Users’ resistance towards radical innovations: The case of the self-driving car

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour

Volumn 44, Issue , 2017, Pages 42-52

  Konig M ^a   Neumayr, L ^a  

^a VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS   (Austria)

Author keywords

Barriers; End user attitudes; Radical innovation; Resistance to change; Self driving car; Strategic implications

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; TRANSPORTATION;

BARRIERS; END USERS; RADICAL INNOVATION; RESISTANCE TO CHANGE; SELF DRIVINGS; STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS;

INNOVATION;

EID: 84995549556     PISSN: 13698478     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2016.10.013     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Begg, D. (2014). A 2050 vision for London: What are the implications of driverless transport. Retrieved from < http://www.transporttimes.co.uk/Admin/uploads/64165-Transport-Times_A-2050-VWoSon-for-London_AW-WEB-READY.pdf> on December 2, 2015.
2. Beiker, S.A., Legal aspects of autonomous driving. Santa Clara Law Review, 52, 2012, 1145.
3. Bekiaris, E., Petica, S., & Brookhuis, K. (1997). Driver needs and public acceptance regarding telematic in-vehicle emergency control aids, In Conference Paper no. 2077, 4th world congress on intelligent transport systems, Berlin.
4. Böhm, S., Jones, C., Land, C., Paterson, M., Part one conceptualizing automobility: Introduction: Impossibilities of automobility. The Sociological Review 54:s1 (2006), 1–16.
5. Brace, I., Questionnaire design: How to plan, structure and write survey material for effective market research. 2008, Kogan Page Publishers.
6. Calo, R. (2015). A new regulatory agency for autonomous technology is needed first. Retrieved from < http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/01/29/are-we-ready-for-driverless-cars/a-new-regulatory-agency-for-autonomous-technology-is-needed-first> on December 2, 2015.
7. Corbetta, P., Social research: Theory, methods and techniques. 2003, Sage.
8. Douma, F., Palodichuk, S.A., Criminal liability issues created by autonomous vehicles. Santa Clara Law Review, 52, 2012, 1157.
9. Epprecht, N., von Wirth, T., Stünzi, C., Blumer, Y.B., Anticipating transitions beyond the current mobility regimes: How acceptability matters. Futures 60 (2014), 30–40.
10. Frey, D., Frank, E., Der Beitrag (sozial-) psychologischer Theorien für die Erforschung und Umsetzung von Innovationen. 2001, Außergewöhnliche Entscheidungen: Festschrift für Jürgen Hauschildt, 597–646.
11. Giffi, C. A., Vitale, J., Drew, M., Gangula, B., & Schmith, S. (2014). The changing nature of mobility. Retrieved from < http://dupress.com/articles/automotive-trends-gen-y/> on December 2, 2015.
12. Glancy, D.J., Privacy in autonomous vehicles. Santa Clara Law Review, 52, 2012, 1171.
13. Goldenberg, J., Lehmann, D.R., Mazursky, D., The idea itself and the circumstances of its emergence as predictors of new product success. Management Science 47:1 (2001), 69–84.
14. Hauschildt, J., Innovationsmanagement, 3, völlig überarbeitete und erweiterte Aufl. 2004, Franz Vahlen, München.
15. Jiang, J.J., Muhanna, W.A., Klein, G., User resistance and strategies for promoting acceptance across system types. Information & Management 37:1 (2000), 25–36.
16. Kallus, K.W., Erstellung von Fragebogen. 2010, facultas. wuv.
17. Kemp, R., Schot, J., Hoogma, R., Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: The approach of strategic niche management. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 10:2 (1998), 175–198.
18. Khan, A.M., Bacchus, A., Erwin, S., Policy challenges of increasing automation in driving. IATSS Research 35:2 (2012), 79–89.
19. Krogh, G., Rossi-Lamastra, C., Haeflinger, S., Phenomenon-based research in management and organisation science: When is it rigorous and when does it matter?. Long Range Planning 45 (2012), 277–298.
20. Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., & De Winter, J. (2014). Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire among 5,000 respondents. Available at SSRN 2506579.
21. Lee, J.D., See, K.A., Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46:1 (2004), 50–80.
22. Martens, M.H., Jenssen, G.D., Behavioral adaptation and acceptance Handbook of Intelligent Vehicles, 2012, 118–136.
23. Merritt, S.M., Heimbaugh, H., LaChapell, J., Lee, D., I trust it, but i don't know why effects of implicit attitudes toward automation on trust in an automated system. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2012 0018720812465081.
24. Mitchell, W. J., Borroni-Bird, C. E., & Burns, L. D. (2010). Reinventing the automobile. Personal Urban Mobility for the 21st Century. Cambridge/l/IA.
25. Mokhtarian, P.L., Salomon, I., How derived is the demand for travel? Some conceptual and measurement considerations. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 35:8 (2001), 695–719.
26. Moore, M. & Lu, B. (2011). Autonomous vehicles for personal transport: A technology assessment. Available at SSRN 1865047.
27. Morison, E., Gunfire at sea: a case study of innovation. Men, Machines, and Modern Times, 1966, 17–44.
28. Norton, P.D., Fighting traffic: The dawn of the motor age in the American city. 2008, MIT Press.
29. Oxford Dictionary. (2015). Language matters. Retrieved from < http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/de/definition/englisch_usa/neophobia> on December 2, 2015.
30. Peterson, R.A., Constructing effective questionnaires, Vol. 1, 2000, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
31. Porst, R., Fragebogen. Ein Arbeitsbuch, 3, 2011.
32. Regan, M.A., Horberry, T., Stevens, A., Drivers acceptance of new technology Theory, measurement and optimisation, 2014, Ashgate.
33. Reimer, B., Driver assistance systems and the transition to automated vehicles: A path to increase older adult safety and mobility?. Public Policy & Aging Report 24:1 (2014), 27–31.
34. Renn, O., Zwick, M.M., Risiko- und Technikakzeptanz mit 15 Tabellen. 1997, Springer, Berlin u.a.
35. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York.
36. Rudin-Brown, C.M., Jamson, S.L., Behavioural adaptation and road safety Theory, evidence and action, 2013, Taylor & Francis.
37. Rudin-Brown, C.M., Parker, H.A., Behavioural adaptation to adaptive cruise control (ACC): Implications for preventive strategies. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 7:2 (2004), 59–76.
38. Rupp, J. D. & King, A. G. (2010). Autonomous driving – a practical roadmap. SAE Technical Paper.
39. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A., Research methods for business students. 2011, Pearson Education India, 5/e.
40. Schoettle, B. & Sivak, M. (2014). Public opinion about self-driving vehicles in China, India, Japan, the US, the UK, and Australia, Transportation Research Institute.
41. Silberg, G., Wallace, R., Matuszak, G., Plessers, J., Brower, C., Subramanian, D., Self-driving cars: The next revolution. 2012, White paper, KPMG LLP & Center of Automotive Research.
42. Song, C., Qu, Z., Blumm, N., Barabási, A.-L., Limits of predictability in human mobility. Science 327:5968 (2010), 1018–1021.
43. Steg, L., Car use: Lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 39:2 (2005), 147–162.
44. Van Geenhuizen, M., Nijkamp, P., Coping with uncertainty: an expedition into the field of new transport technology. Transportation Planning and Technology 26:6 (2003), 449–467.
45. Zikmund, W., Babin, B., Carr, J., Griffin, M., Business research methods. 2012, Cengage Learning.