Rehman, A; GhaffarianHoseini, A; Naismith, N; Almhafdy, A; Ghaffarianhoseini, A; Tookey, J and Urrehman, S (2025) Development of trust-based autonomous driving framework in New Zealand. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 14(2), pp. 429-470. ISSN 2046-6099
Abstract
Purpose: Autonomous vehicles (AVs) have the potential to transform the infrastructure, mobility and social well-being paradigms in New Zealand (NZ) amid its unprecedented population and road safety challenges. But, public acceptance, co-evolution of regulations and AV technology based on interpersonal and institutional trust perspectives pose significant challenges. Previous theories and models need to be more comprehensive to address trust influencing autonomous driving (AD) factors in natural settings. Therefore, this study aims to find key AD factors corresponding to the chain of human-machine interaction (HMI) events happening in real time and formulate a guiding framework for the successful deployment of AVs in NZ. Design/methodology/approach: This study utilized a comprehensive literature review complemented by an AV users' study with 15 participants. AV driving sprints were conducted on low, medium and high-density roads in Auckland, followed by 15 ideation workshops to gather data about the users' observations, feelings and attitudes towards the AVs during HMI. Findings: This research study determined nine essential trust-influencing AD determinants in HMI and legal readiness domains. These AD determinants were analyzed, corresponding to eight AV events in three phases. Subsequently, a guiding framework was developed based on these factors, i.e. human-machine interaction autonomous driving events relationship identification framework (HMI-ADERIF) for the deployment of AVs in New Zealand. Research limitations/implications: This study was conducted only in specific Auckland areas. Practical implications: This study is significant for advanced design research and provides valuable insights, guidelines and deployment pathways for designers, practitioners and regulators when developing HMI Systems for AD vehicles. Originality/value: This study is the first-ever AV user study in New Zealand in live traffic conditions. This user study also claimed its novelty due to AV trials in congested and fast-moving traffic on the four-lane motorway in New Zealand. Previously, none of the studies conducted AV user study on SUV BMW vehicle and motorway in real-time traffic conditions; all operations were completely autonomous without any input from the driver. Thus, it explored the essential autonomous driving (AD) trust influencing variables in human factors and legal readiness domains. This research is also unique in identifying critical AD determinants that affect the user trust, acceptance and adoption of AVs in New Zealand by bridging the socio-technical gap with futuristic research insights.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | autonomous driving; autonomous vehicles; determinants; human-machine interaction; ideation workshops; readiness |
| Index terms: | human factor, regulation, practitioner, population, methodology, well-being, evolution, literature review, determinant, interaction, real time, paradigm, designer, regulator, workshop, socio-technical, New Zealand, mobility, density |
| Subjects: | political science, infrastructure and transport systems, sociology, occupational health and safety management, project controls, education and knowledge transfer, data analysis and analytics, mental health and wellbeing, risk assessment, profession, behavioral psychology, demography, Geography, research methods, analytical methods, environmental science, practitioner, construction type |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety, Sustainability, Risk Management, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Governance, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Urban Studies, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here