Changing attitudes towards e-mobility by actively elaborating fast-charging technology

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 106, Issue , 2016, Pages 31-36

  Gebauer, Fabian ^a,b,c   Vilimek, Roman ^d   Keinath, Andreas ^d   Carbon, Claus Christian ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BAMBERG   (Germany)

^b Bamberg Graduate School of Affective and Cognitive Sciences (BaGrACS)   (Germany)

^c Forschungsgruppe EPÆG (Ergonomie   (Germany)

^d BMW GROUP   (Germany)

Author keywords

Acceptance; E mobility; Fast DC charging; Future concept; Prediction

Indexed keywords

ELECTRIC IMPEDANCE MEASUREMENT; FORECASTING;

ACCEPTANCE; ALTERNATING CURRENT; CHARGING PROCESS; CHARGING SYSTEMS; E MOBILITIES; FUTURE CONCEPT; FUTURE PROSPECTS; WRITTEN INFORMATION;

FAST CHARGING (BATTERIES);

ELECTRIC VEHICLE; FUTURE PROSPECT; MOBILITY; PREDICTION; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT;

EID: 84959209845     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.02.006     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Albrecht S., Carbon C.C. The fluency amplification model: fluent stimuli show more intense but not evidently more positive evaluations. Acta Psychol. 2014, 148:195-203. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.02.002.
2. Bayram I.S., Michailidis G., Devetsikiotis M. Electric Power Resource Provisioning for Large Scale Public EV Charging Facilities 2013, IEEE, New York.
3. Botsford C., Szczepanek A. Fast charging vs. slow charging: pros and cons for the new age of electric vehicles. Paper presented at the EVS24 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium, Stavanger 2009.
4. Bunce L., Harris M., Burgess M. Charge up then charge out? Drivers' perceptions and experiences of electric vehicles in the UK. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 2014, 59(0):278-287. 10.1016/j.tra.2013.12.001.
5. Carbon C.C., Leder H. The repeated evaluation technique (RET). A method to capture dynamic effects of innovativeness and attractiveness. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 2005, 19(5):587-601. 10.1002/acp.1098.
6. Carbon C.C., Michael L., Leder H. Design evaluation by combination of repeated evaluation technique and measurement of electrodermal activity. Res. Eng. Des. 2008, 19(2-3):143-149. 10.1007/s00163-008-0045-2.
7. Cocron P., Bühler F., Neumann I., Franke T., Krems J.F., Schwalm M., Keinath A. Methods of evaluating electric vehicles from a user's perspective - the MINI E field trial in Berlin. IET Intell. Transp. Syst. 2011, 5(2):127-133. 10.1049/iet-its.2010.0126.
8. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989, 13(3):319-340. 10.2307/249008.
9. Doring T., Aigner B. E-mobility: realistic vision or hype - an economic analysis. Przegl. Elektrotechniczny 2011, 87(3):37-40.
10. Faerber S.J., Leder H., Gerger G., Carbon C.C. Priming semantic concepts affects the dynamics of aesthetic appreciation. Acta Psychol. 2010, 135(2):191-200. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.06.006.
11. Franke T., Cocron P., Bühler F., Neumann I., Krems J.F. Adapting to the range of an electric vehicle-the relation of experience to subjectively available mobility resources. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the European conference on human centred design for intelligent transport systems, Valencia, Spain 2012.
12. Franke T., Neumann I., Buhler F., Cocron P., Krems J.F. Experiencing range in an electric vehicle: understanding psychological barriers. Appl. Psycholo. Int. Rev. Psychol. Appl.-Rev. Int. 2012, 61(3):368-391. 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00474.x.
13. Holdway A.R., Williams A.R., Inderwildi O.R., King D.A. Indirect emissions from electric vehicles: emissions from electricity generation. Energy Environ. Sci. 2010, 3(12):1825-1832. 10.1039/c0ee00031k.
14. Jakesch M., Carbon C.C. The mere exposure effect in the domain of haptics. PLoS One 2012, 7(2). 10.1371/journal.pone.0031215.
15. Janiszewski C. Preattentive mere exposure effects. J. Consum. Res. 1993, 20(3):376-392. 10.1086/209356.
16. Jensen A.F., Cherchi E., Mabit S.L. On the stability of preferences and attitudes before and after experiencing an electric vehicle. Transp. Res. D Transp. Environ. 2013, 25:24-32. 10.1016/j.trd.2013.07.006.
17. Jin C.R., Tang J., Ghosh P. Optimizing electric vehicle charging: a customer's perspective. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2013, 62(7):2919-2927. 10.1109/TVT.2013.2251023.
18. Kampker A., Burggraf P., Nee C. Costs, Quality and Scalability: Impact on the Value Chain of Electric Engine Production 2012, IEEE, New York.
19. Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt Bestand an Personenkraftwagen am 1. Januar 2015 nach ausgewählten Kraftstoffarten http://www.kba.de/DE/Statistik/Fahrzeuge/Bestand/Umwelt/2014_b_umwelt_dusl_absolut.html.
20. Labeye E., Adrian J., Hugot M., Regan M.A., Brusque C. Daily use of an electric vehicle: behavioural changes and potential for ITS support. IET Intell. Transp. Syst. 2013, 7(2):210-214. 10.1049/iet-its.2012.0155.
21. Legris P., Ingham J., Collerette P. Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Inf. Manag. 2003, 40(3):191-204. 10.1016/s0378-7206(01)00143-4.
22. Mairesse J., Mohnen P. Accounting for innovation and measuring innovativeness: an illustrative framework and an application. Am. Econ. Rev. 2002, 92(2):226-230. 10.1257/000282802320189302.
23. Mohseni P., Stevie R.G. Electric Vehicles: Holy Grail or Fool's Gold. Paper presented at the IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting 2010 2010.
24. Muth C., Carbon C.C. The aesthetic aha: On the pleasure of having insights into Gestalt. Acta Psychol. 2013, 144(1):25-30. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.05.001.
25. Nationale-Plattform-Elektromobilität(NPE) Fortschrittsbericht der Nationalen Plattform Elektromobilität (Dritter Bericht) http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/bmu-import/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/bericht_emob_3_bf.pdf.
26. Neumann I., Cocron P., Krems J.F. Electric vehicles as a solution for green driving in the future? A field study examing the user acceptance of electric vehicles. Proceedings of the European Conference on Human Interface Design for ITS 2010, Germany, Berlin. J.F. Krems, T. Petzold, M. Henning (Eds.).
27. Reber R., Winkielman P., Schwarz N. Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychol. Sci. 1998, 9(1):45-48. 10.1111/1467-9280.00008.
28. Robinson A.P., Blythe P.T., Bell M.C., Hubner Y., Hill G.A. Analysis of electric vehicle driver recharging demand profiles and subsequent impacts on the carbon content of electric vehicle trips. Energy Policy 2013, 61:337-348. 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.074.
29. Schwedes O., Kettner S., Tiedtke B. E-mobility in Germany: white hope for a sustainable development or fig leaf for particular interests?. Environ. Sci. Pol. 2013, 30:72-80. 10.1016/j.envsci.2012.10.012.
30. Spickermann A., Grienitz V., von der Gracht H.A. Heading towards a multimodal city of the future? Multi-stakeholder scenarios for urban mobility. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 89:201-221. 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.08.036.
31. Steinhilber S., Wells P., Thankappan S. Socio-technical inertia: understanding the barriers to electric vehicles. Energy Policy 2013, 60:531-539. 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.076.
32. Turrentine T., Garas D., Lentz A., Woodjack J. The UC Davis MINI E Consumer Study 2011, 1-78. Insitute of Transportation Studies University of California, Davis.
33. Venkatesh V., Davis F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manag. Sci. 2000, 46(2):186-204. 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.
34. Vilimek R., Keinath A. User-centred design and evaluation as a prerequisite for the success of disruptive innovations: An electric vehicle case study. Driver acceptance of new technology: theory, measurement and optimisation 2014, 169-186. Ashgate, Farnham. M. Regan, T. Horberry, A. Stevens (Eds.).
35. Vilimek R., Keinath A., Schwalm M. The MINI E field study - similarities and differences in international everyday EV driving. Advances in human aspects of road and rail transportation 2012, 363-372. N.A. Stanton (Ed.).
36. Zajonc R.B. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1968, 9(2):1-27. 10.1037/h0025848.