Mirror or camera? Acceptance and valuation of camera-monitor systems
Manufacturers are increasingly considering the replacement of side-mounted rear-view mirrors with camera-monitor systems (CMS). These systems offer advantages that can improve rearward vision and safety, such as image enhancement. However, these systems must also be accepted and valuated by users. W...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2022-03-01
|
| Series: | Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198221002177 |
| _version_ | 1818992142699200512 |
|---|---|
| author | Christoph Bernhard Heiko Hecht |
| author_facet | Christoph Bernhard Heiko Hecht |
| author_sort | Christoph Bernhard |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Manufacturers are increasingly considering the replacement of side-mounted rear-view mirrors with camera-monitor systems (CMS). These systems offer advantages that can improve rearward vision and safety, such as image enhancement. However, these systems must also be accepted and valuated by users. We examined acceptance of CMS, the willingness to change from rear-view mirrors to CMS, and the willingness to pay for this replacement, using an online questionnaire. We also explored the relationship between these variables using an adaption of the technology acceptance model. In total, 364 subjects completed the questionnaire. Items were aggregated using confirmatory factor analysis and factors were analyzed using (non-) parametric tests as well as path model analysis. Despite a positive attitude and high intention to use standard CMS, a combination of mirror and blind spot detection system was preferred. Subjects were willing to pay around 300 € for standard CMS, which is comparable to the preferred price of driver assistance systems. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease-of-use, and satisfaction were strong predictors of intention-to-use, but only satisfaction had a direct effect on willingness-to-change, and none of these variables predicted willingness-to-pay. Finally, customization was identified as a promising way to increase acceptance of and preference for CMS. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-20T20:21:28Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a459b8125221490da49702be00617a04 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2590-1982 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-20T20:21:28Z |
| publishDate | 2022-03-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives |
| spelling | doaj.art-a459b8125221490da49702be00617a042022-12-21T19:27:34ZengElsevierTransportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives2590-19822022-03-0113100512Mirror or camera? Acceptance and valuation of camera-monitor systemsChristoph Bernhard0Heiko Hecht1Corresponding author.; Experimental Psychology, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Mainz, GermanyExperimental Psychology, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Mainz, GermanyManufacturers are increasingly considering the replacement of side-mounted rear-view mirrors with camera-monitor systems (CMS). These systems offer advantages that can improve rearward vision and safety, such as image enhancement. However, these systems must also be accepted and valuated by users. We examined acceptance of CMS, the willingness to change from rear-view mirrors to CMS, and the willingness to pay for this replacement, using an online questionnaire. We also explored the relationship between these variables using an adaption of the technology acceptance model. In total, 364 subjects completed the questionnaire. Items were aggregated using confirmatory factor analysis and factors were analyzed using (non-) parametric tests as well as path model analysis. Despite a positive attitude and high intention to use standard CMS, a combination of mirror and blind spot detection system was preferred. Subjects were willing to pay around 300 € for standard CMS, which is comparable to the preferred price of driver assistance systems. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease-of-use, and satisfaction were strong predictors of intention-to-use, but only satisfaction had a direct effect on willingness-to-change, and none of these variables predicted willingness-to-pay. Finally, customization was identified as a promising way to increase acceptance of and preference for CMS.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198221002177Camera-monitor systemsUser acceptanceWillingness-to-payTechnology acceptance modelCustomization |
| spellingShingle | Christoph Bernhard Heiko Hecht Mirror or camera? Acceptance and valuation of camera-monitor systems Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives Camera-monitor systems User acceptance Willingness-to-pay Technology acceptance model Customization |
| title | Mirror or camera? Acceptance and valuation of camera-monitor systems |
| title_full | Mirror or camera? Acceptance and valuation of camera-monitor systems |
| title_fullStr | Mirror or camera? Acceptance and valuation of camera-monitor systems |
| title_full_unstemmed | Mirror or camera? Acceptance and valuation of camera-monitor systems |
| title_short | Mirror or camera? Acceptance and valuation of camera-monitor systems |
| title_sort | mirror or camera acceptance and valuation of camera monitor systems |
| topic | Camera-monitor systems User acceptance Willingness-to-pay Technology acceptance model Customization |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198221002177 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT christophbernhard mirrororcameraacceptanceandvaluationofcameramonitorsystems AT heikohecht mirrororcameraacceptanceandvaluationofcameramonitorsystems |