자율주행자동차 특성이 지각된 유용성, 용이성, 위험 및 구매의도에 미치는 영향: 기술 경험 및 기술 신뢰의 조절효과를 중심으로 = The Effects of Autonomous Vehicle Attributes on Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use, Risk, and Purchase Intention: Moderating Roles of Technological Experience and Technological Trust

국문 초록 (Abstract)

21세기 교통 패러다임의 전환은 인공지능, 센서 융합, 통신 기술의 급 속한 발전과 함께 자율주행자동차의 상용화를 앞당기고 있다. 자율주행 자동차는 단순한 교통수단을 넘어 에너지 효율성, 교통 안전성, 이동 편 의성, 그리고 사회적 포용성을 동시에 실현할 수 있는 미래 모빌리티 혁 신의 핵심으로 평가된다. 그러나 자율주행자동차 관련 기술적 진보에도 불구하고 소비자들은 여전히 안전성, 시스템 오류, 통제 상실, 개인정보 유출 등 다양한 불확실성에 대해 우려하고 있으며, 이러한 인식이 실제 구매 및 수용 행동으로 이어지는 과정에는 다양한 심리적·인지적 요인이 복합적으로 작용한다. 따라서 자율주행자동차에 대한 소비자 수용 메커 니즘을 다차원적으로 규명하는 것은 학문적·실무적 관점 모두에서 매우 중요한 과제라 할 수 있다. 본 연구는 자율주행자동차의 특성이 소비자의 인지적 평가에 어떠한 영향을 미치며, 이러한 인지가 구매의도 형성에 어떠한 경로로 작용하는 지를 실증적으로 분석하고자 하였다. 특히 자율주행자동차의 특성을 안 전성, 편의성, 효율성, 오락성, 촉진성의 다섯 차원으로 세분화하여 각각 의 속성이 지각된 유용성, 용이성, 위험에 미치는 영향과 이들 인지 요인 이 구매의도에 매개적으로 작용하는 과정, 그리고 기술 경험과 기술 신뢰를 각각 전단 및 후단 조절변수로 설정하여 개인의 경험 수준과 신뢰 정도가 인지와 행동의도 간 관계에 미치는 조절효과를 함께 검증하였다. 실증분석 결과, 자율주행자동차의 다섯 가지 특성은 공통으로 지각된 유용성과 지각된 용이성에 유의한 정(+)의 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났 으며, 이 두 인지 요인은 구매의도 형성에 핵심적인 매개 역할을 하였다. 반면 지각된 위험은 구매의도에 부(-)의 영향을 미쳤으나, 자율주행자동 차의 특성과 구매의도 간 매개 경로에서는 통계적으로 유의하지 않았다. 이는 일정 수준 이상의 기술 신뢰가 형성될 경우, 위험 인식이 소비자의 수용 판단에 결정적 장벽으로 작용하지 않음을 의미한다. 또한 조절효과 검증 결과, 기술 경험은 자율주행자동차의 특성과 인지 요인 간 관계를 일부 강화하는 것으로 나타났으며, 특히 안전성과 효율 성 인식이 높은 소비자일수록 경험 수준이 높을 때 유용성과 용이성 평 가가 더욱 긍정적으로 형성되었다. 반면 기술 신뢰는 지각된 유용성과 용이성이 구매의도에 미치는 영향을 유의하게 증폭시키는 조절효과를 보 였으나, 지각된 위험과 구매의도 간의 관계에서는 조절효과가 나타나지 않았다. 이는 신뢰가 긍정적 인지의 행동 전환을 촉진하지만, 부정적 위 험 인식을 완전히 상쇄하지는 못함을 보여준다. 본 연구의 학문적 의의는 자율주행자동차의 다차원적 특성과 소비자 인지 요인 간의 구조적 관계를 통합적으로 규명함으로써 수용 연구의 설 명력을 확장한 데 있다. 특히 기술 경험과 신뢰를 각각의 조절 요인으로 설정함으로써 자율주행기술 수용의 단계적 과정을 보다 명확히 설명할 수 있었다. 실무적으로는 첫째, 제조사와 정책 당국이 안전성 검증과 투 명한 정보 공개를 통해 소비자의 신뢰 형성을 우선해야 함을 시사한다. 둘째, 체험 기반의 홍보 및 시범운행 프로그램을 확대하여 소비자의 기 술 경험을 실질적으로 축적할 필요가 있다. 셋째, 자율주행자동차의 효율 성과 편의성을 강화하는 사용자 인터페이스 개선과 맞춤형 서비스 개발 이 구매 전환을 촉진할 수 있다. 마지막으로, 정부는 신뢰성 검증 제도 및 안전 표준화를 강화함으로써 사회 전반의 자율주행자동차 수용 기반 을 공고히 할 필요가 있다. 결과적으로 본 연구는 자율주행자동차의 특성과 소비자 인지 요인이 상호작용을 하는 복합적 수용 구조를 실증적으로 규명함으로써 학문적· 정책적 시사점을 동시에 제시하였으며, 향후 자율주행 서비스의 상용화 및 시장 활성화를 위한 실질적 근거를 제공한다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The paradigm shift in 21st-century transportation, driven by the ra pid advancement of artificial intelligence, sensor fusion, and communic ation technologies, is accelerating the commercialization of autonomou s vehicles (AVs). Beyond serving as a mere means of transportation, AVs are regarded as a core innovation in future mobility that can si multaneously achieve energy efficiency, traffic safety, travel convenien ce, and social inclusiveness. However, despite technological progress, consumers continue to harbor various concerns and uncertainties (suc h as safety, system failures, loss of control, and data privacy) which influence their acceptance and purchase behaviors through complex ps ychological and cognitive mechanisms. Accordingly, identifying the mu ltidimensional mechanisms underlying consumer acceptance of autono mous vehicles is an essential task from both academic and practical p erspectives. This study empirically examines how the technological attributes of autonomous vehicles affect consumers’ cognitive evaluations and, in turn, how these cognitions shape purchase intention. Specifically, AV attributes are conceptualized across five dimensions (safety, convenience, efficiency, entertainment, and facilitation) and their effects on perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and perceived risk are analyzed. Furthermore, the mediating roles of these cognitive factors in forming purchase intention are tested. The study also incorporates technological experience and technological trust as front-end and back-end moderating variables, respectively, to investigate how individual differences in experience and trust influence the relationships between cognition and behavioral intention. The empirical results reveal that the five AV attributes have a significant positive effect on both perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, which in turn serve as key mediators in shaping purchase intention. Conversely, perceived risk exerts a negative effect on purchase intention but does not show a statistically significant mediating path between AV attributes and purchase intention. This implies that once a certain level of technological trust is established, perceived risk no longer acts as a decisive barrier to consumer acceptance. The moderation analysis further shows that technological experience strengthens the relationships between AV attributes and cognitive factors, particularly in that particularly, consumers with higher experience levels form more positive evaluations of usefulness and ease of use when they perceive greater safety and efficiency. In contrast, technological trust significantly amplifies the effects of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use on purchase intention but does not moderate the relationship between perceived risk and purchase intention. This finding suggests that while trust facilitates the translation of positive cognitions into behavioral intention, it may not completely neutralize negative perceptions of risk. The academic contribution of this study lies in its integrative identification of the structural relationships between the multidimensional attributes of autonomous vehicles and consumers’ cognitive factors, thereby extending the explanatory power of AV acceptance research. By incorporating technological experience and trust as moderating variables, this study provides a more precise explanation of the stepwise process of technological acceptance. From a managerial and policy perspective, several implications emerge. First, manufacturers and policymakers should prioritize building consumer trust through rigorous safety validation and transparent information disclosure. Second, experiential marketing and pilot programs should be expanded to enhance consumers’ direct technological experience. Third, improving user interfaces (UIs) and developing personalized services that emphasize efficiency and convenience can promote purchase conversion. Finally, governments should strengthen reliability certification systems and standardize safety regulations to establish a robust social foundation for AV acceptance. In conclusion, this study empirically demonstrates the complex structure of interactions between AV attributes and consumer cognition, providing both theoretical and policy insights, as well as practical evidence to support the commercialization and market activation of autonomous driving services in the future.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론 ···············································································································1
