User Acceptance of Autonomous Shuttle Busses Tests in Berlin’s KISM project First results of test drives, experts and focus groups related to the introduction of level 4 automated shuttle busses as first and last mile service in Berlin, Germany in 2024 automated driving, autonomous public transport, acceptance The KIS’M project (https: / / testfeldstadtverkehrberlin.de/ en/ avf/ kism) tested in 2024 driverless Shuttle Busses in Berlin on the UTR Test Area at the former Airport (TXL). A key research aim is to assess post-test technology acceptance, which is crucial for successful implementation. The aim of the study was to record and descriptively analyse the distribution of acceptance, using the UTAUT2 model as a basis. Acceptance was operationalised by surveying usage intentions (cf. Venkatesh et al., 2021). In addition, relevant latent attitudes in connection with mobility and user characteristics were analysed, which can be qualitatively substantiated. This makes it possible to identify potential opportunities and barriers to the acceptance of this technology. Another focus was on analysing user characteristics, including socio-demographic characteristics as well as mobility-related and other personal characteristics. On the one hand the test was an opportunity to verify the questionnaire, for a subsequent representative city-wide household study in Berlin, which was conducted later in 2025. On the other hand, the user experience results could be evaluated within this small sample, and the user characteristics could be described. This makes it possible to produce hypotheses about user groups in the representative study. The initial results indicate a high level of acceptance of autonomous shuttle buses as an additional public transportation option for firstand last-mile services. However, despite the positive shuttle evaluation after the first experience, the intention to use the service regularly is limited, with only about one-third of participants reporting plans for frequent use. Wulf-Holger Arndt, Jakob Busch, Robert Linke-Wittich, Katharina Lange, Christoph Schäper DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0074 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 11 1 Background and research interest 1.1 Introduction The use of fully automated Level 4 journeys in Berlin’s public transport system pursued in the KIS’M project represents an innovation, both for the developers and operators as well as for the potential users. A central research question of this project is the investigation of technology acceptance, which plays a decisive role in the success of the introduction of this innovation. Technology acceptance is considered in a differentiated manner and analysed depending on the acceptance object, the affected subjects and the specific context (Schäfer & Keppler, 2014). The investigation is carried out on various conceptual levels, ranging from individual user intentions and group-specific user behaviour to social approval or rejection and the evaluation of specific user experiences (e.g. through usability tests). Various methods from social and participation research are used to comprehensively analyse the multi-layered determinants of acceptance. Practical application and user testing is a central component of the KIS’M project. Due to changes in technological availability, the service realized within the scope of the project was adapted by the operational and technical partners, and the design of the acceptance tests was adjusted accordingly. A Wizard of Oz setup was implemented through teleoperated driving, so the participants believed the shuttle was fully automated. The acceptance tests between November 4 and 8 2024, were based on a passenger survey (n=35) after two test drives and were conducted at the innovation campus “Berlin TXL - The Urban Tech Republic” (UTR) test site. Initial results from the qualitative and quantitative data collected are presented below. 1.2 Project description The state of Berlin faces the challenge of providing affordable and reliable local public transport in rapidly growing residential areas. KIS’M wanted to test and implement such a demand-responsive public transport service with driverless vehicles at UTR the site of the former Tegel airport and then on the neighbouring public roads. This is to be realised for the first time taking into account the amendment to the Road Traffic Act on autonomous driving (BMDV, 2021). Seamless networking with the mobility system and traffic control is important here. The possible technical solutions are to be further developed with a broad committee of experts and users. In addition, a socially accepted vision of the mobility of tomorrow is to be developed. The project was funded by the Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport (BMDV) with €8.46 million over the period from the beginning of 2022 to spring 2025. The main objectives of the project are the implementation of driverless on-demand transport and the development of safe, reliable and accepted processes for technical supervision at virtual stops and in the vehicles are among the ambitious goals of KIS’M. Better networking and cooperation between automated vehicles and with the traffic control system are intended to achieve greater traffic safety, even in a mixed system. More up-to-date and accurate map and traffic information is to be derived from the data recorded in traffic using artificial intelligence. In addition, KIS’M intends to use the experience gained to develop a strategy for the further use of driverless vehicles and their transfer to regular operation in the state of Berlin. 1.3 Research interest The overarching goal of this study is to develop a deeper understanding to support the widespread introduction of driverless minibuses in Berlin’s public transport services. The aim is to ensure that the service meets the diverse user requirements so that it not only appeals to existing demand but also offers the potential to promote a transport transition towards a reduction in motorised private transport. The technology of driverless minibuses could represent a significant improvement in the quality of the service, which is also attractive to car users and could therefore increase the acceptance and use of this transport alternative. The KIS’M project implemented an important innovation: test users were able to experience and then evaluate a fully automated Level 4 drive without being aware of the different underlying technology. This opportunity enables the investigation of technology acceptance under relatively realistic conditions. The study focuses on three central questions: (1) who chose to use the shuttle (with attention to potential user-group categories), (2) whether participants would intend to use such a shuttle once fully implemented after the test ride (usage intention as the core acceptance construct, following UTAUT2), and (3) how frequently they would use it if it were available. In addition, attitude-based items were included to capture general, usage-independent evaluations of such services. These attitudinal dimensions were developed through a mixed-methods approach and informed by qualitative pre-interviews. The overarching aim of the study was to capture and descriptively analyse the distribution of acceptance, drawing on the dependent variables of the UTAUT2 model (Venkatesh et al., 2021). Acceptance was operationalised primarily through usage intentions. The questionnaire was further complemented by measures of latent attitudes related to mobility as well as by user characteristics, including socio-demographic attributes, mobility-related factors, and other personal characteristics. Additional attitude items addressed perceptions of the service — such as environmental friendliness or contributions to overall quality of life — enriched by qualitative insights. This multidimensional approach enables the identification of potential opportunities and barriers to the adoption of automated shuttle services. Understanding these characteristics is essential for interpreting acceptance patterns and for identifying distinct user groups. The test deployment served a dual purpose. First, it provided an empirical setting to validate the survey instrument for a subsequent representative, city-wide household study in Berlin in 2025. Second, the data collected from this pilot sample enabled an initial evaluation of user experience and a descriptive profiling of users. These insights support the development of hypotheses about relevant user groups and their acceptance levels prior to large-scale testing in the representative study. 2 Description of methods In order to record the technology acceptance of (potential) users, this project proceeded on various levels. A triangulation of quantitative and qualitative methods was used. The aim was for these methods to iteratively complement each other to be able to analyse as many different aspects of acceptance of autonomous driving in Berlin’s public transport system as possible. The following methods were used: Expert interviews, focus groups, passenger tests and representative Berlin-wide survey conducted after the tests in 2025, which will presented in an upcoming publication. The expert interviews were used for preliminary exploration of the concept of acceptance and further categorisation for the following survey methods. The focus groups focussed on the evaluation of the planned service (use of an autonomous shuttle (level 4, on-demand, ride-pooling) on the first and last mile of Berlin’s public transport system). The passenger tests served as an exploratory, non-representative survey in which potential users could gain and evaluate initial experience with autonomous driving technology and its integration into public transport. However, this was a laboratory-like situation. Due to the difficulty of technically implementing level 4 automation in road traffic, the journeys were carried out teleoperated. However, a purely autonomous driving situation was simulated for the test subjects, with the legally required safety driver being sold as an observer. A test track was set up on DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0074 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 12 MOBILITY  autonomous shuttle busses eral participants also stated that they were critical of the increasing singularisation of society, meaning that the wishes of each individual must always be taken into account immediately. Category - Perceived safety: In the case of the target group of older people, the main issue raised was safety through accessibility. Several people criticised conventional BVG vehicles in terms of accessibility when boarding, for example when bus drivers do not stop close enough to the kerb, which is a particular problem for people with walking difficulties. Concerns were also expressed that there might not be enough space for wheelchairs or pushchairs due to the small size of the vehicles. The time of day also plays a role in safety concerns. Some emphasised that safety concerns on public transport are particularly prevalent at night. Older people and people with walking difficulties often need barrier-free access and well-lit stops and paths at to feel safe. In this context, the proximity to other people was emphasised as a safety concern, as there are no alternative options in a vessel the size of a shuttle. In this context, respondents mentioned negative experiences with conventional means of transport, such as bad odours or a reluctance to sit too close to other people. At the same time, it was also noted that the transport companies are generally trusted to place sufficient emphasis on passenger safety. Category - Intended use: If we look at the statements regarding the usage category, we can recognise different attitudes. There were voices that would definitely consider the offer in comparison to conventional means of transport. Different scenarios of use were mentioned, especially for the transport of heavy items, some luggage or shopping. In addition, the possibility of a “neighbourhood bus” was mentioned, i.e. the possibility of direct transport with such a shuttle close to one’s own place of residence to be able to cover short distances. However, alternative scenarios for bridging the first or last mile were also repeatedly mentioned. In particular, the option of walking still seems to be a serious alternative for the participants. One person spoke of being happy to walk the first or last mile, as long as it was attractively designed. Walking was also mentioned as a way to stay physically fit. However, participants noted that they would consider using a shuttle for the first or last mile if their physical condition deteriorated and they were less able to walk. Nevertheless, a so-called singularisation was also criticised here (as in the on-demand transport setting category). Instead, emphasis should be placed on planning a city in a way that makes the UTR site for this purpose, on which test subjects (n=35) completed two different test drives and answered both quantitative questions in a survey and qualitative ones in a group discussion, both on the technology assessment or on a potential intention to use it. The evaluation of the user data collected from the passenger survey therefore highlights the following: 1. a detailed description of the sample; 2. an analysis and exploration of the mobility behaviour of the respondents and 3. an examination of the acceptance distribution, taking into account both the intention to use and support of the service based on attitudes independent of usage. 3 First results 3.1 Initial results from the qualitative analysis 3.1.1 Focus groups The results of focus groups with the target group of older people (>65 years) are presented below. The target here was on the evaluation of the offer based on a travel chain created in advance and presented to the participants. To systematically evaluate the results, categories were created before the analysis using a deductive procedure, on the basis of which the transcript of the focus group was analysed. Category - Choice of transport: In relation to the question about the evaluation of different means of transport and the associated personal experiences, it was stated here that participants prefer public transport (rail) as long as they do not have to make any or fewer changes. One person argued that they accept time restrictions but can compensate for these with other advantages, such as more comfort, no stress when changing between modes of transport or the ability to do non-travelling activities such as reading or relaxing. Category - Hiring on-demand traffic: In the first group, a number of criticisms and reservations were voiced about an on-demand service. For example, there was criticism of potential traffic congestion caused by large numbers of vehicles. Concerns were expressed that an on-demand system that sends smaller vehicles could flood the roads and lead to a chaotic transport system. Fixed timetables and larger vehicles would be a better solution instead. This need for reliable timetables instead of individual bookings was also mentioned, being sceptical about the flexibility of the on-demand system and preferring welltimed timetables. In addition, reliability and predictability are a decisive advantage, as this avoids unnecessary use of resources for individual requests. In this context, sevthe most sense for society as a whole. This means, for example, that all everyday necessities are accessible within a short space of time and that public spaces are designed in such a way that they fulfil a wide range of requirements 3.1.2 Group discussion after test drive Following the test drives, the test subjects were asked open questions. The test subjects’ statements on their general intention to use the shuttle service are presented below. Positively some respondents stated that they could imagine using such a service as they find it