Will people accept shared autonomous electric vehicles? A survey before and after receipt of the costs and benefits
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
40% of people are willing to use SAVs for 80% of their trips and 44% are willing to use for 50% of their trips, while the remaining 16% will continue to use their private vehicle for all their trips.
“Webb et al. (2019) estimate that 40% of the people are willing to use SAVs for 80% of their trips and 44% are willing to use for 50% of their trips.But, remaining 16% will continue to use their private vehicle for all their trips.”
From Shared autonomous vehicle services: A comprehensive review (2020) · cites this paper as Webb et al., 2019
Cites
A survey of public opinion about connected vehicles in the U.S., the U.K., and Australia
Schoettle, B., & Sivak, M. (2014) · 2014 International Conference on Connected Vehicles and Expo (ICCVE) · doi:10.1109/iccve.2014.7297637 · Cited by 400 · see citing works
Firnkorn, J., & Müller, M. (2015) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2014.09.005 · Cited by 187 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Shared autonomous vehicle services: A comprehensive review
Narayanan, S., Chaniotakis, E., & Antoniou, C. (2020) · Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1016/j.trc.2019.12.008 · Cited by 691 · see citing works
- Authors
- Webb, J., Wilson, C., & Kularatne, T.
- Affiliations
- Queensland University of Technology (AU)
- Venue
- Economic Analysis and Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-03
- Volume
- 61
- Pages
- 118-135
- ISSN
- 0313-5926 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2910096930
- Cited by
- 92
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 5.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- eprints.qut.edu.au
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- Locations
- Economic Analysis and Policy (publishedVersion)
- QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Transportation and Mobility Innovations
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
- Keywords
- shared autonomous electric vehicles, willingness to pay, car ownership, autonomous vehicles, ride-sharing, electric vehicles, mode choice, discrete choice experiment, travel cost, congestion, urban space, Brisbane
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
