Will the Public Ever Trust Fully Autonomous Cars?
When it comes to autonomous vehicles, it seems the age-old saying is accurate: Familiarity breeds contempt. At the very least, familiarity with autonomous cars breeds skepticism. Recent studies show that as the public has become more familiar with self-driving cars, trust in those cars has eroded. One factor in the lack of trust might be a series of high-profile autonomous vehicle crashes — some of them fatal — which may have been the first introduction some people had to self-driving cars. Another factor could be that though more people have heard of self-driving cars, few understand how they work and self-driving car companies haven’t exactly been transparent with their information. The lack of regulation over autonomous vehicles doesn’t help matters and is something lawmakers will have to take seriously, soon.
Of course, the main issue could be that human beings are used to human drivers and though human drivers often make errors — all too frequently fatal mistakes — we still understand and accept those more than we accept a computer’s error, even if that computer is programmed to make far fewer blunders. Self-driving cars, if they become as widespread as industry insiders believe they will, could have a significant impact on society and how we live our lives, which could affect how willing people are to accept them.
How Does the Public Feel About Self-Driving Cars?
With more self-driving cars on the road than in the past — and even more projected in coming years — researchers are exploring how the public feels about autonomous vehicles. Companies like Deloitte have researched public views about autonomous cars in recent years, and have interviewed people in a variety of countries, including the United States, Japan, and Germany.
Though the overall percentage of people in the U.S. who agree that autonomous vehicles will not be safe is down over three years, that percentage increased between 2018 and 2019. In 2017, the percentage of people who believe autonomous vehicles are not safe was 74 percent. That figure dropped to 47 percent in 2018, but then rose to 50 percent again in 2019.
Cox Automotive also recently released a study with similar results to Deloitte’s. A main difference between the two, however, is that Cox Automotive differentiated between autonomous technology and semi-autonomous technology. What researchers in the Cox Automotive study found was that while people are generally willing to adopt some autonomous technology, they aren’t embracing full vehicle autonomy just yet.
According to Cox Automotive’s survey, consumers have a high desire for autonomous features in their vehicles, including collision avoidance, lane keeping assist, adaptive cruise control, and active parking assist. Furthermore, 54 percent of respondents said the new technology features would make people better drivers.
Consumer trust, however, stops at around Level 2 vehicle autonomy — the level at which the above features sit. When it comes to fully autonomous cars, 68 percent of respondents said they would feel uncomfortable in a car that was entirely controlled by a computer. That’s compared with 39 percent of respondents who feel uncomfortable in a vehicle driven by a stranger. Meanwhile, 84 percent of those who responded think even in a fully autonomous vehicle, humans should always have the option of taking control of the vehicle, compared with 16 percent who said they were comfortable not having the option of taking control in an autonomous vehicle.
From 2016 to 2018, public perception of autonomous vehicle safety has decreased, according to Cox Automotive. In 2016, 47 percent of respondents agreed that Level 5 autonomous vehicles are safe, compared with only 28 percent in 2018. In the same period, the percentage of people who believed Level 4 autonomy is safe dropped from 64 percent to 45 percent, and the percentage who believed Level 3 is safe dropped from 73 percent to 59 percent. In 2016, the percentage of people who agree that roadways would be safer if all vehicles were fully autonomous was 63 percent, compared with 45 percent in 2018.
Those who find autonomy appealing tend to prefer Level 2 autonomy, with 49 percent of people saying they would never buy a Level 5 autonomous vehicle. That percentage shifts depending on the age of the respondents, with 71 percent of Baby Boomers rejecting fully autonomous vehicles but only 39 percent of Millennials doing the same. Forty-eight percent of Generation Z said they would never buy a Level 5 vehicle, but it’s not clear if that’s a lack of trust in the vehicles or that they don’t consider car ownership a necessity.
“As awareness around the development of autonomous technology increases, we’re seeing some dramatic shifts in consumer sentiment,” said Karl Brauer, executive publisher of Autotrader and Kelley Blue Book. “People now have a deeper understanding of the complexities involved when creating a self-driving car, and that has them reconsidering their comfort level when it comes to handing over control.”
Other studies have also found that people don’t entirely trust autonomous vehicles. A 2018 study from Allianz Global Assistance found that the percentage of Americans who are not very or not at all interested in using self-driving vehicles rose from 47 percent in 2017 to 57 percent in 2018. Of those who were not interested in the technology, 71 percent of 2018 respondents said safety was their concern, compared with 65 percent in 2017.
A 2018 AAA poll found that 73 percent of drivers in the US said they would not ride in a fully autonomous vehicle, compared with 63 percent in 2017. Also in 2018, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 67 percent of US residents who responded were uncomfortable with riding in self-driving cars.