practical and flexible. It would be an attractive option for short distances in particular, such as the so-called first or last mile. It could be a useful addition in poorly connected areas or at certain times of the day, such as at night. Some mentioned specific use cases such as use on hospital grounds or for transport to cultural events. The shuttle was also seen as a promising solution in rural areas to better connect remote areas and make everyday life easier. Another argument in favour of using the shuttle was the environmental aspect. Many respondents expressed the hope that the shuttle could make public transport more attractive and thus reduce private transport. Parked cars could thus disappear from urban areas, which would improve the quality of life. Some participants were also enthusiastic about the technology. They found the test drive pleasant and quiet and saw the technology as an exciting new concept that could enable innovative mobility solutions. Despite this positive feedback, there were also numerous critical voices. One common reason for not using the service was technical concerns. Many test subjects had doubts as to whether the system would work reliably enough, especially in the event of malfunctions or unforeseen situations. The fact that there is no human on board to intervene in an emergency also led to uncertainty. The cost-benefit ratio was also viewed critically. Some participants considered the costs to be disproportionate, especially for short distances that could just as easily be covered on foot or by bike. Another point of criticism was the logistics of the shuttle. Some expressed concern that waiting times or detours could lead to disadvantages because of the ridesharing concept. This would be a considerable restriction, especially if there is time pressure. The speed and efficiency of the shuttle were also questioned, especially in comparison to bicycles or other modes of transport. One specific target group that was frequently mentioned in the responses was senior citizens. Possible barriers due to the need to use apps or QR codes were mentioned DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0074 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 13 autonomous shuttle busses  MOBILITY here, which could be difficult for older people to overcome. Some respondents had the impression that the shuttle was a “technical gimmick” that did not cater for all population groups equally. In addition to these practical and technical concerns, there was also general scepticism. Safety concerns played a major role. Participants wondered how the system would react to unforeseen obstacles or how situations could be handled in which the shuttle suddenly stopped and could not continue its journey. There were also concerns that the system could be misused, for example by vandalism or unauthorised persons entering the shuttle. The idea of sharing a vehicle with strangers made some test subjects uncomfortable, particularly with regard to possible conflicts or unpleasant behaviour on the part of passengers. Another point raised was the long-term integration of the shuttle into local public transport. Some respondents emphasised that the service should not compete with mass transport systems such as trams or underground trains. Instead, they saw it as a supplement in poorly developed rural areas or as a feeder to central hubs. However, it was also criticised that such projects are often introduced without sustainable planning and then discontinued. The test subjects expressed clear expectations with regard to the technology. They wanted transparent information about waiting times, journey times and possible detours to make it easier to plan usage. The operation of the shuttle should also be as intuitive as possible, with simple buttons or clear instructions. Some saw the need to provide a contact person, either virtually or via a central control centre, to offer support in the event of questions or problems. To summarise, it can be said that the test subjects see both opportunities and challenges in the autonomous shuttle. While some recognise the potential and advantages, such as flexibility, environmental friendliness and innovative technology, there are also technical, logistical and social concerns that could hinder widespread acceptance. Successful deployment therefore requires transparent communication, simple operation and sensible integration into existing transport concepts. 3.2 Initial results from the quantitative analysis 3.2.1 Sample description The survey sample comprised 37 participants, of whom 2 were excluded due to straight-lining responses, resulting in an effective sample of n = 35. This sample is not representative for Berlin households. Participants were recruited through multiple channels, using a recruitment tool from the project Partner Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), other project contacts, and a snowball sampling system. Participation was voluntary but incentivised with a compensation payment. Despite the limited sample size, the 35 respondents who completed the survey exhibited substantial variation in both socio-demographic and mobility-related characteristics. Of the 35 respondents, 27 live in Berlin districts. The differentiation between places of residence inside and outside the centre of Berlin (Ringbahn-line highlighted in red in Figure 1: Participants’ places of residence by postcode; own illustration (Geoportal Berlin; OpenStreetMap) DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0074 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 14 MOBILITY  autonomous shuttle busses of people stating that their privacy is only partially or not at all restricted, while 9% do not feel restricted at all. The results show that environmental friendliness plays an important role for the respondents: 60% of participants stated that they fully or somewhat feel obliged to use climate-friendly modes of transport based on personal principles. Within Berlin, this aspiration appears to be practicable, as only 23% of respondents tended to (strongly) disagree with the statement ”I can do what I want to do by public transport”. At the same time, however, 31% state that they (rather) cannot organise their everyday life without a car. Nevertheless, over two thirds of respondents (69%) find it easy to switch from car to public transport in everyday life. 3.2.2 Acceptance distribution Intended use: According to Venkatesh et al. 2012, technology acceptance can be operationalised using the UTAUT2 (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2) through behavioural intention to use and use behaviour. Behavioural intention is the central dependent variable of the model, as it is a strong predictor of subsequent actual use. The intention to use was measured among the test subjects with three common items, based on the German translation by Rybizki et al. (2022): 1. Assuming I had access to automated shuttles, I would use them in the future 2. If automated shuttles are permanently available, I intend to use them. 3. I want to use these automated shuttles when I get the chance. Following the user experience at the testing area, responses to all three questions were highly positive, with 80-88% of participants indicating strong agreement. The reliability analysis for the BI variables shows a very high internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.891 and three items. This means that the items reliably measure the same construct and the scale is robust for further analyses. An aggregated variable was created by computing the mean of the three UTAUT items (sum divided by three, with values ranging from lower to higher), which was exhibits the highest daily usage at 51% (Berlin 28,1 %: ibid.), indicating its importance in participants’ routine mobility. Walking is also frequent, with 49% reporting daily travels exclusively on foot. Weekly patterns reveal that 23% use bicycles one to three times per week, 31% use cars, 34% use public transport, and 40% walk. Monthly or less frequent use is relatively low for public transport (3% use it less than monthly, none never use it), while bicycles and cars show greater variation, with 17% of participants never or almost never using a bike and 11% never or almost never using a car. Overall, these data suggest a high reliance on public transport and walking, complemented by moderate bicycle use and lower car dependency, reflecting a mobility pattern typical of urban, multimodal transport environments, but even higher as in Berlin average households. Access to forms of mobility: Almost 83% of respondents (n=29), stated that they had a car driving licence. This means that an above-average number of people with a car driving licence are represented in the sample. Around 75% of the respondents have a monthly ticket in public transport, which is much higher than in Berlin average of 30% (Tagesspiegel, 2023). With 20% of people in the sample not having a car at their disposal, including car sharing, the picture is consistent with driving licence ownership. However, the 63% always having a car available exceed the 49% of households in Berlin that have at least one car (MiD, 2017). 20% again do not own a working bicycle. In metropolises, an average of 28% do not own bicycles (MiD, 2017). Of those surveyed, 11% ride electrified bicycles. Attitudes towards public transport: These indicators on mobility attitudes are based on Hunecke et al. 2021. The questions on mobility attitudes show that physical proximity is a problem for many people on public transport: 46% of respondents fully or somewhat agree with the statement ”People get too close to me in an unpleasant way on public transport” . Restriction of privacy, on the other hand, is perceived less strongly, with the majority (66%) the figure) suggests that respondents within the Ringbahn area tend to have better public transport connections, while respondents outside are more frequently dependent on cars. Although there is no clear distinction between postcodes and the Ringbahn route, a rough classification can be made. This shows that a higher proportion of respondents live outside the Ringbahn (within: 7; outside: 13). Age: With 18 male and 17 female respondents, the analysis shows that the gender distribution among the respondents was almost balanced. The largest age group among the respondents is the 20-29 age group (46%), followed by the 30-39 age group (11%). The other age groups have lower proportions, although the distribution is relatively even from the age of 40. To counteract the uncertainty surrounding the relationship between age and openness to technology, technology adoption types were also examined according to Rogers’ diffusion model. Adopter types: The sample shows an above-average number of “innovators” and “early adopters” (Rogers, 2003[1962]). While innovators account for 2.5% in the traditional distribution, the proportion of people achieving the highest scores in this sample is 26%. At 20%, the proportion of participants achieving high scores is also significantly higher than the usual percentage representing “early adopters” (13.5%). This shows a bias of the sample in favour of people with a high affinity to technology and people who are willing to take risks. Accordingly, there is a underrepresentation of the early and late majority as well as the “laggards”. This is the case with laboratory-like technology trials - participation may rely on voluntary engagement and a sense of curiosity. Level of education: Over 54% of the test subjects had a university degree, which is well above average. In 2022, 20% of individuals aged 15 and over held an academic degree (Destatis, 2024). Following Rogers, it can be assumed that more highly educated people have a generally positive attitude towards technology, as they potentially understand it better and recognise its benefits. Employment: Three groups were frequently represented among the 35 test subjects: at 34%, students were most frequently represented, 23% were employees and 17% were pensioners. Mobility Behaviour The mobility behaviour of the sample shows a diverse usage pattern across different transport modes. Bicycles, including e-bikes, are used daily or almost daily by 43% of participants, while car usage is lower, with only 20% (Berlin 14,5 %: SRV 2023) reporting daily use. Public transport (regional bus and train) (electrical) bike car regional bus & train exclusively walking daily or almost daily 43 % 20 % 51 % 49 % one to three days per Week 23 % 31 % 34 % 40 % one to three days per Month 6 % 23 % 11 % 6 % less than monthly 11 % 14 % 3 % 6 % never or almost never 17 % 11 % 0 % 0 % Table 1: Frequency of use per mode of transport (n = 35) DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0074 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 15 autonomous shuttle busses  MOBILITY which represents a substantial and impressive proportion this question was asked independently of personal usage intentions. 68% (somewhat or fully agree) perceive this as an improvement to the quality of life in their neighbourhood this may be attributed to the fact that it provides coverage for gaps or the last mile in public transport networks, which has not been previously available. 74% see the offer as an opportunity to contribute to climate protection as enhancing the attractiveness of public transport through such services may help reduce private car usage and thereby lower emissions. From the perspective of local residents, respondents demonstrate high tolerance, as 72% accept that minor disruptions may occur during the introduction of the service. Only a limited correlation can be identified between mobility attitudes and usage intention. The item environmental friendliness shows a low positive correlation with the intention to use the shuttle recorded after the test drive (r = 0.275). However, this effect is not statistically significant at a 95% confidence level (p = 0.110). The items on rejection of physical proximity and restriction of privacy correlate slightly negatively with the intention to use the shuttle surveyed before the test journey (r = -0.114 and r = -0.112). People who value privacy and personal space intend to use the shuttle less. However, these effects are also not significant (p = 0.516 and p = 0.520 respectively), and after the test drive there are no longer any relevant correlations. This could lead to the interpretation that the use has dispelled these concerns, which has to be further explored. 4 Discussion and Conclusion This study examined user acceptance of an autonomous shuttle service in the context of an on-site passenger survey, undertaken prior to a comprehensive, city-wide investigation planned for 2025. The analyses presented here remain exploratory in nature. A more extensive bivariate examination of socio-demographic and mobility-related determinants of acceptance, as well as a multivariate modelling of the classical constructs of UTAUT2, could not yet be conducted due to the modest sample size. Such analyses reed that 51.4% indicated trust in the technology, 57.1% attributed it to the fact that it was a test ride rather than a real traffic situation, and 34.3% felt reassured by the presence of observers in the vehicle. 3.2.3 Attitudes independent of intended use In addition to the UTAUT2 model, which operationalizes acceptance based on intention and usage, theoretical groundings (e.g., Lucke, 1995) and our qualitative results show that there are “usage-independent” attitudes that describe technology acceptance. This was formulated through the support-variable “I support the introduction of automated shuttles in public transport” and additionally through further variables to query usage-independent attitudes. Such as the question about improved quality of life in one’s own neighbourhood after the introduction, or the willingness to overlook initial disruptions during the introduction, as well as the questions “Such shuttles contribute to improving the quality of life in my neighbourhood” and “Such shuttles contribute to climate protection.” Acceptance is therefore seen as a broader support of the use of driverless minibuses in local public transport. The analysis aims to quantify the perceptions and expectations of the respondents in these categories and to evaluate their relevance for supporting the new mobility offer (table 4). 3.2.4 Description and interpretation Fundamentally, 81% (somewhat and fully agree) of respondents favour a comprehensive introduction of such shuttle services, used as the dependent variable in further analyses. The aim is to analyse the determining factors behind acceptance and to quantify their influence on the dependent variable by means of a variance decomposition. Overall, the respondents exhibited an average cumulative usage intention (‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’) of 74 %. Extended question to specify the dependent variable: A specific extension of the question was made in order to capture the dependent variable more precisely. This is done by focussing on the regularity of use to quantify the frequency of use as a decisive factor. This extension aims to differentiate the underlying usage patterns more clearly and to enable a differentiated analysis of usage habits. Planned frequency of use: The planned frequency of use for the shuttle services shows a remarkable intensity. 74% of respondents stated that they would use the service at least 1-3 times per month, with 32% even stating that they would use the shuttles at least once a week, i.e. regularly. These figures reflect a significant intention to use the service regularly and could indicate that there is an interest in using the shuttle on a regular basis, provided that the availability and the service meet users’ expectations. But the attitude behavior gap could additionally be a problem. In the forerunner project Shuttles&Co a quite irregular use was noted, with only 8.5% of the 246 surveyed passengers stating that they used the line-based L3-shuttles at least once a week (Linke-Wittich et al., 2023). Willingness to pay: A more reserved assessment of the offer can be observed in the “willingness to pay more”: cumulatively, 49% of respondents answered, “rather not” or “not at all” to the question: “I would be willing to pay more for the expansion of public transport services through such shuttles.” Safety perception during the ride: The perception of safety during the ride was predominantly positive. Reasons for this includ- Table 2: Responses on the Items of Behavioural Intention (n=35) I support the introduction of automated shuttles in public transport. If automated shuttles are permanently available, I intend to use them. I want to use these automated shuttles when I get the chance. Mean strongly disagree 3 % 0 % 0 % 1 % rather disagree 17 % 20 % 3 % 13 % neutral 11 % 11 % 11 % 11 % rather agree 46 % 43 % 49 % 46 % strongly agree 23 % 26 % 37 % 29 % Frequency % never or almost never 4 11 less than monthly 5 14 one to three times per month 15 43 one to three times per week 10 29 daily or almost daily 1 3 Table 3: Intended Frequency of Use MOBILITY  autonomous shuttle busses DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0074 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 16 Stelter, Sarah (2023). Akzeptanzuntersuchung von hochautomatisierten Shuttlebussen im Realbetrieb in Berlin-Tegel - Erkenntnisse zu Einstellung und Nutzung. Journal für Mobilität und Verkehr (17), 14-26. 8. Lucke, D. (1995). Akzeptanz: Legitimität in der “Abstimmungsgesellschaft“. Leske + Budrich: Opladen. 9. Rybizki, A.; Ihme, K.; Nguyen, H.P.; Onnasch, L.; Bosch, E. Acceptance of Automated Shuttles-Application and Extension of the UTAUT-2 Model to Wizard-of-Oz Automated Driving in Real-Life Traffic. Future Transp. 2022, 2, 1010-1027. https: / / doi. org/ 10.3390/ futuretransp2040056 10. Tagesspiegel 3.5.2023: “Zehntausende neue Abonnenten bei der BVG: Fast 900 Millionen Fahrgäste befördert”, https: / / www.tagesspiegel. de/ berlin/ 29-euro-ticket-in-berlin-zehntausendeneue-abonnenten-bei-der-bvg-9756320.html, 12/ 11/ 2025 11. Van der Laan, J.D., Heino, A., & De Waard, D. (1997). A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telematics. Transportation Research - Part C: Emerging Technologies, 5, 1-10 12. Schäfer, M. & Keppler, D. (2013). Modelle der technikorientierten Akzeptanzforschung - Überblick und Reflexion am Beispiel eines Forschungsprojekts zur Implementierung innovativer technischer Energieeffizienz-Maßnahmen. In: ZTG Discussion Paper. 13. SRV, 2023: https: / / www.berlin.de/ sen/ uvk/ _assets/ verkehr/ verkehrsdaten/ zahlen-und-fakten/ mobilitaetin stae dten sr v-2023/ sr v_ 2023 _ b e r lin _ t ab e lle n b e r icht.p d f ? t s=174 4 02635, 12/ 11/ 2025 14. Venkatesh, V.; Thong, J.Y.; Xu, X. Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. MIS Q. 2012, 36, 157. Eingangsabbildung: © Arndt ipants to support the early stages of implementation. The qualitative findings deepen this picture: participants recognized both potential and challenges. They emphasized flexibility, environmental advantages, and the innovative character of the shuttle, but also voiced technical and safety-related concerns, uncertainties regarding cost and reliability, and usability challenges particularly for older persons. Overall, acceptance is present but contingent upon transparent communication, a user-friendly interface, and meaningful integration within the broader public transport system. In sum, while the sample is not representative, the results provide valuable early indications of user acceptance and highlight the strengths of the survey instrument. They suggest that subsequent testing phases should - as widely intended move beyond controlled environments and be carried out under real-life operating conditions with actual user groups. To establish generalizable findings and allow for robust multivariate analyses of acceptance determinants, the instrument will be applied in a representative, city-wide survey across Berlin. ▪ SOURCES 1. BMDV - Bundesministerium für Digitales und Verkehr (2021): https: / / www.bmv.de/ SharedDocs/ DE/ Artikel/ DG/ gesetz-zum-autonomen-fahren.html, 12/ 11/ 2025 2. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. 3. Destatis, 2024: https: / / www.destatis. d e / D E / P r e s s e / P r e s s e m i t t e i l u n g e n / Z e n s u s 2 0 2 2 - P r e s s e m i t t e i l u n g e n / P M _ z e n s u s 2 0 2 2 _ 5 0 . h t m l ? u t m _ s o u r c e = c h a t g p t . com12/ 11/ 2025 4. Hunecke, M., Heppner, H., & Groth, S. (2021). Questionnaire on psychological factors influencing car, public transport and bicycle use (PsyVKN): factor structure, psychometric properties and validation. 5. MiD - Mobilität in Deutschland (2017): https: / / www. mobilitaet-in-deutschland.de/ downloads.html 6. Rogers, E. M. (2003[1962]). Diffusion of innovations. 5. Aufl. New York: The Free Press. 7. Linke-Wittich, Robert; Schäper, Christoph; Arndt, Wulf-Holger; Busch, Jakob; van der Wel, Elmer; quire a substantially larger and more diverse sample and will therefore be carried out as part of the forthcoming Berlin-wide survey. Several limitations must be acknowledged. First, the experimental setting resembled a laboratory-like trial rather than a real-world deployment, which may have influenced participants’ behaviour and expectations. Second, the sample size was small, and participant recruitment did not involve random procedures. As is typical for technology trials of this kind, participation was likely driven by voluntary engagement and curiosity, resulting in a self-selection bias. Moreover, the study design does not capture the perspectives of individuals who chose not to attend the test day (“non-users”), even though understanding acceptance barriers requires explicitly surveying those who do not intend to use the service. Identifying the motivations for actual non-use remains challenging, particularly when data is collected at the interface between surveying intended use before implementation and observing initial use (and user experiences) in pilot-like scenarios. Despite these constraints, the findings demonstrate that the measurement instrument especially the UTAUT2 construct of behavioural intention to use exhibited high construct validity. Furthermore, methodological triangulation enabled the development of additional attitude-based items that proved analytically fruitful. The results indicate a high intention to use the shuttle among a heterogeneous set of test participants following the ride experience: 74.3% expressed positive usage intention (“agree” or “strongly agree”). The user-group characteristics reflect a comparatively young, highly educated cohort with strong everyday public transport use and a higher share of “innovators” in the sense of Rogers (2003). However, when asked about expected frequency of future use, only one third reported an intention to use the service regularly a quantity that may be further affected by the problem of the attitude-behaviour gap. Potential acceptance barriers emerged as well. Even among a largely public-transport-affine group, almost half (45.7%) reported discomfort with the physical proximity of other passengers, indicating that shuttle size and the absence of a driver may represent substantive concerns. Although respondents ascribed potential benefits to the shuttle such as enhanced neighbourhood quality of life and contributions to climate protection, with 60% reporting a personal commitment to climate-friendly mobility there remains no willingness to pay higher fares, which constitutes a clearly identifiable acceptance barrier. At the same time, the high tolerance for initial operational disruptions (72% acceptance) suggests readiness among partic- Wulf-Holger Arndt, Dr.-Ing., Head of research unit Mobility and Space, Center for Technology and Society, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany wulf-holger.arndt@tu-berlin.de Jakob Busch, Center for Technology and Society, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany Robert Linke-Wittich Katharina Lange Christoph Schäper (electrical) bike car regional bus & train exclusively walking daily or almost daily 43 % 20 % 51 % 49 % one to three days per Week 23 % 31 % 34 % 40 % one to three days per Month 6 % 23 % 11 % 6 % less than monthly 11 % 14 % 3 % 6 % never or almost never 17 % 11 % 0 % 0 % Table 4: Attitudes independent of intended use DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0074 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 17 autonomous shuttle busses  MOBILITY