The effect of information on changing opinions toward autonomous vehicle adoption: An exploratory analysis

References

• Anastasopoulos, P., & Mannering, F. (2009). A note on modeling vehicle accident frequencies with random-parameters count models. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 41(1), 153–159. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2008.10.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bansal, P., & Kockelman, K. (2017). Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies. Transportation Research Part A, 95, 49–63. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2016.10.013
   Google Scholar
• Barbour, N., Menon, N., Zhang, Y., & Mannering, F. (2018). Shared autonomous vehicles: A statistical analysis of consumer use likelihoods and concerns, Working Paper, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of South Florida, Tampa.
   Google Scholar
• Behnood, A., & Mannering, F. (2017a). The effect of passengers on driver-injury severities in single-vehicle crashes: A random parameters heterogeneity-in-means approach. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 14, 41–53. doi: 10.1016/j.amar.2017.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behnood, A., & Mannering, F. (2017b). Determinants of bicyclist injury severities in bicycle-vehicle crashes: A random parameters approach with heterogeneity in means and variances. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 16, 35–47. doi: 10.1016/j.amar.2017.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benoit, J.-P., & Dubra, J. (2017). When do populations polarize? An explanation, Working Paper. London Business School, London, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Bhat, C. (2003). Simulation estimation of mixed discrete choice models using randomized and scrambled Halton sequences. Transportation Research Part B, 37(9), 837–855. doi: 10.1016/S0191-2615(02)00090-5
   Google Scholar
• Brandstatter, H. (1993). Should economic psychology care about personality structure? Journal of Economic Psychology, 14(3), 473–494.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman, G. B., & Johnson, E. J. (1999). Anchoring, activation, and the construction of values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79(2), 115–153. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1999.2841
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edison, S., & Geissler, G. (2003). Measuring attitudes towards general technology: Antecedents, hypotheses and scale development. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 12(2), 137–156. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jt.5740104
   Google Scholar
• Furnham, A., & Boo, H. (2011). A literature review of the anchoring effect. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40(1), 35–42. doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2010.10.008
   Google Scholar
• Galinsky, A., & Mussweiler, T. (2001). First offers as anchors: The role of perspective taking and negotiator focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(4), 657–669. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.81.4.657
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halton, J. (1960). On the efficiency of evaluating certain quasi-random sequences of points in evaluating multi-dimensional integrals. Numerische Mathematik, 2(1), 84–90. doi: 10.1007/BF01386213
   Google Scholar
• Haboucha, C., Ishaq, R., & Shiftan, Y. (2017). User preferences regarding autonomous vehicles. Transportation Research Part C, 78, 37–49. doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2017.01.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jern, A., Chang, K., & Kemp, C. (2014). Belief polarization is not always irrational. Psychological Review, 121(2), 206–224. doi: 10.1037/a0035941
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeBoeuf, R. A., & Shafir, E. (2009). Anchoring on the “Here” and “Now” in time and distance judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35(1), 81–93. doi: 10.1037/a0013665
   Google Scholar
• Lord, C., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2109. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.37.11.2098
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mannering, F. (2018). Temporal instability and the analysis of highway accident data. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 17, 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.amar.2017.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mannering, F., & Bhat, C. (2014). Analytic methods in accident research: Methodological frontier and future directions. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 1, 1–22. doi: 10.1016/j.amar.2013.09.001
   Google Scholar
• Mannering, F., Shankar, V., & Bhat, C. (2016). Unobserved heterogeneity and the statistical analysis of highway accident data. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 11, 1–16. doi: 10.1016/j.amar.2016.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mannering, F., Winston, C., & Starkey, W. (2002). An exploratory analysis of automobile leasing by US households. Journal of Urban Economics, 52(1), 154–176. doi: 10.1016/S0094-1190(02)00009-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McFadden, D. (1981). Econometric models for probabilistic choice. Structural analysis of discrete data using econometric applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• McFadden, D. (2007). The behavioral science of transportation. Transport Policy, 14(4), 269–274. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menon, N., Pinjari, A. R., Zhang, Y., & Zou, L. (2016). Consumer perception and intended adoption of autonomous-vehicle technology: Findings from a university population survey. In Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting (No. 16-5998).
   Google Scholar
• Menon, N., Barbour, N., Zhang, Y., Pinjari, A., & Mannering, F. (2018). Shared autonomous vehicles and their potential impacts on household vehicle ownership: An exploratory empirical assessment. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, Forthcoming, 1. doi: 10.1080/15568318.2018.1443178
   Google Scholar
• Moore, G. (2009). Crossing the chasm: Marketing and selling disruptive products to mainstream customers. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2001). The semantics of anchoring. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 234–255. doi: 10.1006/obhd.2001.2954
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nickerson, R. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220. doi: 10.1037//1089-2680.2.2.175
   Google Scholar
• Rakotonarivo, O., Schaafsma, M., & Hockley, N. (2016). A systematic review of the reliability and validity of discrete choice experiments in valuing non-market environmental goods. Journal of Environmental Management, 183, 98–109. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.08.032
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seraneeprakarn, P., Huang, S., Shankar, V., Mannering, F., Venkataraman, N., & Milton, J. (2017). Occupant injury severities in hybrid-vehicle involved crashes: A random parameters approach with heterogeneity in means and variances. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 15, 41–55. doi: 10.1016/j.amar.2017.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strack, F., & Mussweiler, T. (1997). Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(3), 437–446. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.437
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science (New York, N.Y.), 185(4157), 1124–1131. Judgement
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Exel, N., Brouwer, W., van den Berg, B., & Koopmanschap, M. (2006). With a little help from an anchor: Discussion and evidence of anchoring effects in contingent evaluation. Journal of Socio-Economics, 35(5), 836–853. doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2005.11.045
   Google Scholar
• Washington, S., Karlaftis, M., & Mannering, F. (2011). Statistical and econometric methods for transportation data analysis, 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis, Chapman and Hall/CRC.
   Google Scholar
• Wegener, D., Petty, R., Blankenship, K., & Detweiler-Bedell, B. (2010). Elaboration and numerical anchoring: implications of attitude theories for consumer judgment and decision making. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(1), 5–16. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wegener, D. T., Petty, R. E., Detweiler-Bedell, B., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (2001). Implications of attitude change theories for numerical anchoring: Anchor plausibility and the limits of anchor effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(1), 62–69. doi: 10.1006/jesp.2000.1431
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar