, Volume 45, Issue 6, pp 1607–1621 | Cite as

Modeling adoption timing of autonomous vehicles: innovation diffusion approach

  • Ramin Shabanpour
  • Ali Shamshiripour
  • Abolfazl Mohammadian


Autonomous vehicles (AVs) are expected to act as an economically-disruptive transportation technology offering several benefits to the society and causing significant changes in travel behavior and network performance. However, one of the critical issues that policymakers are facing is the absence of a sound estimation of their market penetration. This study is an effort to quantify the effect of different drivers on the adoption timing of AVs. To this end, we develop an innovation diffusion model in which individuals’ propensities to adopt a new technology such as AVs takes influence from a desire to innovate and a need to imitate the rest of the society. It also captures various sources of inter-personal heterogeneity. We found that conditional on our assumptions regarding the changes in market price of AVs over time, their market penetration in our study region (Chicago metropolitan area) will eventually reach 71.3%. Further, model estimation results show that a wide range of socio-demographic factors, travel pattern indicators, technology awareness, and perceptions of AVs are influential in people’s AV adoption timing decision. For instance, frequent long-distance travelers are found to make the adoption decision more innovatively while those who have experienced an accident in their lifetime are found to be more influenced by word of mouth.


Autonomous vehicles Adoption timing Innovation diffusion Heterogeneity Bass model 


  1. Bain, A.D.: The growth of demand for new commodities. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A. 126, 285–299 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bass, F.M.: A new product growth for model consumer durables. Manage. Sci. 15, 215–227 (1969). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dellenback, S.: Director, Intelligent Systems Department, Automation and Data Systems Division, Southwest Research Institute. Commun. by email, May 26. (2013)Google Scholar
  4. Fagnant, D.J., Kockelman, K.: Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 77, 167–181 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gregg, J.V., Hossell, C.H., Richardson, J.T.: Mathematical Trend Curves: An Aid to Forecasting. Published for Imperial Chemical Industries by Oliver and Boyd (1966)Google Scholar
  6. Heeler, R.M., Hustad, T.P.: Problems in predicting new product growth for consumer durables. Manage. Sci. 26, 1007–1020 (1980). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Islam, T.: Household level innovation diffusion model of photo-voltaic (PV) solar cells from stated preference data. Energy Policy 65, 340–350 (2014). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Islam, T., Meade, N.: The impact of competition, and economic globalization on the multinational diffusion of 3G mobile phones. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 79, 843–850 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kelarestaghi, K.B., Heaslip, K., Fessmann, V., Khalilikhah, M., Fuentes, A.: Intelligent transportation system security: hacked message signs. SAE Int. J. Transp. Cybersecur. Priv. (2018). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., de Winter, J.C.F.: Public opinion on automated driving: results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 32, 127–140 (2015). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Langheim, J.: Energy consumption and autonomous driving. Springer, Nueva York, NY (2016). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lavasani, M., Jin, X., Du, Y.: Market penetration model for autonomous vehicles on the basis of earlier technology adoption experience. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board. 2597, 67–74 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Manyika, J., Chui, M., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Bisson, P., Marrs, A.: Disruptive Technologies: Advances That Will Transform Life, Business, and the Global Economy, p. 163. McKinsey Glob. Institute, San Francisco (2013)Google Scholar
  14. Mattson, J.W.: Travel Behavior and Mobility of Transportation-Disadvantaged Populations: Evidence from the National Household Travel Survey. Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute, Fargo (2012)Google Scholar
  15. McCarthy, C., Ryan, J.: An econometric model of television ownership. Econ. Soc. Rev. 7, 265–277 (1976)Google Scholar
  16. Meade, N., Islam, T.: Modelling and forecasting the diffusion of innovation—a 25-year review. Int. J. Forecast. 22, 519–545 (2006). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Milakis, D., van Arem, B., van Wee, B.: Policy and society related implications of automated driving: a review of literature and directions for future research. J. Intell. Transp. Syst. 21, 324–348 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mirheli, A., Hajibabai, L., Hajbabaie, A.: Development of a signal-head-free intersection control logic in a fully connected and autonomous vehicle environment. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 92, 412–425 (2018). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nourinejad, M., Bahrami, S., Roorda, M.J.: Designing parking facilities for autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 109, 110–127 (2018). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations. Simon and Schuster, New York (1962)Google Scholar
  21. Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations. Simon and Schuster, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  22. Ryan, B., Gross, N.C.: The diffusion of hybrid seed corn in two Iowa communities. Rural Sociol. 8, 15–24 (1943)Google Scholar
  23. Schmittlein, D.C., Mahajan, V.: Maximum likelihood estimation for an innovation diffusion model of new product acceptance. Mark. Sci. 1, 57–78 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shabanpour, R., Golshani, N., Auld, J., Mohammadian, A.: Willingness-to-pay for automated vehicles: a random parameters and random thresholds HOPIT model. In: Proceedings of the International Choice Modelling Conference, Cape Town, South Africa (2017)Google Scholar
  25. Shabanpour, R., Golshani, N., Shamshiripour, A., Mohammadian, A.K.: Eliciting preferences for adoption of fully automated vehicles using best-worst analysis. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. (2018). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shamshiripour, A., Golshani, N., Shabanpour, R., Mohammadian, A. (Kouros): Week-long mode choice behavior: a dynamic random effects logit model. In: Transportation Research Board 98th Annual Meeting., Washington, DC (2019)Google Scholar
  27. Shchetko, N.: Laser eyes pose price hurdle for driverless cars. Wall Str. J. 21, 2014–2016 (2014)Google Scholar
  28. Silberg, G., Wallace, R., Matuszak, G., Plessers, J., Brower, C., Subramanian, D.: Self-driving cars: The next revolution. White paper, KPMG LLP & Center of Automotive Research (2012)Google Scholar
  29. Silk, A.J., Urban, G.L.: Pre-test-market evaluation of new packaged goods: a model and measurement methodology. J. Mark. Res. 15, 171–191 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stephens, T.S., Auld, J., Chen, Y., Gonder, J., Kontou, E., Lin, Z., Xie, F., Mohammadian, A., Shabanpour, R., Gohlke, D.: Assessing energy impacts of connected and automated vehicles at the U.S. national level—preliminary bounds and proposed methods. In: Meyer, G., Beiker, S. (eds.) Road Vehicle Automation 5. Lecture Notes in Mobility, pp. 105–115. Springer, Cham (2019)Google Scholar
  31. Tajalli, M., Hajbabaie, A.: Distributed optimization and coordination algorithms for dynamic speed optimization of connected and autonomous vehicles in urban street networks. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 95, 497–515 (2018). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tsai, B.-H., Li, Y., Lee, G.-H.: Forecasting global adoption of crystal display televisions with modified product diffusion model. Comput. Ind. Eng. 58, 553–562 (2010). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van den Bulte, C., Stremersch, S.: Social contagion and income heterogeneity in new product diffusion: a meta-analytic test. Mark. Sci. 23, 530–544 (2004). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Van Ittersum, K., Feinberg, F.M.: Cumulative timed intent: a new predictive tool for technology adoption. J. Mark. Res. 47, 808–822 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhang, J., Kuwano, M., Lee, B., Fujiwara, A.: Modeling household discrete choice behavior incorporating heterogeneous group decision-making mechanisms. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 43, 230–250 (2009). CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Materials EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations