Public perception of wireless power transfer safety

1.1 Background

Energy distribution has undergone a paradigm shift because of Wireless electricity Transfer (WPT), which provides a way to distribute electricity without a physical connection. WPT enables energy transfer between two objects by relying on electromagnetic fields, specifically the electromagnetic resonance or inductive coupling principle (Park & Ahn, 2020). Energy transmission is more effective when the distance between the transmitter and receiver coils is less. WPT use has increased significantly during the past few years. Many people are familiar with its use in consumer electronics, where it is used to wirelessly charge smartphones and wearables (Barreto et al., 2021). Devices that have a coil incorporated in them can be charged using pads instead of conventional wires. But its effects go far beyond simply individual gadgets. Electric vehicles (EVs) have risen to the forefront of transportation debates as the globe continues to move towards more sustainable alternatives. WPT offers a promising future in this industry, providing a viable answer for charging techniques that are both more effective and user-friendly (Triviño et al., 2021). WPT safety is being investigated more thoroughly as worries regarding potential health effects and interaction with other electronic devices have surfaced due to the invisibility of energy transmission.

1.2 Problem statement

Energy transmission techniques have been revolutionised by Wireless Power Transfer (WPT), which has quickly established itself across numerous industries. However, because of its widespread use, several possible health and safety concerns have also surfaced (Lin, 2013). Despite being novel, the invisible nature of energy transfer has raised questions regarding its long-term health effects, potential for interference with medical equipment, and dangers in both residential and business settings. It is also critical to comprehend how the general public views WPT safety. This impression, whether supported by reality or misinformation, has a big impact on adoption rates, regulatory choices, and the future course of research. In addition to facilitating the seamless integration of WPT, addressing public concerns will ensure that technological improvements are in line with societal comfort and welfare.

1.3 Aim and objectives

The main goal of this study is to examine how the general public feels about Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) technology. The study specifically aims to;

1.4 Research questions

1.5 Hypotheses

1.6 Significance of the study

In the rapidly changing field of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) technology, this research is of utmost significance. Understanding public opinion is essential as WPT becomes more interwoven into daily life. The study will conclude the breadth of public awareness, identify common safety problems, and provide manufacturers and policymakers with new information. To ensure informed public participation, focused educational and awareness initiatives can be created by analysing the demographic elements impacting opinions. The findings will also help technology creators address concerns and innovate with user-centric safety in mind. In the end, this research aids in the peaceful and secure integration of WPT into society.

2.1 Introduction

In-depth research on Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) technology is done in the literature review, which also looks at how people feel about it and how it has evolved. This section examines previous research to identify trends, insights, and knowledge gaps that can help to better comprehend how the public feels about the safety of WPT and its wider ramifications.

2.2 Historical development of WPT 250

There is a long revolution of power transfer techniques in the tech world. The origins of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) have its roots in the ground-breaking research of Nikola Tesla from the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Shinohara, 2021). Experiments of Tesla, especially those conducted in Colorado Springs, laid the groundwork for the idea of transporting electricity without the use of physical connectors.

As per Figure 1 it can be seen that due to technological and financial limitations, however, widespread applications remained primarily theoretical for decades despite his ground-breaking work. With developments in semiconductor technologies in the late 20th century, interest in WPT started to pick up again (Hui et al., 2023). These breakthroughs made it possible for WPT to be used in more effective and useful ways. Resonant inductive coupling was developed in the twenty-first century, allowing for more effective transmission of power across short distances. This development helped WPT move from experimental prototypes to practical applications (Athira et al., 2022). WPT is currently used to charge a variety of items, including medical equipment, electric vehicles, and personal electronics. However, even though technical development is well-documented, a critical study of the literature reveals that there may have been a potential overlook regarding public perception during this time. It is possible that the quick developments in technology were not matched by equal attempts to raise public awareness and provide education (Lukovics et al., 2019). It is possible that the end users will not understand the safety processes and standards, which were designed after a thorough investigation.

Figure 1. Approaches for WPT.

(Source: Laha et al., 2023).

2.3 Existing safety standards and regulations

Given the widespread use of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) technology across numerous industries, questions about its safety requirements are only logical. In response, several nations and international organisations have created policies and rules to guarantee the security of WPT systems for both users and the environment. According to Kalialakis et al. (2016), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) has been at the forefront of this field. This paper delve into the power and frequency as technical part and safety of health regarding radiation. Thus Kalialakis et al. (2016) depicts a comprehensive view of framework of regulation and current global aspects. The safety, interoperability, and performance facets of WPT are specifically covered by several standards that the IEEE Standards Association has created. These recommendations concentrate on a variety of topics, from the minimal safety of WPT devices for various frequencies to the maximum permissible electromagnetic exposure. The main goal of the IEEE has been to make sure that the electromagnetic fields of WPT devices stay within safe ranges to avoid any potential health hazards (Alrashdan et al., 2021). Examining the IEEE standards critically reveals a methodical, scientifically supported methodology.

