A priori acceptance of automated rideshare services: Do intentions to use differ when safety operators are inside or outside the vehicle?

With advancements in automated driving technology and the sharing economy, automated rideshare services (ARS) are entering the market. In this service, vehicles are controlled by an automated driving system, with a safety operator available to take over if needed. ARS has great potential to reduce travel costs and crashes caused by human error. However, user acceptance is essential for adoption and intention to use. To address this issue, this study examined users’ a priori acceptance of ARS by extending the Technology Acceptance Model to include perceived risk, trust, social influence, and facilitating conditions (e.g., road infrastructure, communication facilities). Intentions to use ARS with an in-vehicle safety operator versus one provided by remote network control was also investigated. Data were collected from 580 participants (M = 32.1 years, SD = 6.8, Range = 21.0–61.0 years; Male: 60.7 %) through an online questionnaire. The structural equation model showed that higher levels of perceived trust in automated driving systems, and trust in safety operators were associated with lower perceived safety risk and subsequent increased intention to use the services. Increased perceived safety risk of manual rideshare services only promoted intentions to use ARS with remote safety operators, not those with in-vehicle safety operators. Perceived ease of use strongly influenced intentions for ARS with in-vehicle safety operators, while social influence and facilitating conditions were key factors for those with remote safety operators. These findings indicate a need for programs that enhance users’ understanding of how automated driving systems and safety operators contribute to road safety. Additionally, clarifying the operational scope of different ARS will improve their perceived ease of use and acceptance.