ASSESSING PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES USING A NOVEL IRN PIPRECIA - IRN AROMAN MODEL

Meijing Song, Željko Stević, Ibrahim Badi, Dragan Marinković, Yifei Lv, Kaiyang Zhong

DOI Number
10.22190/FUME240729040S
First page
Last page

Abstract


Autonomous vehicles (AVs) have become a tangible presence on roads, indicating the emergence of a promising transportation technology for the future, possibly arriving sooner than anticipated. Nevertheless, the extensive integration of this technology is contingent on various factors, with the foremost being the level of public acceptance and adjustment to this advanced technology. Several factors, including safety, privacy, and cost, play crucial roles in fostering acceptance. Consequently, this research delves into the key determinants shaping individuals' willingness to embrace AVs. In this paper, a novel model, which consists of two methods: PIPRECIA and AROMAN with Interval Rough Numbers (IRNs) has been developed. The IRN PIPRECIA serves to define criterion weights, while the most significant contribution of the paper is the extension of the AROMAN method with IRNs for evaluating the public acceptance of autonomous vehicles and adapting all the necessary conditions for their use. The results show that a rapid implementation with extensive testing strategy represents the best solution.

Keywords

Autonomous Vehicles, IRN PIPRECIA, IRN AROMAN, MCDM

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ryan, M., 2020, The future of transportation: ethical, legal, social and economic impacts of self-driving vehicles in the year 2025, Science and engineering ethics, 26(3), pp. 1185-1208.

Harb, M., Stathopoulos, A., Shiftan, Y., Walker, J.L., 2021, What do we (Not) know about our future with automated vehicles?, Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 123, 102948.

Jing, P., Xu, G., Chen, Y., Shi, Y., Zhan, F., 2020, The determinants behind the acceptance of autonomous vehicles: A systematic review, Sustainability, 12(5), 1719.

Yuen, K.F., Wong, Y.D., Ma, F., Wang, X., 2020, The determinants of public acceptance of autonomous vehicles: An innovation diffusion perspective, Journal of Cleaner Production, 270, 121904.

Yuen, K.F., Chua, G., Wang, X., Ma, F., Li, K.X., 2020, Understanding public acceptance of autonomous vehicles using the theory of planned behaviour, International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(12), 4419.

Janatabadi F., Ermagun, A., 2022, Empirical evidence of bias in public acceptance of autonomous vehicles, Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 84, pp. 330-347.

Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., de Winter, J.C., 2015, Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents, Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 32, pp. 127-140.

Alsghan, I., Gazder, U., Assi, K., Hakem, G.H., Sulail, M.A., Alsuhaibani, O.A., 2022, The determinants of consumer acceptance of autonomous vehicles: A case study in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 38(14), pp. 1375-1387.

Aldakkhelallah, A., Alamri, A.S., Georgiou, S., Simic, M., 2023, Public Perception of the Introduction of Autonomous Vehicles, World Electric Vehicle Journal, 14(12), 345.

Zefreh, M.M., Edries, B., Esztergár-Kiss, D., Torok, A., 2023, Intention to use private autonomous vehicles in developed and developing countries: What are the differences among the influential factors, mediators, and moderators?, Travel Behaviour and Society, 32, 100592.

Raj, A., Kumar, J.A., Bansal, P., 2020, A multicriteria decision making approach to study barriers to the adoption of autonomous vehicles, Transportation research part A: policy and practice, 133, pp. 122-137.

Hilgarter, K. Granig, P., 2020, Public perception of autonomous vehicles: A qualitative study based on interviews after riding an autonomous shuttle, Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 72, pp. 226-243.

Rezaei, A., Caulfield, B., 2020, Examining public acceptance of autonomous mobility, Travel behaviour and society, 21, pp. 235-246.

Bala, H., Anowar, S., Chng, S., Cheah, L., 2023, Review of studies on public acceptability and acceptance of shared autonomous mobility services: Past, present and future, Transport Reviews, 43(5), pp. 970-996.

Khayyam, H., Javadi, B., Jalili, M., Jazar, R.N., 2020, Artificial intelligence and internet of things for autonomous vehicles, Nonlinear Approaches in Engineering Applications: Automotive Applications of Engineering Problems, pp. 39-68.

Wang, J., Zhang, L., Huang, Y., Zhao, J., Bella, F., 2019, Safety of autonomous vehicles, Journal of advanced transportation, 20, 8867757.

Papadoulis, A., Quddus, M., Imprialou, M., 2019, Evaluating the safety impact of connected and autonomous vehicles on motorways, Accident Analysis & Prevention, 124, pp. 12-22.

