The Development of the Pooled Rideshare Acceptance Model (PRAM)

IF 1.8 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Safety Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.3390/safety9030061
Rakesh Gangadharaiah, J. Brooks, Patrick J. Rosopa, Haotian Su, Lisa Boor, Ashley Edgar, Kristin Kolodge, Yunyi Jia
{"title":"The Development of the Pooled Rideshare Acceptance Model (PRAM)","authors":"Rakesh Gangadharaiah, J. Brooks, Patrick J. Rosopa, Haotian Su, Lisa Boor, Ashley Edgar, Kristin Kolodge, Yunyi Jia","doi":"10.3390/safety9030061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Due to the advancements in real-time information communication technologies and sharing economies, rideshare services have gained significant momentum by offering dynamic and/or on-demand services. Rideshare service companies evolved from personal rideshare, where riders traveled solo or with known individuals, into pooled rideshare (PR), where riders can travel with one to multiple unknown riders. Similar to other shared economy services, pooled rideshare is beneficial as it efficiently utilizes resources, resulting in reduced energy usage, as well as reduced costs for the riders. However, previous research has demonstrated that riders have concerns about using pooled rideshare, especially regarding personal safety. A U.S. national survey with 5385 participants was used to understand human factor-related barriers and user preferences to develop a novel Pooled Rideshare Acceptance Model (PRAM). This model used a covariance-based structural equation model (CB-SEM) to identify the relationships between willingness to consider PR factors (time/cost, privacy, safety, service experience, and traffic/environment) and optimizing one’s experience of PR factors (vehicle technology/accessibility, convenience, comfort/ease of use, and passenger safety), resulting in the higher-order factor trust service. We examined the factors’ relative contribution to one’s willingness/attitude towards PR and user acceptance of PR. Privacy, safety, trust service, and convenience were statistically significant factors in the model, as were the comfort/ease of use factor and the service experience, traffic/environment, and passenger safety factors. The only two non-significant factors in the model were time/cost and vehicle technology/accessibility; it is only when a rider feels safe that individuals then consider the additional non-significant variables of time, cost, technology, and accessibility. Privacy, safety, and service experience were factors that discouraged the use of PR, whereas the convenience factor greatly encouraged the acceptance of PR. Despite the time/cost factor’s lack of significance, individual items related to time and cost were crucial when viewed within the context of convenience. This highlights that while user perceptions of privacy and safety are paramount to their attitude towards PR, once safety concerns are addressed, and services are deemed convenient, time and cost elements significantly enhance their trust in pooled rideshare services. This study provides a comprehensive understanding of user acceptance of PR services and offers actionable insights for policymakers and rideshare companies to improve their services and increase user adoption.","PeriodicalId":36827,"journal":{"name":"Safety","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/safety9030061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Due to the advancements in real-time information communication technologies and sharing economies, rideshare services have gained significant momentum by offering dynamic and/or on-demand services. Rideshare service companies evolved from personal rideshare, where riders traveled solo or with known individuals, into pooled rideshare (PR), where riders can travel with one to multiple unknown riders. Similar to other shared economy services, pooled rideshare is beneficial as it efficiently utilizes resources, resulting in reduced energy usage, as well as reduced costs for the riders. However, previous research has demonstrated that riders have concerns about using pooled rideshare, especially regarding personal safety. A U.S. national survey with 5385 participants was used to understand human factor-related barriers and user preferences to develop a novel Pooled Rideshare Acceptance Model (PRAM). This model used a covariance-based structural equation model (CB-SEM) to identify the relationships between willingness to consider PR factors (time/cost, privacy, safety, service experience, and traffic/environment) and optimizing one’s experience of PR factors (vehicle technology/accessibility, convenience, comfort/ease of use, and passenger safety), resulting in the higher-order factor trust service. We examined the factors’ relative contribution to one’s willingness/attitude towards PR and user acceptance of PR. Privacy, safety, trust service, and convenience were statistically significant factors in the model, as were the comfort/ease of use factor and the service experience, traffic/environment, and passenger safety factors. The only two non-significant factors in the model were time/cost and vehicle technology/accessibility; it is only when a rider feels safe that individuals then consider the additional non-significant variables of time, cost, technology, and accessibility. Privacy, safety, and service experience were factors that discouraged the use of PR, whereas the convenience factor greatly encouraged the acceptance of PR. Despite the time/cost factor’s lack of significance, individual items related to time and cost were crucial when viewed within the context of convenience. This highlights that while user perceptions of privacy and safety are paramount to their attitude towards PR, once safety concerns are addressed, and services are deemed convenient, time and cost elements significantly enhance their trust in pooled rideshare services. This study provides a comprehensive understanding of user acceptance of PR services and offers actionable insights for policymakers and rideshare companies to improve their services and increase user adoption.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
拼车接受模式(PRAM)的发展
由于实时信息通信技术和共享经济的进步,拼车服务通过提供动态和/或按需服务而获得了巨大的动力。拼车服务公司从个人拼车(乘客单独出行或与熟人一起出行)演变为拼车(PR),乘客可以与一名或多名不认识的乘客一起出行。与其他共享经济服务类似,拼车是有益的,因为它有效地利用了资源,减少了能源消耗,也降低了乘客的成本。然而,之前的研究表明,乘客对拼车有顾虑,尤其是在人身安全方面。一项有5385名参与者的美国全国调查被用来了解与人为因素相关的障碍和用户偏好,以开发一种新的拼车接受模型(PRAM)。该模型采用基于协方差的结构方程模型(CB-SEM)来识别考虑PR因素(时间/成本、隐私、安全、服务体验和交通/环境)的意愿与优化PR因素(车辆技术/可达性、便利性、舒适性/易用性和乘客安全)的体验之间的关系,从而产生高阶因子信任服务。我们考察了这些因素对人们对公关的意愿/态度和用户对公关的接受程度的相对贡献。隐私、安全、信任服务和便利性是模型中具有统计学意义的因素,舒适性/易用性因素以及服务体验、交通/环境和乘客安全因素也是如此。该模型中仅有的两个非显著因素是时间/成本和车辆技术/可达性;只有当乘客感到安全时,个人才会考虑时间、成本、技术和可达性等额外的非显著变量。隐私、安全和服务体验是阻碍PR使用的因素,而便利性因素极大地鼓励了PR的接受。尽管时间/成本因素缺乏重要性,但在便利性的背景下,与时间和成本相关的个别项目是至关重要的。这表明,虽然用户对隐私和安全的看法对他们对待公共关系的态度至关重要,但一旦安全问题得到解决,服务被认为是方便的,时间和成本因素就会大大增强他们对拼车服务的信任。这项研究提供了对用户接受公关服务的全面了解,并为政策制定者和拼车公司提供了可操作的见解,以改善他们的服务并提高用户的采用率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Safety
Safety Social Sciences-Safety Research
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
71
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
Enhancing System Safety and Reliability through Integrated FMEA and Game Theory: A Multi-Factor Approach General Knowledge and Attitudes about Safety and Emergency Evacuation: The Case of a Higher Education Institution Simultaneous Enhancement of Welder Health and Aluminum Weld Joint Quality Using Controlled Welding Room Condition Control Transitions in Level 3 Automation: Safety Implications in Mixed-Autonomy Traffic Improving Functional Exercises Based on Experts’ Evaluation Weights for Emergency Responses
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1