The definition of acceptance and acceptability

Driver Acceptance of New Technology: Theory, Measurement and Optimisation

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 11-21

  Adell, Emeli ^a   Várhelyi, András ^b   Nilsson, Lena ^c  

^a Trivector Traffic ^*  (Sweden)

^b LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c SWEDISH NATIONAL ROAD AND TRANSPORT RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84901140335     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (26)

1. Adell, E. 2009. Driver experience and acceptance of driver assistance systems - a case of speed adaptation. Bulletin 251. PhD thesis, Lund University, Sweden.
2. Ausserer, K. and Risser, R. 2005. Intelligent Transport systems and services - chances and risks. Proceedings of the 18th ICTCT workshop, Helsinki, Finland.
3. Brookhuis, K. and Brown, I.D. 1992. Ergonomics and road safety. Impact of science on society, 165: 35-40.
4. Chismar, W.G. and Wiley-Patton, S. 2003. Does the Extended Technology Acceptance Model Apply to Physicians. Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'03), Hawaii, USA.
5. Corbett, C. 2001. The social construction of speeding as not 'real' crime. Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, 2(4): 33-46.
6. Dillon, A. and Morris, M. 1996. User acceptance of new information technology - theories and models, in Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 31: 3-32. Edited by M. Williams. Medford, NJ: Information Today.
7. Franken, V. 2007. Use of navigation systems and consequences for travel behaviour. ECTRI-FEHRL-FERSI Young Researcher Seminar, Brno, Czech Republic.
8. Goldenbeld, C. 2003. Publiek draagvlak voor verkeersveiligheid en veiligheidsmaatregelen. SWOV, Leidschendam. In Defining the public support: what can determine acceptability of road safety measures by a general public? Edited by S. Vlassenroot, J. de Mol, T. Brijs and G. Wets. 2006. Proceedings of the European Transport Conference 2006, Strasbourg, France.
9. Jamson, S. 2010. Acceptability data - what should or could it predict? Presented at the International seminar on Acceptance, Paris, France, November 2010.
10. Katteler, H. 2005. Driver acceptance of mandatory intelligent speed adaptation. EJTIR, 5(4): 317-36.
11. Kollmann, T. 2000. Die Messung der Akzeptanz bei Telekommunikations- systemen, JBF - Journal für Betriebswirtschaft, 50(2): 68-78. In User requirements for a multimodal routing system to support transport behavior. Edited by V. Franken and B. Lenz. 2007. Proceedings of the Sixth European Congress and Exhibition on Intelligent Transport Systems and Services, Aalborg, Denmark.
12. Muir, B.M. 1994. Trust in automation: Part I. Theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems. Ergonomics, 37(11): 1905-22.
13. Najm, W.G., Stearns, M.D., Howarth, H., Koopmann, J. and Hitz, J. 2006. Evaluation of an automotive rear-end collision avoidance system (chapter 5). US Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Report no. DOT HS 810 569. Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Volpe National Transportation Systems Centre, Cambridge, USA.
14. Nielsen, J. 1993. Usability engineering. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
15. Pianelli, C., Saad, F. and Abric, J-C. 2007. Social representations and acceptability of LAVIA (French ISA system). Proceedings of the Fourteenth World Congress and Exhibition of Intelligent Transport Systems and Services, Beijing, China.
16. Regan, M.A., Mitsopoulos, E., Haworth, N. and Young, K. 2002. Acceptability of in-vehicle intelligent transport systems to Victorian car drivers. Report no. 02/02. Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
17. Risser, R., Almqvist, S. and Ericsson, M. 1999. Fördjupade analyser av acceptansfrågor kring dynamisk hastighetsanpassning. Bulletin 174, Lund University, Sweden (In Swedish).
18. Risser, R. and Lehner, U. 1998. Acceptability of speeds and speed limits to drivers and pedestrians/cyclists. Deliverable D6, MASTER-project.
19. Saad, F. 2004. Behavioural adaptations to new assistance systems - some critical issues. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 288-93.
20. Saad, F. and Dionisio, C. 2007. Pre-evaluation of the "mandatory active" LAVIA: Assessment of usability, utility and acceptance. Proceedings of the 14th World Congress and Exhibition of Intelligent Transport Systems and Services, Beijing, China.
21. Schade, J. and Baum, M. 2007. Reactance or acceptance? Reactions towards the introduction of road pricing. Transportation Research Part A, 41(1): 41-8.
22. Schade, J. and Schlag, B. 2003. Acceptability of urban transport pricing strategies. Transportation Research Part F, 6(1): 45-61.
23. Van der Laan, J.D., Heino, A. and De Waard, D. 1997. A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telemetics. Transportation research Part C, 5(1): 1-10.
24. Van Driel, C. 2007. Driver support in congestion - an assessment of user needs and impacts on driver and traffic flow. PhD thesis, Thesis Series, T2007/10, TRAIL Research School, the Netherlands.
25. Vlassenroot, S. and De Mol, J. 2007. Measuring public support for ISA: development of a unified theory. Proceedings of the 14th World Congress and Exhibition of Intelligent Transport Systems and Services, Beijing, China.
26. Vlassenroot, S., de Mol, J., Brijs, T. and Wets, G. 2006. Defining the public support: what can determine acceptability of road safety measures by a general public? Proceedings of the 6th European Congress and Exhibition of Intelligent Transport Systems and Services, Strasbourg, France.