Noy, I.Y., Shinar, D., Horrey, W.J., 2018, Automated driving: Safety blind spots, Safety science, 102, pp. 68-78.

Bansal, P., Kockelman, K.M., Singh, A., 2016, Assessing public opinions of and interest in new vehicle technologies: An Austin perspective, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 67, pp. 1-14.

Hulse, L.M., Xie, H., Galea, E.R., 2018, Perceptions of autonomous vehicles: Relationships with road users, risk, gender and age, Safety science, 102, pp. 1-13.

Fagnant, D.J., Kockelman, K., 2015, Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 77, pp. 167-181.

Rakotonirainy, A., Schroeter, R., Soro, A., 2014, Three social car visions to improve driver behaviour, Pervasive and mobile computing, 14, pp. 147-160.

Katrakazas, C., Quddus, M., Chen, W.H., Deka, L., 2015, Real-time motion planning methods for autonomous on-road driving: State-of-the-art and future research directions, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 60, pp. 416-442.

Howard D., Dai, D., 2014, Public perceptions of self-driving cars: The case of Berkeley, California, in Transportation research board 93rd annual meeting, 14, 452.

Schoettle, B., Sivak, M., 2014, A survey of public opinion about autonomous and self-driving vehicles in the US, the UK, and Australia, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Transportation Research Institute.

Liu, P., Guo, Q., Ren, F., Wang, L., Xu, Z., 2019, Willingness to pay for self-driving vehicles: Influences of demographic and psychological factors, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 100, pp. 306-317.

Gkartzonikas, C., Gkritza, K., 2019, What have we learned? A review of stated preference and choice studies on autonomous vehicles, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 98, pp. 323-337.

Bansal, P., Kockelman, K.M., 2017, Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 95, pp. 49-63.

Sohrabi, S., Khreis, H., Lord, D., 2020, Impacts of autonomous vehicles on public health: A conceptual model and policy recommendations, Sustainable Cities and Society, 63, 102457.

Dabić-Miletić, S., Raković, K., 2023, Ranking of autonomous alternatives for the realization of intralogistics activities in sustainable warehouse systems using the TOPSIS method, Spectrum of Engineering and Management Sciences, 1(1), pp. 48-57.

Li, S., Sui, P.C., Xiao, J., Chahine, R., 2019, Policy formulation for highly automated vehicles: Emerging importance, research frontiers and insights, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 124, pp. 573-586.

Nourinejad, M., Bahrami, S., Roorda, M.J., 2018, Designing parking facilities for autonomous vehicles, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 109, pp. 110-127.

Buckley, L., Kaye, S.A., Pradhan, A.K., 2018, A qualitative examination of drivers’ responses to partially automated vehicles, Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 56, pp. 167-175.

Stanujkić, D., Karabašević, D., Popović, G., Stanimirović, P.S., Saračević, M., Smarandache, F., Katsikis, V.N., Ulutaş, A., 2021, A new grey approach for using SWARA and PIPRECIA methods in a group decision-making environment. Mathematics, 9(13), 1554.

Đukić, T., 2022, Ranking factors that affect satisfaction and motivation of employees using the PIPRECIA method, Journal of process management and new technologies, 10(1-2), pp. 102-114.

Qaddoori, Q.Q., Breesam, H.K., 2023, Using the Pivot Pair-Wise Relative Criteria Importance Assessment (PIPRECIA) Method to Determine the Relative Weight of the Factors Affecting Construction Site Safety Performance, International Journal of Safety & Security Engineering, 13(1), pp. 59-68.

Ulutaş, A., Topal, A., Karabasevic, D., Stanujkic, D., Popovic, G., Smarandache, F., 2021, Prioritization of logistics risks with plithogenic PIPRECIA method, In International Conference on Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 663-670.

Xu, W., Das, D.K., Stević, Ž., Subotić, M., Alrasheedi, A.F., Sun, S., 2023, Trapezoidal Interval Type-2 Fuzzy PIPRECIA-MARCOS Model for Management Efficiency of Traffic Flow on Observed Road Sections, Mathematics, 11(12), 2652.

Pamucar, D., Deveci, M., Stević, Ž., Gokasar, I., Isik, M., Coffman, D.M. 2022, Green strategies in mobility planning towards climate change adaption of urban areas using fuzzy 2D algorithm, Sustainable Cities and Society, 87, 104159.

Matić, B., Jovanović, S., Marinković, M., Sremac, S., Das, D.K, Stević, Ž., 2021, A novel integrated interval rough MCDM model for ranking and selection of asphalt production plants, Mathematics, 9(3), 269.