One can counter that these norms are more reactive than proactive. Instead of anticipating and directing technological changes, they frequently seem to react to them. This guarantees that the safety standards are founded on the most recent scientific knowledge. However, it may cause a lag in which new WPT technologies are introduced to the market more quickly than safety rules can be created (Lin, 2021). The regulation of WPT technologies on a global level exhibits a patchwork of various strategies. The electromagnetic compatibility of WPT devices, for instance, is addressed in directives that the European Union has put into effect (European Commission, 2023). This has the effect of making them resistant to disruptions and ensuring that they do not interfere with other electrical devices. Similar to this, Japan has developed its own set of regulations, largely due to its active promotion of electric vehicles, which heavily utilise WPT (Shinohara, 2020). The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has taken an active role in setting acceptable exposure limits for electromagnetic fields coming from WPT devices in the United States (FCC, 2023). Every nation is looking for a set of safe parameters for this wireless power delivery. While this is going on, nations like South Korea have been pushing the edge by establishing entire zones with WPT for public transit, which has forced the development of strict, practical safety requirements (Triviño et al., 2021). Despite these coordinated efforts, a close analysis reveals differences in how various nations view and govern WPT safety. These variations can be due to varying rates of technological adoption, various public perceptions, and various governmental viewpoints on risk management. This hodgepodge of rules can make it difficult for firms with international operations to standardise products and ensure widespread compliance.

The possible knowledge gap between these safety standards and the comprehension of them is also a major cause for concern. The average consumer might not be aware of the stringent safety procedures in place, even though regulatory organisations and the industry probably are (Beeby et al., 2023). If this gap is not addressed, it may feed misunderstandings and unwarranted worries, impeding technological adoption.

2.4 Previous studies on public perception

To comprehend the interaction between technological development and cultural acceptance, it is essential to investigate how the general public feels about developing technologies, especially those focused on Wireless Power Transfer (WPT). A thorough analysis of the literature in existence demonstrates a dynamic spectrum of public reactions, frequently mediated by a complex web of elements ranging from technological comprehension to more general cultural attitudes and narratives (von Terzi et al., 2021). Many emergent technologies have historically been adopted with a mixture of awe, scepticism, and concern, from X-ray machines to mobile phones. There is a tendency for the earliest stages of any technological introduction to be characterised by increased worries about potential negative impacts, which frequently result from misunderstandings or misinterpretations. Studies on the early use of microwave ovens, for instance, revealed a considerable level of public anxiety owing to radiation fears, even though the dangers were minuscule (Zhi et al., 2017). This phenomenon is similar to the current state of WPT, where many people are still concerned about electromagnetic broadcasts even when they are below dangerous thresholds.

Focusing on research that deals directly with WPT reveals a common theme: a tension between concerns about its safety ramifications and recognition of the convenience and innovation WPT brings (Lin, 2021). These worries are frequently amplified by technological invisibility, which allows power to be conveyed without the use of any physical channel. Additionally, some people may associate the word “wireless” with cell phone or internet transmissions, which further complicates understanding.

In Figure 2 it has been seen that critical perception identifies two key difficulties. First off, knowledge gaps and increased safety concerns frequently go hand in hand (Rasmussen et al., 2018). Populations with less knowledge of the science underpinning WPT frequently show more anxiety. Second, there may be a subconscious uneasiness rooted in deeply ingrained evolutionary aversions to unknown or unseen forces, even in situations where there is a conscious awareness of technology-related safety. Additionally, some research has used the “psychometric paradigm” technique to assess public perception, breaking down emotions regarding WPT into components including dread, unknown hazards, and advantages (Alrawad et al., 2022). These results demonstrate that although the ease and efficiency of WPT are easily acknowledged, the worries related to the perceived unknown hazards are frequently not completely allayed. The spread of incidents or bad press is another interesting finding. For instance, each solitary incident, even if it is not directly connected to WPT safety (such as a device breakdown or a well-publicised health problem), is likely to magnify public concerns and emphasise how flimsy the public trust in new technologies is (Zhang et al., 2022). In conclusion, earlier research on public perception highlights the variety of public responses to WPT and other developing technologies in general.

