Environment and Social Psychology

A Study on Perception Gaps in Autonomous Vehicle Technologies and Their Implications for AV Transport System Deployment: An Integrated AHP–T-Test Approach

SeongJeong Yoon

Department of AI & Bigdata, Swiss School of Management, Pellandini 4 6500 Bellinzona, Switzerland

MinYong Kim

School of Business, Kyung Hee University, 26 Kyungheedae-ro, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 02447, Korea

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v10i12.4413

Keywords: Autonomous vehicles; perception gap; expectation–disconfirmation; AHP, transport system deployment, safety assurance

---

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the perception gap between users’ expectations and the actual performance of autonomous vehicle (AV) technologies, and to examine how these gaps influence the deployment of AV-based transport services such as autonomous taxis, shuttles, and mobility-as-a-service (MaaS). A total of 107 users with experience in Level 2–3 autonomous driving systems participated in a structured survey evaluating expectations and satisfaction across three domains: Technology (decision-making, control, communication), Safety (driver monitoring, takeover request, emergency handling, system redundancy), and Convenience (long-distance support, lane automation, vehicle condition monitoring). Paired-samples t-tests revealed a significant gap in decision-making technology and statistically significant expectation–performance discrepancies in all Safety and Convenience items. System redundancy recorded the largest gap, indicating users’ strong concerns about fail-safe capability. To identify priority areas for AV service deployment, an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) framework was constructed. The results showed that users prioritize Safety Assurance (0.38), whereas manufacturers and engineering experts assign the highest importance to Decision-Making Technology (0.34). These differing priorities highlight a structural misalignment between supply-side development strategies and demand-side expectations, which may influence public acceptance, operational reliability, and regulatory planning for AV transport systems. This study contributes to the literature by integrating perception-gap analysis with a technology prioritization model, offering actionable insights for future AV system design, service planning, and safety policy formulation.

---

References

[1]. 1.Shao, W., et al. (2025). From prediction to planning: Comprehensive uncertainty management in autonomous driving. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2025.3581238

[2]. 2.Alqahtani, T. (2025). Recent trends in the public acceptance of autonomous vehicles: A review. Vehicles. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles7020045

[3]. 3.Yang, Y., & Kim, M.-Y. (2024). Promoting sustainable transportation: How people trust and accept autonomous vehicles—Focusing on the different levels of collaboration between human drivers and artificial intelligence—An empirical study with partial least squares structural equation modeling and multi-group analysis. Sustainability, 17(1), 125. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17010125

[4]. 4.Kenesei, Z., et al. (2025). The central role of trust and perceived risk in the acceptance of autonomous vehicles in an integrated UTAUT model. European Transport Research Review, 17(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-024-00681-x

[5]. 5.Fernández Llorca, D., et al. (2025). Testing autonomous vehicles and AI: Perspectives and challenges from cybersecurity, transparency, robustness and fairness. European Transport Research Review, 17(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-025-00732-x

[6]. 6.Nazari, F., Noruzoliaee, M., & Mohammadian, A. K. (2025). Autonomous vehicle adoption behavior and safety concern: A study of public perception. Multimodal Transportation, 100252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.multra.2025.100252

[7]. 7.Li, J. (2024). Investigating the factors influencing user trust and driving performance in level-3 ADS. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2024.06.013

[8]. 8.Akram, M., & Ilyasa, F. (2025). An enhanced interval rough numbers-based outranking technique for evaluation of technology for sustainable mining. Iranian Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 22(1), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.22111/ijfs.2025.49980.8832

[9]. 9.Gherardini, L., & Cabri, G. (2024). The impact of autonomous vehicles on safety, economy, society, and environment. World Electric Vehicle Journal, 15(12), 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/wevj15120579

[10]. 10.Rahman, M. M., & Thill, J.-C. (2023). Impacts of connected and autonomous vehicles on urban transportation and environment: A comprehensive review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 96, 104649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104649

[11]. 11.SAE International. (2021). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles (SAE Standard J3016_202104). https://www.sae.org/standards/j3016_202104-taxonomy-definitions-terms-related-driving-automation-systems-road-motor-vehicles

[12]. 12.Khan, M. A., et al. (2022). Level 5 autonomous driving—Are we there yet? A review of research literature. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(2), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3485767

[13]. 13.Tafidis, P., et al. (2022). Safety implications of higher levels of automated vehicles: A scoping review. Transport Reviews, 42(2), 245–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.1971794

[14]. 14.Caesar, H., Bankiti, V., Lang, A. H., Vora, S., Liong, V. E., Xu, Q., … Kautz, J. (2020). nuScenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 11618–11628. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR42600.2020.01164

[15]. 15.Huang, T., et al. (2025). Vehicle-to-everything cooperative perception for autonomous driving. Proceedings of the IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2025.3600903

