Consumer behavior signals structural shift toward autonomous last-mile delivery

A new study examines the deeper behavioral mechanisms that drive consumers to abandon manual delivery systems and decide whether they will continue using autonomous alternatives over time.

The findings are detailed in the study From Manual Delivery to Autonomous Delivery Robots: A Socio-Technical Push–Pull–Mooring Framework, published in the Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research. 

Why traditional delivery is pushing consumers away

The study finds that dissatisfaction with manual delivery services is a powerful driver of change. Consumers increasingly associate traditional courier-based delivery with delays, inconsistent service quality, privacy and security concerns, and rising costs. These factors act as what the researchers define as “push forces,” creating pressure for users to seek alternatives even before they are fully comfortable with new technologies.

Service quality emerges as a key issue. Many consumers report frustration with unreliable delivery times, lack of responsiveness, and uneven service standards. As delivery volumes rise, especially in densely populated urban areas, these shortcomings become more visible and harder to tolerate. The study suggests that inefficiency during peak demand periods has eroded trust in manual delivery systems.

Privacy and safety concerns also play a significant role. Traditional delivery often requires human couriers to access personal information and physical spaces, which heightens anxiety around data misuse, theft, or personal harm. These concerns were amplified during public health crises, when face-to-face contact became a perceived risk rather than a convenience.

Financial considerations further intensify dissatisfaction. Rising labor costs and delivery fees have led consumers to question whether manual delivery still offers fair value. Many respondents perceive a growing mismatch between price and service quality, which weakens emotional attachment to human-based delivery systems and lowers resistance to switching.

Taken together, these pressures do not automatically lead consumers to adopt autonomous delivery robots. Instead, they create a readiness to consider alternatives. The study emphasizes that dissatisfaction alone is not enough to drive sustained behavioral change, but it sets the stage for new technologies to gain traction.

What makes autonomous delivery robots attractive

While frustration with manual delivery pushes consumers away from traditional services, the perceived advantages of autonomous delivery robots pull them toward adoption. The study identifies several technological and experiential factors that shape this attraction.

Perceived usefulness and ease of use are foundational. Consumers are more likely to consider robotic delivery when they believe it can improve efficiency, reduce errors, and simplify the delivery process. Autonomous robots are often associated with consistent performance, predictable timing, and the ability to operate without human fatigue, which contrasts sharply with the variability of manual delivery.

Technological innovativeness also plays a critical role. Many consumers view autonomous delivery robots as a symbol of progress and modernization. This perception matters because it frames robotic delivery not just as a functional service, but as part of a broader shift toward smart cities and digital lifestyles. When consumers believe a technology represents the future of urban logistics, they are more willing to experiment with it.

Human-like interaction features further enhance acceptance. Although autonomous delivery robots are not human, consumers respond positively to systems that communicate clearly, behave predictably, and appear socially aware. These qualities help reduce uncertainty and make the experience feel more intuitive, even for first-time users.

Importantly, the study finds that these “pull factors” are especially influential in shaping continuance intention. While dissatisfaction with manual delivery motivates initial switching, the long-term use of autonomous delivery robots depends primarily on whether users perceive real, sustained benefits. Pull factors are therefore more decisive in determining whether robotic delivery becomes a permanent habit rather than a novelty.

Fear, expectations, and the role of social influence

Fear and anxiety toward automated technologies significantly reduce consumers’ willingness to switch from manual delivery to autonomous robots. This emotional resistance acts as a psychological barrier at the entry stage, slowing adoption even when dissatisfaction with existing services is high.

However, technophobia does not significantly affect continuance intention. Once consumers overcome their initial hesitation and begin using autonomous delivery robots, fear tends to fade. Actual experience with the technology appears to replace abstract anxiety with practical evaluation. This suggests that exposure and familiarity are key to reducing resistance.

The study also highlights the complex role of outcome expectancy. Positive expectations about speed, convenience, and cost savings encourage consumers to try autonomous delivery robots. High expectations make the idea of switching appealing and help justify the decision to move away from familiar systems.

Additionally, overly optimistic expectations can undermine long-term adoption. If real-world performance fails to meet idealized expectations, consumers may become disappointed and less willing to continue using the service. This expectation gap creates a paradox: strong expectations drive initial adoption but can weaken loyalty if they are not fulfilled consistently.

Social norms play a powerful moderating role in this dynamic. Supportive attitudes from family, friends, media, and the broader community significantly strengthen both switching and continuance intentions. When autonomous delivery robots are seen as socially accepted or even encouraged, individual hesitation diminishes.

Social influence also helps buffer the negative effects of technophobia. Consumers who are anxious about automation are more likely to adopt robotic delivery when they observe others doing so without negative consequences. This effect underscores the importance of visibility and normalization in the diffusion of new technologies.

Implications for logistics providers and policymakers

For logistics providers, the research suggests that adoption strategies must address both emotional and functional dimensions. Reducing dissatisfaction with manual delivery alone will not guarantee uptake of autonomous alternatives. Providers must also demonstrate clear, reliable advantages and manage consumer expectations carefully.

Marketing that overpromises futuristic benefits may attract initial interest but risks damaging long-term trust. Instead, consistent service performance and transparent communication are critical for sustaining adoption. Offering trial opportunities in controlled environments can help reduce technophobia and allow consumers to build confidence through experience.

Design choices also matter. Autonomous delivery robots that prioritize clarity, predictability, and user-friendly interaction are more likely to gain acceptance. Human-centered design, even in non-humanoid systems, can ease psychological resistance and improve satisfaction.

For policymakers, the study highlights the importance of social context. Regulations, pilot programs, and public communication can shape social norms that either accelerate or hinder adoption. When governments frame autonomous delivery as part of broader urban innovation strategies, they help legitimize the technology and reduce public skepticism.

Policy interventions may also be needed to address equity and access. If autonomous delivery is perceived as benefiting only certain groups or neighborhoods, social resistance may grow. Inclusive deployment strategies can help ensure that robotic delivery systems are seen as a public good rather than a niche service.