Figure 2. Control paradigm shift schematic of WPT.

(Source: Hui et al., 2023).

2.5 Gap

There is a glaring gap in the understanding of the complex perceptions unique to WPT safety, even though there is a wealth of literature describing the technical elements of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) and a rising corpus of work on general public perceptions of developing technologies. Numerous studies have either covered other aspects of WPT without going into safety perceptions or they have covered other aspects of technology adoption widely. Additionally, little is known about how demographic factors like age and education interact with one another to affect how people perceive safety. Closing this gap is essential since it can inform future technological advancements in the field of WPT as well as communication tactics.

2.6 Conclusion

Understanding public perception is essential, given the rapid growth of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) technology. The uncovered research gap emphasises the necessity of detailed investigations concentrating on safety perceptions. To build confidence, ensure widespread adoption, and direct the future course of WPT innovations, this gap must be closed.

3.1 Research design

A survey-based technique has been used to negotiate the complex environment of public perception regarding Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) safety. This methodology is recognised for its capacity to compile quantitative data on a massive scale, ensuring a comprehensive representation of the viewpoints of the public (Ponto, 2015). Surveys are especially suitable for this study since they help identify trends, correlations, and patterns by transforming subjective judgements into quantifiable measurements. Alternative research methods, including focus groups or interviews, might be taken into account. Although they offer extensive qualitative insights, their reach is necessarily constrained, which frequently results in a smaller sample size (Mwita, 2022). The depth offered by interviews in the context of the study, which aims to provide a comprehensive picture of public perception, can be at the expense of the breadth required for this research.

3.2 Sampling

A representative sample that includes a range of perspectives is required to understand how the general public feels about the safety of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT). The target audience for this study is the general public, which represents a wide range of experiences and ideologies. Choosing a sample size of 50 responders may seem little, but it guarantees thorough analysis and efficient administration of the data gathered. For a subject as specialised as WPT safety, a larger sample could complicate data administration and may not necessarily yield materially different conclusions. Given the complex nature of public perception, the use of stratified random selection is especially appropriate (Iliyasu & Etikan, 2021). The sample is not biased towards any particular group, thanks to stratification based on age, education, and tech knowledge.

Given its simplicity, convenience sampling might be justified, but it frequently sacrifices representativeness. Similar to quota sampling, which might guarantee specified numbers from each group, randomisation is not a requirement for lowering bias (Iliyasu & Etikan, 2021). In this study, stratified random sampling proves to be the best method for balancing representativeness and unpredictability, guaranteeing that the findings accurately reflect the wide range of public perceptions of WPT safety.

3.3 Data collection

This study has used primary data as its major source, acquired via an online survey, to get a good sense of how the public feels about the safety of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT). Primary data was chosen because of its immediateness and relevance to the research question (Paradis et al., 2016). Given the dynamic shifts in public perception and the developing nature of WPT technology, primary data guarantees real-time insights, enabling a current grasp of the ideas and concerns of people.

The method of data collecting has been recognised as platforms like Google Forms or SurveyMonkey. These internet platforms provide a broad audience, effective data gathering, and integrated analytical capabilities. This global perspective is especially pertinent for a technology like WPT, which has a wide range of uses.

On the other hand, secondary data, while helpful, might not provide the specificity needed for this investigation. Frequently, secondary sources offer broad insights that, in the context of this study, do not have the level of specificity required to comprehend individual safety concerns (Martins et al., 2018). Furthermore, because WPT is a developing area, only using secondary data could result in generalised or out-of-date results that are not suited to the specific nuances of WPT safety perceptions.

3.4 Data analysis

A strong analytical approach is required to navigate the complex web of public perception surrounding the safety of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT). Therefore, this study chose a quantitative approach. A strategy like this has several clear benefits. The first benefit is that it enables the methodical examination of patterns and trends within the collected data, ensuring objectivity and reducing biases (Albers, 2017). A quantitative technique can effectively assess and statistically evaluate the impressions of a bigger sample size using the data obtained from online questionnaires. The nature of the research questions and the method used to collect the data is the cause for not using qualitative analysis (Mwita, 2022). Online surveys frequently produce well-structured responses that can be best understood through quantitative analysis. Even while they provide a deeper understanding of individual experiences, qualitative methods might not be as good at identifying patterns in huge datasets, making them less suitable for this particular study.

