ArticlePloS one2025
A modification of technology acceptance model for investigating driver-vehicle interaction systems usage.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This descriptive study investigated respondents' acceptance of driver-vehicle interaction systems by modifying the technology acceptance model using user experience concepts. A questionnaire survey was conducted, which including 15 variables and a Likert scale (1-5) range from 'strongly agree' to 'strongly disagree' was adopted for all variables. The questionnaire examined six constructs proposed in the modified technology acceptance model: perceived usefulness, perceived enjoyment, satisfaction, attitude, interactive media, and user interface. 495 samples aged from 21 to 82 years old (48.7 ± 12.5 years) including 279 males and 216 females were collected for data analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated the reliability and validity of the model using several indices. Correlations between constructs were proven using path analysis (p < 0.05). Then, the influences of drivers' gender (male = 1 and female = 2) and age on the constructs were analyzed using linear regression analysis. Male drivers had higher perceived usefulness (Beta = 0.235, p < 0.01) and more positive attitudes (Beta = 0.087, p < 0.01) than female drivers. However, their perceived enjoyment of the system was lower than that of females (Beta = -0.135, p < 0.01). Older age led drivers to prefer a negative attitude toward driver-vehicle interaction systems (Beta = 0.072, p < 0.01) and dislike utilizing the user interface (Beta = 0.139, p < 0.01). Finally, four implications based on the analysis were proposed to guide the design of driver-vehicle interaction systems. This study clarified the feasibility of the modified technology acceptance model for investigating Japanese driver's opinions on driver-vehicle interaction systems and provided insights for designing vehicle human-machine interfaces to improve driver acceptance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.