自動駕駛汽車是現今汽車產業發展重心，在未來的幾十年內將改變我們的駕駛模式，為人類社會帶來安全與便利。由於汽車的安全意識提升，自動駕駛汽車也開始受到社會大眾的重視，自動駕駛汽車的重要性也逐漸提高。展望全球汽車產業，均朝向自動駕駛汽車的趨勢前進，個人與社會對自動駕駛汽車的接受度仍需要靠政府的重視及推廣，並且制定相關完整規範與制度。目前諸多研究預估2025年後，自動駕駛汽車將逐漸成為車輛的主流，而2040年自駕車全面普及之下帶來的發展及應用，將對運輸產業、產業發展、社會經濟、生活環境等面向，帶來重大改變與衝擊。
本研究以科技接受模式做為研究架構的基礎，參考並彙整過去相關文獻資料後，建構出影響消費者對自動駕駛系統之使用意圖的研究模式，對消費者進行自動駕駛汽車使用意圖之調查，藉以探討消費者在自動駕駛汽車的接受態度及使用意願，是否與系統透明度、技術能力、情境管理、信任、感知風險、感知有用性、感知易用性、操控信心、尋求刺激、行為意圖或是消費者自身的個體條件有關。本研究透過網路雲端方式進行問卷調查，受測的有效問卷共計有208份。
研究結果顯示：（1）系統透明度、技術能力、情境管理對信任有正向顯著影響。 （2）信任、感知風險、感知有用性、感知易用性對行為意圖有正向顯著影響。 （3）操控信心、尋求刺激對行為意圖有負向顯著影響。

Autonomous Vehicles are the focus of the development of the current automotive industry. In the next few decades, they will change our driving mode and bring safety and convenience to human society. As people’s awareness of car safety has increased, autonomous vehicles have also begun to receive attention from the public, and the importance of autonomous vehicles have gradually increased. Looking forward to the global automotive industry, all are moving towards the trend of autonomous vehicles. The acceptance of autonomous vehicles by individuals and society still needs the attention and promotion of the government, and the formulation of relevant complete regulations and systems.
The study is based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). After referring to and compiling relevant literature, this study constructs a research model that affects consumers’ intention to use autonomous vehicle, and investigates consumers' intention to use autonomous vehicle. Whether people's willingness to use autonomous vehicle is related to System transparency, Technical competence, Situation management, Trust, Perceived risk, Perceived usefulness, Perceived ease of use, Locus of control, Sensation seeking and Behavioral intention of consumers themselves. In this study, a questionnaire survey was conducted through the Internet cloud method. A total of 208 valid questionnaires were tested.
The findings of the study showed: (1) System transparency, Technical competence and Situation management have a positive effect on Trust. (2) Trust, Perceived risk, Perceived usefulness and Perceived ease of use have a positive effect on Behavioral intention. (3) Locus of control and Sensation seeking have a negative effect on Behavioral intention.

論文審定書 i
誌 謝 ii
摘 要 iii
Abstract v
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第三節 研究流程 3
第二章 文獻探討 4
第一節 信任 5
第二節 感知風險 6
第三節 感知有用性與易用性 7
第四節 操控信心 9
第五節 尋求刺激 9
第六節 行為意圖 10
第三章 研究設計 12
第一節 研究架構 12
第二節 操作型定義及衡量方法 13
第三節 問卷架構 18
第四節 研究方法 21
第四章 實證分析 26
第一節 樣本基本資料分析 26
第二節 項目分析-獨立樣本T檢定 36
第三節 信度分析 38
第四節 效度分析 40
第五節 自動駕駛汽車使用意圖之分析 43
第六節 人口統計變數 52
第五章 結論與建議 65
第一節 結論 65
第二節 建議 68
第三節 管理意涵 70
參考文獻 72
附錄 76