• 1. 연구배경 및 연구목적 ·················································································1
• 2. 연구방법 및 연구구성 ·················································································5
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 ··································································································8
• 1. 자율주행기술과 자율주행자동차 ·······························································8
• 가. 자율주행기술 ···························································································8
• 나. 자율주행자동차 ·····················································································14
• 다. 자율주행자동차 관련 연구 현황 ·······················································18
• 2. 자율주행자동차 특성 ·················································································21
• 가. 안전성 ·····································································································21
• 나. 편의성 ·····································································································24
• 다. 효율성 ·····································································································27
• 라. 오락성 ·····································································································31
• 마. 촉진성 ·····································································································34
• 3. 지각된 유용성, 용이성, 위험 ···································································38
• 가. 지각된 유용성 ······················································································38
• 나. 지각된 용이성 ······················································································40
• 다. 지각된 위험 ··························································································43
• 4. 구매의도 ·······································································································46
• 5. 기술 경험 및 기술 신뢰 ···········································································50
• 가. 기술 경험 ······························································································50
• 나. 기술 신뢰 ······························································································54
• Ⅲ. 연구설계 ······································································································59
• 1. 연구의 개념적 모형 ···················································································59
• 2. 연구가설 ·······································································································61
• 가. 자율주행자동차 특성과 지각된 유용성, 용이성, 위험의 관계 ··· 61
• 나. 지각된 유용성, 용이성, 위험과 구매의도의 관계 ·························63
• 다. 자율주행자동차 특성과 구매의도의 관계에서 지각된 유용성, 용이성,
• 위험의 매개효과·························································································65
• 라. 자율주행차 특성과 지각된 유용성, 용이성, 위험의 관계에서 기술 경험의
• 조절효과·····································································································67
• 마. 지각된 유용성, 용이성, 위험과 구매의도의 관계에서 기술 신뢰의 조절효과
• ···················································································································70
• 3. 변수의 조작적 정의 및 측정 ···································································71
• 가. 자율주행차 특성 ···················································································72
• 나. 지각된 유용성, 용이성, 위험 ·····························································74
• 다. 구매의도 ·······························································································76
• 라. 기술 경험 및 기술 신뢰 ·····································································77
• 4. 조사설계 및 분석방법 ···············································································79
• Ⅳ. 실증분석 ······································································································81
• 1. 표본의 인구 통계적 특성 ·········································································81
• 2. 신뢰도 및 타당성 분석 ·············································································83
• 가. 탐색적 요인분석 ·····················································································84
• 나. 확인적 요인분석 ·····················································································89
• 다. 상관관계분석 ···························································································92
• 3. 연구가설의 검증 ···························································································95
• 가. 연구모형의 검증 ·····················································································95
• 나. 연구가설의 검증 ·····················································································96
• Ⅴ. 결론 ·············································································································127
• 1. 연구결과의 요약 및 시사점 ···································································127
• 2. 연구의 한계 및 향후 연구과제 ·····························································129
• 참고 문헌 ·······································································································131
• 부 록(설문지) ································································································151
• Abstract ··········································································································165