Technological perception on autonomous vehicles: perspectives of the non-motorists

Das, Subasish; Dutta, Anandi K; Dutta, Anandi K · 2020 · Technology Analysis and Strategic Management

DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2020.1768235

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the technological perception of autonomous vehicles (AVs) among non-motorists, addressing a gap in literature where most research focuses on drivers rather than pedestrians and bicyclists. Motivated by rising non-motorist fatalities and high-profile AV crashes involving pedestrians, the authors seek to determine if AV perception varies based on stakeholder nature (advocacy group members vs. general public) and if prior interaction with AVs alters these perceptions. The research aims to inform strategic management and safety planning for AV deployment. The researchers analyzed survey data collected by BikePGH in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, comprising 1,114 respondents: 321 members of the advocacy group BikePGH and 793 general public residents. The survey assessed opinions on safety, regulatory needs, and prior interactions with AVs while walking or cycling. To address the complexity of the questionnaire responses, the study employed Chi-Squared tests to identify significant differences between stakeholder groups and Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) to cluster response patterns and visualize associations among variables. The findings reveal that perception measures significantly vary based on stakeholder nature. BikePGH members were more likely to actively support the organization’s position on AVs and reported higher familiarity with AV technology compared to the general public. Conversely, the general public expressed stronger support for specific regulations, such as capping AV speed limits and preventing AV operation in school zones. Regarding prior interaction, participants who had previously interacted with AVs held higher expectations of safety advantages and greater interest in the technology than those with no experience. Furthermore, the analysis identified a strong correlation between safety perceptions and policy support: participants who saw no safety potential in AVs were significantly more likely to oppose using Pittsburgh as an AV proving ground. Overall reception of AVs was mixed, with roughly half of all respondents reporting no prior experience with AV circumstances. The study concludes that understanding the distinct perspectives of non-motorists is critical for the successful integration of AVs. The results suggest that prior exposure to AVs can mitigate safety concerns and increase acceptance, while skepticism regarding safety directly translates to opposition against local testing initiatives. These insights provide transportation planners and policymakers with evidence to tailor communication and regulatory strategies, ensuring that AV deployment addresses the specific safety concerns of vulnerable road users to enhance overall mobility and safety.

Key finding

Non-motorists with prior real-world interactions with autonomous vehicles exhibit higher expectations and interest in the technology compared to those without experience, and perception measures vary significantly between advocacy group members and the general public.

Methodology

survey

Sample size: 1114

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via author_sweep_intake on 2026-05-27.

StageOutcomeToolModelPromptAttemptsCompleted
discover success author_sweep 2 2026-05-27
archive success canonical_url 7 2026-06-06
extract success cached 3 2026-06-10
clean success clean 1 2026-06-04
chunk success chunk 1 2026-06-04
embed success embed Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B 1 2026-06-04
enrich skipped 3 2026-06-04
promote success 1 2026-06-04
summarize success llm qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant summ-v5 2 2026-06-10
tag success vector_similarity 15 2026-06-11
verify success 2 2026-06-10

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).