Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41479989›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

A qualitative focus groups study to identify how pedestrians perceive the arrival of fully autonomous vehicles.

Lou Schwartz, Guillaume Gronier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lou SchwartzLuxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, HANDS, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Guillaume GronierLuxembourg Institute of Science and Technology, HANDS, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study explores pedestrian perceptions of fully autonomous vehicles and their acceptance. We organized two focus groups in which participants (7 for each) discussed, firstly, their own behavior when crossing the road in front of a human-driven vehicle and the key factors they considered, as perceived benefits and risks of fully autonomous vehicles. Secondly, the factors that could positively influence their own acceptance of fully autonomous vehicles and their preferred interfaces and behaviors (external human-machine interface) for communicating with the fully autonomous vehicles were discussed. Participants highlighted the importance of driver-related cues, the need for clear information on fully autonomous vehicles behavior and the way in which they will be introduced into the automotive landscape, and they indicated their preference for external human-machine interfaces that signal safe crossing. Concerning the external human-machine interfaces, the participants preferred those that projected a green pedestrian crossing onto the road to indicate that the fully autonomous vehicles would wait for the pedestrian to cross. The findings emphasize pedestrians' concerns and preferences to guide the design of future autonomous vehicles.

Indexed as

acceptance measurementfocus groupfully autonomous vehiclespedestrianspedestrian safetyqualitative methodsvehicle designvulnearable road users

Identifiers

PMID41479989
PMCPMC12754604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.