This research uses statistical software like SPSS to further improve the precision and thoroughness of this quantitative method. Tools like SPSS are skilled at managing large datasets, enabling a variety of analyses, from straightforward descriptive statistics to intricate hypothesis testing.

3.5 Timeline

The research procedure, which lasts around ten months, is precisely planned. The first two months are spent on framework development and literature reviews. The questionnaire and sample are the main focus of months three and four. The collection of data takes place from months 5-7. The following two months will be used to analyse the data, and the last month will be used to draw conclusions and make modifications.

3.6 Ethical considerations

Protecting the rights and dignity of participants is crucial while studying public perceptions. The Data Protection Act of 2018 is strictly followed in this study, assuring the privacy and security of respondent data. This adherence guarantees that the data acquired is only used for research purposes and that personal information is kept confidential (Ducato, 2020). However, this research adheres to other significant ethical standards in addition to data protection. Participants gave their prior informed permission after being fully informed of the objectives and their part in it. They were allowed to withdraw at any time, and their involvement was maintained optional. To avoid any biases and protect the privacy of participants, collecting anonymous data was given priority. The Data Protection Act of 2018 and these accepted ethical guidelines, when combined, give a comprehensive framework that guarantees that all parts of participant rights and research credibility are upheld. The study makes sure that all of its participants are treated with integrity, transparency, and respect thanks to this strong ethical framework.

4.1 Survey data

4.2 Result of regression

4.3 Model summary

From Table 2 it has been observed that it is involving linear regression in this context can assist with grasping the connections between different independent variables (such as age, education, familiarity with WPT, etc.) and the dependent variable (safety concerns about WPT). Linear regression permits the evaluation and survey of the strength and course of these connections, which can be important in looking at the general meaning of the variables affecting security concerns. Linear regression provides coefficients that evaluate how every independent variable impacts the dependent variable.

With respect to “a priori test for regression,” which is shown in Figure 3, it is a standard term in linear regression. Nonetheless, it is conceivable it might be alluding to indicative tests or making sure that they are performed prior to running a regression model. These checks guarantee that the suppositions of linear regression are met and that the model is proper for the information. Normal checks incorporate inspecting the conveyance of residuals, checking for multicollinearity (connections between independent factors), and surveying homoscedasticity (consistent fluctuation of residuals). These checks are essential to guarantee the legitimacy of the linear regression. Linear regression is an important device for this situation for measuring connections between factors, testing speculations, and evaluating the useful meaning of elements impacting security worries about WPT. It gives bits of knowledge and proof to illuminate independent direction, strategy improvement, and security mindfulness drives.

Figure 3. Q-Q plot of variables.

(Source: Self-Created).

The correlation coefficient (R) gauges the strength and heading of the linear relationship between the independent variable(s) and the dependent variable. In this model, R is roughly 0.600, proposing a tolerably sure direct relationship. The coefficient of determination (R Square) addresses the extent of the fluctuation in the dependent variable that can be made sense of by the independent variable(s). In this model, R Square is around 0.360, demonstrating that 36% of the variance in the dependent variable is made sense of by the independent variable(s).

Changed R Square is an adaptation of R Square that adapts to the quantity of independent variables in the model. It penalises the consideration of unnecessary factors. In this model, the Changed R Square is around 0.235.

Std. Error of the Estimate addresses the standard error of the residuals, which is a proportion of the average error between the observed values and the predicted values of the dependent variable. In this model, the standard error is approximately 0.9704.

Age bracket

In the primary ANOVA test, which is demonstrated in Table 3 and Table 4, respondents were gathered into various age sections to evaluate whether there are genuinely tremendous contrasts in their view of Remote Power Move (WPT). The experimental outcomes demonstrated that there is no genuinely huge contrast between age bunches with regard to their perspectives on WPT. This recommends that age doesn’t give off an impression of being a huge figure moulding individuals’ view of WPT innovation.

Educational qualification

The Table 4 ANOVA test inspected respondents’ most noteworthy instructive capabilities to decide whether instructive foundation assumes a part in forming a view of WPT. The outcomes showed that there is no genuinely massive contrast between various instructive capability gatherings. This proposes that individuals with shifting degrees of training have comparable impressions of WPT security.

Generational concerns

The third test investigated respondents’ perspectives on whether more seasoned ages have a bigger number of worries about WPT than younger ages. Here, a genuinely massive contrast was found between reaction classes, showing that individuals have varying suppositions on this theme. Some accept that more established ages express more worries, while others don’t share this view.

Familiarity of WPT

The fourth ANOVA surveyed whether respondents who have utilised or run over WPT advances have various discernments contrasted with the individuals who have not. The outcomes uncovered a measurably massive contrast, showing that experience with WPT innovations essentially impacts individuals’ insights. The people who have insight into WPT advances might have various perspectives contrasted with the individuals who don’t.

Familiarity with WPT applications

In the fifth test, respondents’ knowledge of different WPT applications was analysed. While there was no genuinely massive distinction between experience with various applications, it’s important that the p-value was near the importance level (0.062). This proposes that there might be a few distinctions in experience with explicit applications. However, they didn’t arrive at factual importance in this examination.

These ANOVA tests give significant bits of knowledge into the elements that impact the public impression of WPT. While age and instructive capability may not assume a critical part, knowledge of WPT advances gives off an impression of being a vital factor in forming individuals’ perspectives. Also, there are varying sentiments on whether more established ages express more worries about WPT, featuring the intricacy of public discernments in this developing mechanical scene.

The results of this study aimed to examine public perceptions of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) technology and its safety implications. Awareness of WPT, safety concerns, demographic influences, and preferences for traditional wired charging were all examined in the study. Eight research questions and their corresponding hypotheses were included in the analysis. Comparing the findings to previous research and determine whether the hypotheses are true.

4.4 Comparison of results with existing literature

Based on the data provided within Table 1 it can be seen that the study provides useful insights into public perceptions of Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) technology. Respondents were assorted concerning age, with the greater part falling into the subsequent age section (42%). Essentially, a significant piece of members held an instructive capability at level 3 (42%). It is interesting to note that opinions on whether older generations are more concerned about WPT than younger generations are divided. The need for a nuanced understanding of how different age groups perceive this mixed opinion emphasises this emerging technology.

Additionally, the significance of education in shaping perceptions is underscored by the fact that nearly 40% of respondents moderately believed that their level of education provided them with a better understanding of WPT than others. A sizable percentage of respondents, 38 per cent, indicated that they were familiar with WPT technologies. This proposes that WPT is building up some decent momentum among the overall population. Besides, the larger part evaluated how they might interpret how WPT functions at a moderate level (3 out of 5), showing a fundamental comprehension among the respondents.

As far as security concerns, the information showed a different scope of suppositions. While there is an outstanding degree of concern, it is conveyed across the scale. Curiously, a larger part of respondents (60%) accepted that WPT in broad daylight spaces presents a bigger number of dangers than in private spaces. This mindful disposition towards the organisation of innovation in high-traffic regions lines up with existing security worries about open openness to electromagnetic fields. In addition, the data showed that a lot of respondents were unsure about the safety of using WPT in a medical or hospital setting. This suggests that in such critical environments, more information and assurance are required. A significant number of participants emphasised the significance of extensive public awareness campaigns and information dissemination and expressed concerns regarding the availability of sufficient information regarding the safety of WPT technologies.

4.5 Hypotheses testing

The following hypotheses are supported by the data and findings that have been provided;

H1: WPT technologies are unfamiliar to more than half of the respondents.

The data shows that 38% of respondents have experienced WPT technologies. The extent of respondents acquainted with WPT is equivalent to or more prominent than half. The extent of respondents acquainted with WPT is under half.

H2: Respondents express more noteworthy well-being worries for WPT in broad daylight places than for individual gadgets.

Most of the respondents (60%) accepted that WPT in broad daylight spaces presents a greater number of dangers than in private spaces. It is identified that 60% of respondents accepted that WPT out in the open spaces presents a larger number of dangers than in confidential spaces. This supports H2 and demonstrates that respondents express more noteworthy well-being worries for WPT out in the open spots.

H3: Concerns about the safety of WPT are more prevalent among respondents who are older and less educated.

The information reveals that there is a mixed opinion about older generations having more concerns about WPT. Also, respondents with less proper instruction are bound to communicate security worries about WPT. This partially backs up H3 because it matches the part of the hypothesis that talks about age and education, but not entirely. In summary, H2 and part of H3 are satisfied based on the provided findings and data.

4.6 Linking with research objectives

With 52% of respondents preferring not to have WPT in public transportation like buses and trains, preferences for the implementation of WPT in public transportation were more cautious. This finding recommends that people, in general, might have qualms about involving WPT in transportation frameworks. In addition, a significant portion of respondents (40%) indicated a continued preference for established technology in this setting by favouring traditional wired charging over wireless charging for their personal devices. The regression analysis provided useful insights, revealing that the independent variables in the model account for approximately 36% of the variability in the perception of WPT safety. This suggests that perceptions of safety are influenced by age, education, and familiarity with WPT.

