Automated vehicles (AVs) have left the laboratories and can be experienced in several projects, e.g. at the premises of a clinic in Germany. With this transition, research on AV attitudes no longer needs to rely on questionnaires with hypothetical scenarios and simulations. Previous research-limited by the unavailability of AVs-has provided ambivalent results regarding age and gender differences in attitudes towards AVs. We present research results about the role of age and gender in connection with attitudes such as acceptance, perceived safety, and trust, as well as intention to use. We additionally demonstrate relationships between those constructs and emotions such as amusement, fear, and surprise. Data were collected from participants (n = 125) after having experienced an AV ride with level 4 automation on two campuses of a clinic in Berlin, Germany. Results reveal strong correlations between all attitudes (.55 ≤ r ≤ .71; p < .01) and show acceptance and perceived safety to be solid predictors of intention to use AVs. We also found age to be a significant predictor for usage intention even when other attitudes are considered (β =-0.22; p < .01). MANOVA results point to gender differences in all constructs, but with limited confidence (5.40 ≤ F ≤ 18.34; p ≤ .02). However, we reject our hypothesis that young men are highly accepting, trusting, and intending to use AVs compared to other combinations of age and gender. We recommend using a mix of attitude, emotion, and behavioural (intention) measures in future research on AVs together with more transparency regarding construct definitions and study materials.

After years of hypothetical surveys and simulator studies, automated vehicles (AVs) are now being tested in realistic traffic environments adding validity to knowledge about their acceptance. We present data from a pilot test with participants ( n = 125) after experiencing a ride in an electric AV on a large clinic area in Berlin, Germany. As a first contribution, we bridge the gap between missing definitions of key constructs, confusion about their operationalisations, and a rigorous test of their statistical properties and data structure by examining scales on acceptance, trust, perceived safety, intention to use, and—for the first time applied to AVs—the emotions amusement, fear, surprise, and boredom. Tests of reliability and normality were satisfying for almost all constructs (Cronbach’s alphas ≥ .69; six of eight scales normally distributed). The vehicles were accepted ( M = 1.22; SD = 0.70; range -2 to 2), trusted ( M = 3.29; SD = 0.81; range 1 to 5), and perceived as safe ( M = 3.29; SD = 1.03; range 1 to 5). However, factor analyses did not reflect the hypothesised data structure, and validity concerns question the suitability of some constructs for attitude assessment of electric AVs. Our open item for comments added valuable insights in qualitative aspects of user attitudes towards electric AVs regarding driving style, technical features, and (unsettling) audio-visual feedback. We thus argue for broader conceptualisations of key constructs based on interdisciplinary exchange and multi-methodical study designs.