[16]. 16.Zhang, X., et al. (2025). Vehicle-to-everything communication in intelligent connected vehicles: A survey and taxonomy. Automotive Innovation, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42154-024-00310-2

[17]. 17.Sarlak, A., Amin, R., & Razi, A. (2025). Extended visibility of autonomous vehicles via optimized cooperative perception under imperfect communication (arXiv:2503.18192). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.18192

[18]. 18.Chavan, S. (2024). A takeover framework for autonomous vehicles to enhance safety and driving experience (Doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Publication No. 31486976). https://www.proquest.com/openview/152cc469970c859767ba4351f225124f/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

[19]. 19.Nagy, V., et al. (2024). Evaluation of autonomous vehicle takeover performance in work-zone environment. Engineering Proceedings, 79(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2024079059

[20]. 20.Sever, T., & Contissa, G. (2024). Automated driving regulations—Where are we now? Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 24, 101033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2024.101033

[21]. 21.Weiss, P., Younessi, A., & Steinhorst, S. (2023). Reliability analysis of gracefully degrading automotive systems (arXiv:2305.07401). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.07401

[22]. 22.Hanselaar, C. A. J., et al. (2024). The safety shell: An architecture to handle functional insufficiencies in automated driving. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 25(7), 7522–7540. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2024.3352829

[23]. 23.Kuzmenko, O., Vasylieva, T., & Boiko, O. (2024). Strategic management of sustainable economic development in transport and logistics sector companies. Financial and Credit Activity: Problems of Theory and Practice, 8(4), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.61954/2616-7107/2024.8.4-9

[24]. 24.SAE International. (2021). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles (SAE Standard J3016_202104). https://doi.org/10.4271/J3016_202104

[25]. 25.Shladover, S. E. (2018). Connected and automated vehicle systems: Introduction and overview. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 22(3), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2017.1336053

[26]. 26.Merat, N., Madigan, R., & Nordhoff, S. (2019). Human factors, user requirements, and user acceptance of automated driving systems. Proceedings of the IEEE, 107(2), 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2018.2868015

[27]. 27.Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., & de Winter, J. C. F. (2015). Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire. Transportation Research Part F, 32, 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.014

[28]. 28.Faisal, A., Kamruzzaman, M., Yigitcanlar, T., & Currie, G. (2019). A systematic literature review on capability, impact, planning and policy issues associated with autonomous vehicles. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 12(1), 45–72. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2019.1401

[29]. 29.Fraske, T., Stilgoe, J., & Cohen, T. (2024). Driving change? Exploring the role of socio-technical experiments with autonomous vehicles in shaping mobility futures. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 20, 100899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2024.100899

[30]. 30.Yigitcanlar, T., Wilson, M., & Kamruzzaman, M. (2020). Can autonomous vehicles contribute to smart city goals? Sustainable Cities and Society, 63, 102434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102434

[31]. 31.Booth, L., & Khoshghalb, A. (2024). Assessing the impacts of autonomous vehicles on urban sustainability. Sustainability, 16(13), 5551. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135551

[32]. 32.Litman, T. (2025). Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions: Implications for transport planning. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. https://www.vtpi.org/avip.pdf

[33]. 33.Alqahtani, T. (2025). Recent trends in the public acceptance of autonomous vehicles: A review. Vehicles, 7(1), 16–38. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles7010002

[34]. 34.Nordhoff, S., de Winter, J., Kyriakidis, M., van Arem, B., & Happee, R. (2018). Acceptance of driverless vehicles: Results from a large cross-national questionnaire. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2018, 5382192. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5382192

[35]. 35.Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008

[36]. 36.Jasanoff, S. (2016). The ethics of invention: Technology and the human future. W. W. Norton & Company.

[37]. 37.Li, B., et al. (2025). V2x-dgw: Domain generalization for multi-agent perception under adverse weather conditions. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA55743.2025.11127945

[38]. 38.Dreissig, M., et al. (2023). Survey on lidar perception in adverse weather conditions. In Proceedings of the IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV). https://doi.org/10.1109/IV55152.2023.10186539

[39]. 39.Wang, J., et al. (2024). Perception methods for adverse weather based on vehicle infrastructure cooperation system: A review. Sensors, 24(2), 374. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24020374

[40]. 40.Kou, E., & Curran, N. (2024). Enhancing autonomous vehicle perception in adverse weather through image augmentation during semantic segmentation training (arXiv:2408.07239). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2408.07239

[41]. 41.Bhatt, N. P., et al. (2024). WATonoBus: Field-tested all-weather autonomous shuttle technology. In Proceedings of the IEEE 27th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC). https://doi.org/10.1109/ITSC58415.2024.10919505

[42]. 42.Rahmati, M. (2025). Edge AI-powered real-time decision-making for autonomous vehicles in adverse weather conditions (arXiv:2503.09638). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.09638

[43]. 43.Baidakova, N., Zhuravleva, T., & Klymenko, O. (2025). Analysis of innovative electromobility development and the advancement of eco-friendly transport infrastructure. Sustainability, 17(3), 1010.

