Public acceptance intention toward autonomous rapid transit in Malaysia using an extended technology acceptance model

Imagine a city where the buses and shuttles that carry people to work, school, and the market have no drivers at all. They navigate the streets, stop at the lights, and open their doors entirely on their own. This is the promise of autonomous rapid transit, a technology that is moving from science fiction into the real world. For these vehicles to succeed, however, they need more than just working software and sturdy wheels; they need people to trust them. The question researchers are asking is not just whether the machines can drive safely, but whether the public is willing to climb aboard. This inquiry sits at the intersection of transportation engineering and human behavior, exploring how people decide to use new technology. It relies on the understanding that our willingness to try something new depends on whether we find it useful, easy to understand, and safe. When a vehicle removes the human driver, the calculation changes, introducing new worries about security and the unknown, alongside the familiar hope for a smoother, greener commute.

In the southern part of Malaysia, specifically in a region known as Iskandar Malaysia, a team of researchers set out to measure this public willingness. They focused on a specific area where a driverless transit system is being considered, looking at the people who might one day ride it. To understand what drives acceptance, the researchers did not just ask if people liked the idea of a driverless bus. They built a detailed picture of the respondents, asking about their jobs, where they lived, and how they currently got around. They also probed deeper into what people feared and what they hoped for, asking specifically about safety, the risk of hacking, and how environmentally friendly the system seemed. The goal was to see if these different factors—like a person's age or their current habit of driving a private car—told a story about who would be ready to switch to an automated ride.

The researchers gathered their information through an online survey that reached 426 people. The group that answered was quite young, with half of them between the ages of 14 and 19, and a large portion were students or people working in the private sector. Most of the people who responded currently relied on their own personal cars to get around. When the researchers asked these individuals how likely they were to use the new autonomous transit, the answer was generally positive. About three-quarters of the people surveyed said they were likely or very likely to accept the service. This suggests that the basic idea of a driverless public transport system is not a hard sell to the public in this region, but the details of who accepts it and why reveal a more complex landscape.

The study found that acceptance was not spread evenly across the population. Where a person lived mattered significantly. People living in certain towns within the region showed a stronger willingness to use the service than those in other areas. Similarly, a person's job played a role; students and private-sector employees were more open to the idea than those who were self-employed, government workers, or unemployed. Perhaps most notably, the way people currently traveled influenced their future choices. The largest group of respondents were private car owners, and surprisingly, this group showed a strong willingness to accept the new system. This indicates that even those who are comfortable with their own vehicles are not necessarily opposed to giving up the steering wheel for a public ride, provided the service meets their needs.

To understand the mechanics behind these choices, the researchers used a method that connects different ideas together to see which ones truly drive the result. They looked at how a person's background, their feelings about safety, and their view of the technology's usefulness all linked together. The analysis showed that a person's background, such as their age and education, did influence their overall acceptance. However, the most powerful factor was how safe and secure the passengers felt. The data revealed a clear pattern: when people felt the system was safe and secure, their willingness to use it went up. Conversely, when they perceived risks to their safety or security, their willingness to use the service dropped. This relationship was strong and consistent, suggesting that the feeling of safety is the gatekeeper for adoption.

One specific fear that often comes up with new technology is the worry about hackers or cyber-attacks. The researchers specifically tested whether the fear of a computer system being hacked influenced people's feelings about the safety of the bus. The results were unexpected but clear: in this group of people, the fear of cyber-security risks did not significantly change their opinion on whether the system was safe. While people might worry about hackers in the abstract, this specific worry did not stop them from feeling that the vehicle itself was secure enough to ride. This finding suggests that for the general public in this context, the physical safety of the ride and the security of the passenger are far more important than the digital security of the software.

The study also looked at other factors that usually make people like a new service. People were more likely to accept the system if they thought it would be easy to use, if it seemed useful for their daily life, and if they believed it was good for the environment. These factors worked together to build a positive attitude. The researchers found that these different pieces of the puzzle explained a large portion of why people felt the way they did. The model they built fit the data very well, meaning the connections they found between safety, background, and acceptance were reliable and not just a coincidence.

For the people planning to build and run these systems, the message is specific and practical. To get people on board, the focus must be on visible safety. Passengers need to see that the vehicle is secure, that there are clear emergency procedures, and that they will be protected while they ride. The service also needs to be convenient, connecting easily to the places people already go, so that the first and last steps of a journey are not a hassle. Communication should be tailored to different groups; what convinces a student might not be the same thing that convinces a government employee. While the idea of a driverless bus is popular, the study shows that trust is built on tangible safety and practical convenience, not just on the novelty of the technology.

The researchers were careful to note the limits of their work. Because they asked people what they would do rather than watching what they did do, the results are a measure of intention, not a guarantee of future ridership. The group they surveyed was also quite young and not perfectly representative of the entire country's population. Despite these limits, the study provides a clear snapshot of the current mood in Iskandar Malaysia. It shows that the public is ready for the next step in public transport, but only if the system feels safe, secure, and useful. The path forward is not just about perfecting the machines, but about understanding the people who will one day sit inside them.