Driver and Pedestrian Trust Analysis On Integration of Autonomous Vehicles To Infrastructure of Turkey

Due to development in technology; technological revolution has been occurred in many sectors. The automotive sector is at the head of these technological revolutions. Autonomous vehicle technology and the development of sensors, cameras, radar and decision-making mechanisms under this technology have made the design and development of autonomous vehicles possible for every company. The aim of this study is to analyze the public's confidence in autonomous vehicles. In this study, driver and pedestrian/passenger trust was analyzed with online survey which was performed with 107 participants. Furthermore, briefly autonomous vehicle market analysis was performed with same survey and same participants. While 60,7% of participants have basics knowledge about autonomous vehicles and their systems, 10,3% of attenders didn’t have any knowledge before. The presence of autonomous vehicles in the traffic is not disturb 73,8% of participants, conversely it can be problem for 6.5% of attenders. 63,5% of participants can drive on same line with autonomous vehicle while 9,6% of attenders do not prefer that. 60,7% of respondents have trust to autonomous vehicle as pedestrian who crosses over. 56,1% of participants prefer domestic produced autonomous vehicle instead of other brand who produces autonomous vehicle and 66,3% of attenders prefer autonomous vehicle in lieu classical vehicle in case of availability. According to this analysis, majority of community in Turkey have positive perspective on autonomous vehicle.


Introduction
According to World Health Organization (WHO, 2015) 1.2 million people die in traffic accidents each year. Autonomous vehicle is an important technology to reduce a portion of those deaths due to driver errors (Kyriakidis, Happee & de Winter, 2015). With technological advancements about trajectory planning, trajectory tracking, sensing, vehicle control and more; developments about autonomous vehicle has been suddenly increased. Therefore, Avs are anticipated to enter and corner the market in near future with their several benefits such as providing higher safety, mobility and comfort. At the same time, Avs can reduce the number of vehicle ownership and can be a solution for traffic congestion problems. While Avs provide several benefits, a main barrier to its adoption is in the public trust about AVs (Kaur & Rampersad, 2018), (Bansal, Kockelman & Singh, 2016). ]. Although many benefits which provide safety, comfort and efficiency; major concerns exist to adopt this technology to the public. These concerns generally related to trust, privacy and reliability. Before the adoption process; user preferences, public concern and their trust level should be analyzed.
According to the development of AV technology, trust and opinion of the public has become extremely important. Especially for Turkey as developing country, adoption of the new technology is not as easy as in other developed countries. In this area, there is one study (Nasir & Ozcelik, 2017) about consumer attitudes towards autonomous vehicles in Turkey. However, just general autonomous vehicle perspective was examined without driver and pedestrian/passenger(P-P) consideration in Turkish language.
In this study, confidence of driver and P-P in AVs was analyzed. For this analysis, online survey with 107 participants who live in Turkey was conducted in August 2018. This analysis includes general view of AVs of public, autonomous vehicle-P-P interaction, autonomous vehicle-driver interaction, future though of participants for autonomous vehicle technology and perspective of public about national autonomous vehicle.

Literature Review
As several governments have started to support testing and developing of autonomous vehicles, public perception of autonomous vehicle has become important. The survey with 1533 participants from the UK, Australia and USA has been performed by (Schoettle & Sivak, 2014). As a result, many of participants believed that impact of autonomous vehicle both less and fewer acute collisions. Nevertheless, they also had several concerns about AVs travelling. Safety consequences because of equipment and system failures are main concern. Besides, they were concerned that they don't have control for the vehicle. There were gender difference on nearly all questions with females less confidence by AVs than males. 5000 responses from 109 countries (40 countries with at least 25 respondents) are collected (Kyriakidis, Happee & de Winter, 2015) to investigate user acceptance, concerns, and willingness to buy autonomous vehicles. Results showed that attendees, on average, found manual driving the most enjoyable mode of driving and 22% of the respondents did not want to pay more than $0 for an autonomous vehicle. Result of Ipsos MORI research (Missel, 2014) shows that the public has yet to see benefits and advantage of autonomous vehicle and just 18% of the British public Alphanumeric Journal Volume 7, Issue 3, 2019 think that it is important for car manufacturers to focus on driverless technologies. Men are significantly more likely to deem it important than women. Older people (aged 55+) are less likely to take up seriously it than the youngest group. (aged 16 -24). AVs hold significantly greater charm to people who aim to buy a new vehicle in the next three years. Study for Turkey (Nasir & Ozcelik, 2017) was conducted with 290 people. 89% of respondents who attended the survey conscious about autonomous vehicles, nevertheless only %23 of them have knowledge about AVs technology. While a majority of the respondents (67%) have positive attitude toward autonomous vehicles, only small portion of them (13%) found the methodology of autonomous vehicles as unpleasant.
Previous studies show positive side of public opinion about autonomous vehicles (Begg, 2014), (Casley et al., 2013), (Missel, 2014). At the same time, attendees also indicate reluctance. Continental carried out a survey (Sommer, 2013) in China, Japan, US and Germany exuded that 59% of participants considered autonomous driving a useful advancement. 54% did not believe the safety operation of AVs and 31% stated that they don't have any information about development of AVs. Particularly, people in Japan (29%) were more unaware of autonomous vehicle developments to those in Germany (67%) and China (64%). Online survey (Xu & Fan, 2018) with 1164 participants be realized about investigating the risk perceptions and expectation of insurance demand for autonomous vehicles in China. The findings unclose that autonomous vehicles are familiar and have a positive impression in China. Of the respondents, 42.35% and 45.28% expect lower risk for AVs. On the other hand, the results of a survey conducted with Tesla drivers about their experiences with two ADAS systems which are Autopilot and Summon were reported (Dikmen & Burns, 2017). Drivers who experienced unexpected behaviors from their vehicles reported lower levels of trust. In time, trust in autonomous systems increased irrespective of experience.

Background
Autonomous vehicle(AV) is a vehicle which uses a several sensors, camera, radar and artificial intelligence (AI) to travel from departure to destination point without any human intervention. These vehicles also call as "driverless vehicle", "self-driving vehicle" and "robotic vehicle". Five levels of autonomous driving are defined by the Society of Automobile Engineers (SAE) and Figure 1 shows these 5 levels. Level 0 doesn't have any automation and driver needs full time performance in this level. Although licensed driver is required for Level0, Level 1 and Level 2 , licensed driver is not required for Level 3, Level 4 and Level 5 . Technology trust is another important background knowledge about this study. There are 2 major psychosocial model for the using technological acceptance such as Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). TAM has been applied to evaluate acceptance of technology including in vehicles (Chen & Chen, 2011). The TAM supposes that perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness foresee intentions to use the system.
Trust of AVs technology can be examined with trust of automation. Autonomous vehicles are operated based on sensing, decision making, actuating by automation. Trust is key in mediating the relationship between automation and humans, operating in a similar way to trust between humans (Sheridan, 2002). Trust is a main concept in human-automation interaction. Improper calibration of trust for the automated system might induce to overreliance and underreliance of automation (Parasuraman & Riley, 1997) and reducing performance and less adoption can be result of that. Improper calibration of trust for the automated system might induce to overreliance and underreliance of automation (Parasuraman & Riley, 1997) and reducing performance and less adaptation can be result of that. Three critical factors which are performance, process and purpose are identified in trusting an automated Alphanumeric Journal Volume 7, Issue 3, 2019 system (Lee & See, 2004). Trust on automation increases as comprehended reliability of automation increases (Ross, Szalma, Hancock, Barnett & Taylor, 2008). Trust decreases with error on automation (Lee & Moray, 1992), but providing reasons of why the error consisted (observing the process; (Lee & See, 2004)) can increase trust and reliance spite of the errors (Dikmen & Burns, 2017), (Dzindolet, Peterson, Pomranky, Pierce & Beck, 2003).