一、 中文
1. 邱皓政，2020年，量化研究與統計分析：SPSS與R資料分析範例解析，五南圖書出版股份公司
2. 葉芳瑜 (2020)。迎向自駕浪潮，掌握商業商機。檢自https://portal.stpi.narl.org.tw/index/article/10582
3. 陳敬典 (2020)。全球自駕車產業發展現況與未來趨勢。檢自https://www.artc.org.tw/upfiles/ADUpload/knowledge/tw_knowledge_659798677.pdf
4. 陳虹燕 (2019)。自動駕駛汽車領域未來發展。檢自https://www.topology.com.tw/DataContent/report/自動駕駛汽車領域未來發展/14842
5. 蔡至誠、羅希哲 (2019)。無人車試乘之使用行為意圖探討─以整合型科技接受模式觀點。檢自http://140.122.64.129/files/recruit/116_7624691c.pdf
二、 英文
1. Abayomi, O.K., Neil, E. and Mhlongo, P.T. (2016), “Applying UTAUT in Clinical Informatics Research”, Library Philosophy and Practice.
2. Adell, E. (2010), “Acceptance of driver support systems”, Proceedings of the European Conference on Human Centred Design for Intelligent Transport Systems, pp. 475-486.
3. Ajzen, I. (1985), “From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior”, In J. Kuhl., & J. Beckman (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior, Heidelberg: Springer.
4. Choi, J.K. and Ji, Y.G. (2015), “Investigating the Importance of Trust on Adopting an Autonomous Vehicle”, Journal of Human Computer Interaction, vol. 31, pp. 692-702
5. Chopdar, P.K., Korfiatis, N., Sivakumar, V.J. and Lytras, M.D. (2018), “Mobile shopping apps adoption and perceived risks: A cross country perspective utilizing the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology”, Computer Hum. Behav., vol. 86, pp. 109-128.
6. Davis, F.D. (1989), “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology”, MIS quarterly, pp. 319-340.
7. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1989), “User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models”, Management Science, vol. 35, pp. 982-1003.
8. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1977), “Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research”, Contemporary Sociology.
9. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1980), “Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior”, Pearson College Div.
10. Ghazizadeh, M., Peng, Y., Lee, J.D. and Boyle, L.N. (2012), “Augmenting the technology acceptance model with trust: Commercial drivers’ attitudes towards monitoring and feedback”, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, pp. 2286-2290.
11. Horton, R.P., Buck, T., Waterson, P.E. and Clegg, C.W. (2001), “Explaining intranet use with the Technology Acceptance Model”, Journal of Information Technology, 16(4), pp. 237-249.
12. Jing P., Xu G., Chen Y., Shi Y. and Zhan F. (2020), “The Determinants behind the Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles: A Systematic Review”, Sustainability.
13. King, W. R. and He, J. (2006), “A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model”, Information & Management, vol. 43, pp. 740-755.
14. Kuo, Y.F. and Yen, S.N. (2009), “Towards an understanding of the behavioral intention to use 3G mobile value-added services”, Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 25, pp. 103-110.
15. Lee, J. and Moray, N. (1992),” Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human–machine systems. Ergonomics, vol. 35, pp. 1243-1270.
16. Lippert, S. K. (2001), “An exploratory study into the relevance of trust in the con-text of information systems technology”, George Washington University.
17. Ma, Q. and Liu, L. (2004), “The technology acceptance model: A meta-analysis of empirical findings”, Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, vol. 16, pp. 59-72.
18. Marriott, H.R. and Williams, M.D. (2018), “Exploring consumers perceived risk and trust for mobile shopping: A theoretical framework and empirical study”, J. Retail. Consum. Serv., vol. 42, pp. 133-146.
19. Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995), “An integrative model of organizational trust”, Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, pp. 709-734.
20. Menon, N., Pinjari, A., Zhang, Y. and Zou, L. (2016), “Consumer Perception and Intended Adoption of Autonomous-Vehicle Technology: Findings from a University Population Survey”, In Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting, Washington DC, USA, pp. 10-14.
21. Mitchell, V.W. (1999), “Consumer perceived risk: Conceptualisations and models”, European Journal of Marketing, vol. 33, pp. 163-195.
22. Noor-A-Rahim, Md., Liu, Z., Lee, H., Ali, G., Pesch, D. and Xiao, P. (2020), “A Survey on Resource Allocation in Vehicular Networks”. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation System, pp. 1-21.
23. Numan, J.H. (1998), “Knowledge-based systems as companions: Trust, human computer interaction and complex systems”, University of Groningen.
24. Pavlou, P. A. (2003), “Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model”, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, vol. 7, pp. 101-134.
25. Payre, W., Cestac, J. and Delhomme, P. (2014), “Intention to use a fully automated car: Attitudes and a priori acceptability”, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 27, pp. 252-263.
26. Peng Jing, Gang Xu, Yuexia Chen, Yuji Shi and Fengping Zhan (2020), “The Determinants behind the Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles: A Systematic Review”, Sustainability, pp. 8-9
27. Phichitchaisopa, N. and Naenna, T. (2013), “Factors affecting the adoption of healthcare information technology”, EXCLI Journal, vol. 12, pp. 413-436.
28. Roselius, T. (1971), “Consumer Rankings of Risk Reduction Methods”, J. Mark., vol. 35, pp. 56-61.
29. Rotter, J.B. (1966), “Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement”, Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, vol. 80, Whole No. 609.
30. Rudin-Brown, C.M. and Ian Noy, Y. (2002), “Investigation of behavioral adaptation to lane departure warnings”, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 1803, pp. 30-37.
31. Rudin-Brown, C.M. and Parker, H.A. (2004), “Behavioural adaptation to adaptive cruise control (ACC): Implications for preventive strategies”, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 7, pp. 59-76.
32. Schepers J and Wetzels M. (2007), “A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects”, Inf. Manag., vol. 44, pp. 90-103.
33. Sheridan, T.B. and Hennessy, R.T. (1984), “Research and modeling of supervisory control behavior. Report of a workshop”, Washington DC: National Research Council, Committee on Human Factors.
34. Sheridan, T.B. (1975), “Considerations in modeling the human supervisory controller”, International Federation of Automatic Control, Triennial World Congress, 6th, pp. 40.
35. Stanton, N.A. and Young, M.S. (2005), “Driver behaviour with adaptive cruise control”, Ergonomics, vol. 48, pp. 1294-1313.
36. Taylor, S. and Todd, P.A. (1995), “Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models”, Information Systems Research, vol. 6, pp. 144-176.
37. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003), “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view”, MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, pp. 425-478.
38. Warshaw, P. R. and Davis, F. D. (1985), “Disentangling behavioral intention and behavioral expectation”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 21, pp. 213-228.
39. Zmud, J., Sener, I.N. and Wagner, J. (2016), “Consumer Acceptance and Travel Behavior: Impacts of Automated Vehicles”, Texas A&M Transportation Institute