Public Has Concerns About Data Collection in Autonomous Vehicles
In addition to concerns about safety, the U.S. public also has concerns about who would manage any data collected and shared by the vehicle. When asked who they would trust the most to manage such data, 31 percent of respondents said the OEM (original equipment manufacturer), another 31 percent said no one, 27 percent said “other” (which includes insurance companies, financial service providers, cellular service providers and cloud service providers), 9 percent said the dealer and 2 percent said the government.
Autonomous Car Safety Concerns: The Role of Media
In examining the reasons for the increase in safety concerns, Deloitte noted that media coverage of recent accidents could have a negative impact on the public’s perception of autonomous vehicles. As indicated in the study, 65 percent of respondents from the US said media reports about autonomous vehicle accidents affected their perception of autonomous technology.
Cox Automotive takes a less harsh view of media coverage, noting that while it could play a role in perception it may only be “slightly to blame” because people who were not aware of the high-profile accidents were just as likely to put their faith in human drivers as people who were aware of the accidents.
The accidents in question are the March 18 accident in which an Uber vehicle hit and killed a pedestrian named Elaine Herzberg when she crossed a street in Tempe, Arizona; and a March 23 accident in which a Tesla in autonomous mode crashed into a highway median in Mountain View, California, killing the driver.
Autonomous Car Safety Concerns: The Role of Industry
How industry insiders talk about autonomy may also be leading to some skepticism — and concerns about safety. Another recent study by AAA involved a survey of 34 car brands that can be purchased in the US and have advanced driver systems. That study found the companies used 40 different names to describe automatic emergency braking, 20 names for adaptive cruise control, and 19 names for lane assistance.
Some of the names manufacturers use include: Dynamic radar cruise control (for adaptive cruise control), Distronic Plus (for adaptive cruise control), Intelligent Lane Intervention (for lane-keeping assistance), Lane Change Alert with Side Blind Zone Alert (for Blind Spot Warning), and Intelligent Around View Monitor (for Surround View Camera).
The trouble with such confusing terminology is that it isn’t always clear what that feature does, and drivers may not understand how the features work. That lack of understanding can result in drivers overestimating how much control the car can have, and whether or not they — as the driver — need to stay engaged. The variations in terminology also make it difficult for consumers to research and decide which safety systems are best for them.
Autonomous Car Safety Concerns: The Role of Regulators
The public is also looking to government to ensure self-driving cars are safe. According to Deloitte’s study, 56 percent of Americans want the government to have significant oversight into how autonomous vehicles are developed and used and another 31 percent want some oversight.
A 2018 ORC International Poll found that 73 percent of Americans polled support the US Department of Transportation developing safety standards for driverless car features and 80 percent said they support “minimum performance requirements for computers that operate driverless cars.”
Confusion over who is responsible for an autonomous car crash could be partially responsible for the public wanting significant government oversight. Cox Automotive found that in the case of an accident involving a self-driving car, respondents were almost even in their blame, with 27 percent blaming the software developer, 26 percent blaming the OEM and 24 percent blaming the vehicle rider or owner.
“Given that consumer interest in AVs has stalled, governments should provide regulatory leadership,” the Deloitte study’s authors wrote in an accompanying article. “Establishing critical standards for AV development and use could address safety concerns, and it may also help the industry converge on technology solutions while reducing the cost of regulatory compliance.”
What Does Public Skepticism Mean for Autonomous Carmakers?
At least some companies involved in developing autonomous vehicles have taken notice of public perception, and have begun focusing more of their attention on semi-autonomous vehicles. Those that have developed autonomous vehicles have either done so only as a means to deliver goods — such as groceries — instead of people, or have back-up drivers in the car with the passengers.
Many are turning their attention to enhancing their Level 2 autonomy features, with companies like Nvidia developing what it calls the first commercially available 2+ automated driving system. That system includes many of the features commonly found in Level 2, with additions such as driver monitoring systems and DRIVE AutoPilot to handle driving challenges.
The issue self-driving carmakers face is that the public currently believes that the vehicles meant to reduce the number of accidents on the road can’t be trusted. Carmakers may have a long, winding road ahead of them if they want to change that perception.
Sources:
https://www.businessinsider.com/self-driving-car-worries-grow-despite-new-products-2019-1
https://driving.ca/volvo/auto-news/news/motor-mouth-weve-had-quite-enough-of-progress
https://www.coxautoinc.com/news/evolution-of-mobility-study-autonomous-vehicles/
http://saferoads.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/AV-Public-Opinion-Polls-10-29-18-1.pdf
https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/29/18200592/driver-assistance-adas-names-aaa-report
https://www.aaa.com/AAA/common/AAR/files/ADAS-Technology-Names-Research-Report.pdf