Methodology
Adaptation of new technology is quite hard for the developing countries such as Turkey. Before this adaptation, analyzing the perspective of users according to this new technology is necessary. The main purpose of this survey is analyze the general view of the public towards AVs, analysis of the confidence of the drivers in autonomous vehicles and the analysis of the confidence of P-P in autonomous vehicles. At the same time, the prediction of the AV technology's future for the infrastructure of Turkey was asked (for 2023 and 2030). Future estimation and trust analysis can be compare for the accurate result.
This survey was designed as 5 parts with "Google Forms" and includes 36 questions. Data collection was performed on between 9 August and 22 August 2018 for different age groups, educational backgrounds and professions from 107 participants in Turkey. All data was considered (107) without any loss. First part includes information about autonomous vehicle, their levels and assumption (Level 5 -autonomous-was considered). Participants-related data were collected in this part. The aim of second part was to measure the knowledge of the participant about autonomous vehicle and to get information about their general perspective. Some basic general (for both driver and P-P) trust measurement questions were located here. In third part, interaction between autonomous vehicle, driver (the person who drives his own or rental vehicle) and perspective of national autonomous vehicle was analyzed. In the fourth part of the survey, the interaction between autonomous vehicle and P-P was investigated. In the last part, ideas of participants about the future use of autonomous vehicle technology were analyzed.  Table 1. shows demographic information of 107 participants with 89 number of respondents, where 83,2% response was male and 18 number of responses corresponding to 16,8% percentage were female. According to the data, age group between 21 and is majority with 53,3% while the 40+ age group is minority with 2.8% participation. 36-40 age group of respondents follows the minority with 3,7%. 15-20, 26-30 and 31-35 age groups of respondents are close each other with 14+, 15,9% and 10,3%. Majority of the respondents were students after 41,1% engineers and 24,3% technician. Educator, academician, officer, housewife and unemployed of respondents are less than quarter of all respondents and the respondents who are working on private sector are 12,2% with 13 participants. 87.7% of respondents have minimum bachelor's degree with 59,8%, master's degree with 24,9+ and PhD degree with 5,6 percent. 2 of respondents have elementary school certificate with 1.9% while 10,3% of respondents graduated from high school. City and region of respondents are important for analyzing data due to trust of cities and regions. Majority of the respondents are from Istanbul with 43,9% while Marmara Region with 12,2% and Ankara as 11,2%. The minority of respondents from Southeastern Region as 0.9%. Data of regions and cities occupies an important place on comparison of trust in Avs. As mentioned at the beginning, this study considers 2 different class as drivers and P-P. 50,5% of respondents are driver while 49.5% of respondents are P-P.
There are 2 assumptions to describe "driver" and "pedestrian/passenger" classes. Assumption1: Driver was assumed as the driver who drive his/her own or rental or Alphanumeric Journal Volume 7, Issue 3, 2019 borrowed vehicle nearly every day (minimum 4 hours/week). Assumption2: Pedestrian/passenger (P-P) class who travels as passenger in personal vehicle, in car sharing service, in car riding service, by public transportation or pedestrian who travels on foot. Basically, the person who doesn't have his/her own or rental vehicle.

Driver aspect Classification Criteria Number of response Response Percentage (%)
Number Driver aspect data according to number of vehicle ownership, daily vehicle usage and driving experience is shown in Figure Z.C. The number of vehicle ownership data shows that, many of the respondents have one vehicle and it constitutes the majority with 58,5% while 22,6% of respondents don't have their own vehicle; probably they use rental vehicle or their family vehicle (For instance, in one family there is vehicle and attendance use one of his/her father vehicle). 11,3% of participants have two vehicles while 7,6% of attenders have more than two. Around one half of the attendances use their vehicle one or less than an hour. Between three and four hours; or more than four hours vehicle usage times are close to each other with 5,7% and 7,6% while 13,2% of participants drive their vehicle between two and three hours. Majority of driving experience is two years or fewer with 30,2% while minority is more than ten years with 13,2%. Nevertheless, response percentage between two and four years, between four and six years are same as 20,8% and 15,1% of participants have experience of six to ten years of driving.  Table 3. shows P-P aspect data according to daily time spent in public transportation (PuT) and daily walking time purpose of travel. Majority of respondents with 46,3% spend 0-1 hour with PuT while minority of respondents with 3,8% spend their 3 or more hours with PuT. While 13% of respondents devote 2-3 hours, 37% travel between 1 and 2 hours by PuT. Both time spend in PuT and walking time complement each other as mode choice model. If the person who wants to travel from A to B by PuT, other mode of transportation must be on foot to reach from departure to PuT stop or from PuT to destination. Possible to say that; due to public transportation usage, the majority of respondents spend their 0-1 hour on foot.

Time spent in public transportation [hour/day]
Alphanumeric Journal Volume 7, Issue 3, 2019

Results
As mentioned, survey has 5 different parts. First part which is about participants' data was evaluated in methodology section as demographic aspects, driver aspects and P-P aspects. Second part of survey include general perspective of attenders in AV s. Third part includes result of interaction between AVs and driver while fourth part contains interaction between AVs and P-P and the last part involves ideas of participants about the future use of autonomous vehicle technology on 2023 and 2030 perspectives. During analysis the results, classification criteria is described as disagree, not decided and agree with coefficient 1,2 and 3. Before the analyzing of the trust in autonomous vehicle; knowledge of participants should be considered, see in Table 4. While 31,8% of attenders saw autonomous vehicle which is below Level three before, just 5% of them travelled with them. While 68,2% of respondents have seen autonomous vehicle which is below the Level three, just 5% of attendances travelled by autonomous vehicle. The majority of respondents know basic and/or system of autonomous vehicle with 2,5047 mean. Just 10,3% don't have enough knowledge about AVs. Presence of autonomous vehicle in the traffic is not disturb many of attenders with 73,8%. 2,6729 shows that, operation of autonomous vehicle on road don't problem for both driver and pedestrian/passenger side. Respondents are abstainer about sleeping in autonomous vehicle while AV is operating with 1,9626 mean. Same result also exists for autonomous shuttle service with 1,9907 mean. Result of these both questions clearly shows that the reason for the abstention of the two questions is the same as each other. Participants in both questions consider the safety of life, while themselves or a relative in the vehicle. In fact, autonomous vehicles in general can create trust; however, there is no confidence in their use. Low level service such as deliver is acceptable with autonomous vehicle and 2,5888 mean proves that. According to future perspective analysis which was performed until 2023, while Istanbul and other metropolis are accepted as major city for the beginning of autonomous vehicles, attenders believe that in East Anatolia and Central Anatolia regions will not be ready for that technology. More than half of participants (54,2%) believe for East Anatolia and Central Anatolia regions cannot handle this process and 26,2% of respondents are abstainer. Due to 2,3458 mean, consequently mostly attenders don't believe integration of this technology in these regions until 2023. With 2,2350 mean, many participants believe that autonomous vehicles can be seen in major cities such as Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir. If we pose the question as 2030 about autonomous operational mode, result looks more pessimistic. As expected, attenders don't believe that all vehicle which manufactured will be autonomous until 2030 with 1,6168 mean. At the same time result also same for private AV operational mode with 1,6262 mean while autonomous public transportation gives prospect with 1,9720 mean.

Discussion
While the participants in this study do not have any concern for autonomous vehicles extremely, it is possible to see that the legal gaps seriously concern consumers in the literature. According to the results of the analysis, possible to say that the people who are unconscious about autonomous vehicle technology do not trust it. Therefore, the public needs to be informed about the autonomous vehicle technology. The confidence of the conscious public about this technology will increase with the awareness raising activities. In the media this technology has to be a big place day by day and people earn trust in this manner. Furthermore, autonomous vehicle manufacturers need to develop a very good marketing policy in the future. Confidence Alphanumeric Journal Volume 7, Issue 3, 2019 in autonomous vehicles will increase with creative marketing policy and state awareness efforts.