93246