[44]. 44.https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031010

[45]. 45.Naiseh, M., et al. (2025). Trust, risk perception, and intention to use autonomous vehicles: An interdisciplinary bibliometric review. AI & Society, 40(2), 1091–1111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-01895-2

[46]. 46.Yang, Y., Peng, L., & Wan, D. (2025). A comparative study on the acceptance of autonomous driving technology by China and Europe: A transnational empirical analysis based on the technology acceptance model (Preprint). https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202508.1473.v1

[47]. 47.Shahedi, A., Dadashpour, I., & Rezaei, M. (2023). Barriers to the sustainable adoption of autonomous vehicles in developing countries: A multi-criteria decision-making approach. Heliyon, 9(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15975

[48]. 48.Li, S., Zhou, R., & Huang, H. (2025). Multidimensional evaluation of autonomous driving test scenarios based on AHP-EWN-TOPSIS models. Automotive Innovation, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42154-024-00344-6

[49]. 49.Tengilimoglu, O. (2024). The readiness of road network and its implications for automated vehicle operations. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Oguz-Tengilimoglu/publication/385411674_The_readiness_of_road_network_and_its_implications_for_automated_vehicle_operations/links/67c6a515461fb56424eff81a/The-readiness-of-road-network-and-its-implications-for-automated-vehicle-operations.pdf

[50]. 50.Xia, Y., et al. (2023). Parameterized decision-making with multi-modal perception for autonomous driving (arXiv:2312.11935). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.11935

[51]. 51.Liu, Y., Li, H., & Pan, Y. (2025). Understanding perceived ride safety and trust formation in robotaxi services under day and night conditions. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 41798. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-25722-w

[52]. 52.Kaye, S.-A., et al. (2021). Users’ acceptance of private automated vehicles: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Safety Research, 79, 352–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2021.10.002

[53]. 53.Sun, M. (2024). Multi-sensor data fusion and management strategies for robust perception in autonomous vehicles. Nuvern Applied Science Reviews, 8(10), 59–68. https://nuvern.com/index.php/nasr/article/view/2024-10-22

[54]. 54.Ma, Z., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Driver-automated vehicle interaction in mixed traffic: Types of interaction and drivers’ driving styles. Human Factors, 66(2), 544–561. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208221088358

[55]. 55.Gamal, A., et al. (2023). An interactive multi-criteria decision-making approach for autonomous vehicles and distributed resources based on logistic systems: Challenges for a sustainable future. Sustainability, 15(17), 12844. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712844

[56]. 56.Pan, H., et al. (2024). A safe motion planning and reliable control framework for autonomous vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 9(4), 4780–4793. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2024.3360418

[57]. 57.Huang, T., et al. (2023). V2X cooperative perception for autonomous driving: Recent advances and challenges (arXiv:2310.03525). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.03525

[58]. 58.Wei, C., Wu, G., & Barth, M. J. (2025). Cooperative perception for automated driving: A survey of algorithms, applications, and future directions. Proceedings of the IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2025.3608874

[59]. 59.Nordhoff, S., de Winter, J. C. F., Kyriakidis, M., van Arem, B., & Happee, R. (2018). Acceptance of driverless vehicles: Results from a large cross-national questionnaire. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2018, 5382192. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5382192

[60]. 60.Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., & de Winter, J. C. F. (2015). Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 32, 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.014

[61]. 61.Merat, N., Madigan, R., & Nordhoff, S. (2019). Human factors, user requirements, and user acceptance of automated driving systems. Proceedings of the IEEE, 107(2), 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2018.2868015

[62]. 62.Shladover, S. E. (2018). Connected and automated vehicle systems: Introduction and overview. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 22(3), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2017.1336053

[63]. 63.Alqahtani, T. (2025). Recent trends in the public acceptance of autonomous vehicles: A review. Vehicles, 7(1), 16–38. https://doi.org/10.3390/vehicles7010002

[64]. 64.SAE International. (2021). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles (SAE Standard J3016™_202104). https://doi.org/10.4271/J3016_202104

[65]. 65.Shladover, S. E., & Nowakowski, C. (2015). Regulatory challenges for automated vehicle systems. Transportation Research Record, 2489(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3141/2489-01

[66]. 66.Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590

[67]. 67.Macharis, C., Springael, J., De Brucker, K., & Verbeke, A. (2004). PROMETHEE and AHP: The design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 153(2), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00153-5

[68]. 68.Tsamboulas, D., & Mikroudis, G. (2000). EFQM-based multicriteria decision-making for transport projects. European Journal of Operational Research, 122(2), 316–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00095-5