Intention of Risk-Taking Behavior at Unsignalized Intersections Under the Connected Vehicle Environment

Abstract

With the rapid emergence of connected vehicle (CV) technologies, there is a shortage of research to understand CV technology's effect on drivers' risk-taking behavioral intentions. This paper aims to analyze driver responses to the real-time information by comparing their reactions to driving intentions between the CV and non-CV environments. A multi-group structural equation model (SEM) is employed to explore the heterogeneity in the relationships between behavioral intentions, attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and risk perceptions under the two different environments. This study reveals two key findings: 1) regarding driver responses to the theory of planned behavior (TPB) model, there are significant differences in attitudes and risk perceptions between the CV and non-CV environments; 2) irrespective of driving environments, risk-taking behavioral intentions are directly related to perceived behavioral control and risk perceptions. While intentions are directly related to attitudes but not associated with subjective norms under the non-CV environment. In contrast, intentions are directly related to subjective norms but not associated with attitude under the CV environment. The findings provide a theoretical basis for using TPB to evaluate CV technology's effects and understanding the differences between the CV and non-CV environments. INDEX TERMS Connected vehicles, Risky driving intentions, Structural equation model, Theory of planned behavior, Unsignalized intersections.

Social Norms Matter: University Students’ Misbehaviors in the Metro Carriage

“…(i) Subjective norms are norms that are enforced by the expectations of people that are important to an individual. For example, what friends/parents expect an individual to do [31,[33][34][35]. (ii) Personal norms are self-expectations of a specific action in a particular situation, experienced as a feeling of moral obligation.…”

“…to test the theoretical hypotheses with empirical data [35]. SEM can simultaneously handle several endogenous and exogenous variables to measure hypothetical latent constructs and to examine the underlying relationships between or in endogenous and exogenous latent variables, respectively [35,55,56]. SEM outperforms the multiple linear regression to reject the false null hypothesis [54].…”

Vehicle Motion State Prediction Method Integrating Point Cloud Time Series Multiview Features and Multitarget Interactive Information

“…In this work, microlevel data, such as the driving track, velocity, and acceleration of the moving target, are obtained using sensor equipment, including light detection and ranging (LiDAR) and cameras. Employing data from research fields that include state estimation [1], intention recognition [2], trajectory prediction [3], intelligent driving [4], driving behavior analysis [5], and safety risk detection [6] can assist intelligent transportation systems in improving traffic safety and reduce accidents.…”

Profiling the Enthusiastic, Neutral, and Sceptical Users of Conditionally Automated Cars in 17 Countries: A Questionnaire Study

“…e largest differences between Enthusiasts, Neutrals, and Sceptics were found in their perception of the expected benefits (efficiency, comfort, and safety) of conditionally automated cars. is indicates that the expected benefits are key factors driving the acceptance of conditionally automated cars as in other surveys [12,27,42,53,64,65]. Enthusiasts were more likely to expect an increase in the productive use of travel time and travel comfort than Neutrals and Sceptics.…”