Jana, C. Pal, M., 2023, Interval-Valued Picture Fuzzy Uncertain Linguistic Dombi Operators and Their Application in Industrial Fund Selection, Journal of Industrial Intelligence, 1(2), pp. 110-124.

Saha, A., Reddy, J., Kumar, R., 2022, A fuzzy similarity based classification with Archimedean-Dombi aggregation operator, Journal of Intelligent Management Decision, 1(2), pp. 118-127.

Erceg, Ž., Starčević, V., Pamučar, D., Mitrović, G., Stević, Ž., Žikić, S., 2019, A new model for stock management in order to rationalize costs: ABC-FUCOM-interval rough CoCoSo model, Symmetry, 11(12), 1527.

Badi, I., Stević, Ž., Radović, D., Ristić, B., Cakić, A., Sremac, S., 2023, A new methodology for treating problems in the field of traffic safety: case study of Libyan cities, Transport, 38(4), pp. 190-203.

Bošković, S., Švadlenka, L., Jovčić, S., Dobrodolac, M., Simić, V., Bačanin, N., 2023, An Alternative Ranking Order Method Accounting for Two-Step Normalization (AROMAN)–A Case Study of the Electric Vehicle Selection Problem. IEEE Access, 11, pp. 39496-39507.

Badi, I., Bouraima, M. B., Muhammad, L.J., 2023, The role of intelligent transportation systems in solving traffic problems and reducing environmental negative impact of urban transport, Decision Making and Analysis, 1(1), pp. 1-9.

Elmansouri, O., Almhroog, A., Badi, I., 2020, Urban transportation in Libya: An overview, Transportation research interdisciplinary perspectives, 8, 100161.

Kizielewicz, B., Sałabun, W., 2024, SITW Method: A new approach to re-identifying multi-criteria weights in complex decision analysis, Spectrum of Mechanical Engineering and Operational Research, 1(1), pp. 215-226.

Badi, I., Bouraima, M.B., 2023, Development of MCDM-based frameworks for proactively managing the most critical risk factors for transport accidents: a case study in Libya, Spectrum of engineering and management sciences, 1(1), pp. 38-47.

Damjanović, M., Stević, Ž., Stanimirović, D., Tanackov, I., Marinković, D., 2022, Impact of the number of vehicles on traffic safety: multiphase modeling, Facta Universitatis-Series Mechanical Engineering, 20(1), pp. 177-197.

Puška, A., Beganović, A., Stojanović, I., 2023, Optimizing Logistics Center Location in Brčko District: A Fuzzy Approach Analysis, Journal of Urban Development and Management, 2(3), pp. 160-171.

Hadžikadunić, A., Stević, Ž., Badi, I., Roso, V., 2023, Evaluating the Logistics Performance Index of European Union Countries: An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach Utilizing the Bonferroni Operator, International Journal of Knowledge and Innovation Studies, 1(1), pp. 44-59.

Tešić, D., Božanić, D., Radovanović, M., Petrovski, A., 2023, Optimising assault boat selection for military operations: An application of the DIBR II-BM-CoCoSo MCDM model, Journal of Intelligent and Management Decision, 2(4), pp. 160-171.

Ristić, B., Bogdanović, V., Stević, Ž., Marinković, D., Papić, Z., Gojković, P., 2024, Evaluation of Pedestrian Crossings Based on the Concept of Pedestrian Behavior Regarding Start-Up Time: Integrated Fuzzy MCDM Model, Tehnički vjesnik, 31(4), pp. 1206-1214.

Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., 2010, A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision‐making, Technological and economic development of economy, 16(2), pp. 159-172.

Velykorusova, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Tupenaite, L., Kanapeckiene, L., Migilinskas, D., Kutut, V., ... Kaklauskas, A., 2023, Intelligent multi-criteria decision support for renovation solutions for a building based on emotion recognition by applying the COPRAS method and BIM integration, Applied Sciences, 13(9), 5453.

Puška, A., Stojanović, I., Štilić, A., 2023, The Influence of Objective Weight Determination Methods on Electric Vehicle Selection in Urban Logistics. Journal of Intelligent and Management Decision, 2(3), pp. 117-129.

Krishankumar, R., Sundararajan, D., Ravichandran, K. S., Zavadskas, E. K., 2024, An Evidence-Based CoCoSo Framework with Double Hierarchy Linguistic Data for Viable Selection of Hydrogen Storage Methods, CMES-Computer Modeling in Engineering & Sciences, 138(3), pp. 2845-2872.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN: 0354-2025 (Print)

ISSN: 2335-0164 (Online)

COBISS.SR-ID 98732551

ZDB-ID: 2766459-4