WPT technologies awareness

The study found that the greater part of the respondents were new to WPT advancements (H1), which goes against the invalid speculation (H0). This is in line with previous research, which suggests that the general public is unaware of WPT.

Safety concerns in public vs. personal spaces

Respondents communicated more noteworthy security worries for WPT out in the open spaces than for individual gadgets (H2), supporting the speculation. This is in line with previous studies that have shown that technology in public spaces frequently raises more safety concerns among the general public.

Demographic factors

The analysis confirmed the hypothesis by revealing that older respondents and those with less formal education were more likely to express safety concerns regarding WPT (H3). Demographic factors can also have an impact on how people perceive technology, according to existing research.

4.7 Implications

The implications of the drive results are as follows;

For technology developers

Technology developers should take note of the limited awareness of WPT technologies among the general public. This emphasises the necessity of educational campaigns to educate the public about the advantages and safety of WPT. Developers ought to prioritise addressing safety concerns, particularly in public areas. Advancements that improve the well-being and straightforwardness of WPT frameworks, particularly in high-traffic regions like transportation and clinical settings, can assist with building trust and acknowledgment.

For policymakers

The findings of the study suggest that regulatory bodies should take a more proactive approach to ensuring the safety of WPT technologies. Policymakers should focus on robust safety regulations and standards that the general public can easily understand because older generations and those with less formal education tend to have more safety concerns. This can cultivate trust in the innovation and guarantee its protected arrangement.

For public awareness campaigns

Public awareness campaigns ought to be intended to target different segment gatherings. The advantages of WPT can be the focus of campaigns that address specific safety concerns in public areas. The findings likewise recommend that missions shouldn’t accept earlier information on WPT, particularly among more seasoned and less-taught populaces. Utilising clear and available language is crucial for spanning the mindfulness hole.

In conclusion, this research sheds light on how the general public views WPT technology. It affirms some current examination findings while revealing insight into segment impacts. The findings emphasise the significance of public acceptance and safe adoption of WPT technologies through education, safety, and regulatory efforts.

5.1 Recommendation

The ways to encourage more industries to utilize Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) can be recommended by considering public attitudes towards its safety.

Collaboration with Tech companies: Collaborating with technology companies can lead to making advanced new applications and software because technology is always changing and people rely on electronic gadgets a lot. For example, WPT zones can be set up in places where technology is important, like tech hubs and innovation centres, to encourage tech-savvy people and entrepreneurs to use them (Van Mulders et al., 2022). Understanding and serving specific audience groups can make more people like something.

Public awareness and education campaigns: It is important to make people aware of the potential safety issues with WPT. The main focus should be on the science behind WPT, how to stay safe when using it, and the benefits it could bring. According to Cormick (2019), Dealing with how the public sees things can affect how well people like new technologies. WPT can be seen as safe and ground-breaking by making the technology easier to understand through educational programs.

Safety standards and certifications: It is recommended to create specific safety rules and certifications for WPT devices to make sure they are safe. These rules are tested and researched well and can help producers make safe systems that users can trust. The importance and freshness of source data can have a big impact on public trust, as McGillivray et al. (2022) stressed. The industry can keep WPT devices safe and up-to-date by regularly updating the standards based on the latest research.

Feedback mechanisms: It is quite important to create ways for people to give their opinions so one can keep making technology better and better. These can be online places where people can talk about their experiences, worries, and ideas related to WPT (Wynn & Maier, 2022). Such immediate feedback can provide producers and researchers with priceless information, ensuring that WPT develops in line with the demands and expectations of the general population.

Wireless Power Transfer has enormous potential, and its wider adoption depends on changing people’s opinions of it, demonstrating its advantages, and consistently innovating. Stakeholders may make sure that WPT becomes a crucial component of the technical landscape and benefits society as a whole by heeding the advice mentioned above.

5.2 Limitations and future research

This concern study has several limitations. Primarily, the sample predominantly consisted of individuals with higher education qualifications, possibly biasing results towards a more informed perspective on WPT. The age distribution was also skewed, with a higher representation of the 18-30 age bracket. These demographics might not accurately represent the general views of the population on WPT. Additionally, self-reported measures of understanding and concern might be subject to response bias. The R Square value of.360 suggests that other unexplored factors significantly influence public perception.

However, future research could aim for a more diverse demographic sample, possibly incorporating global perspectives to understand cultural influences on WPT perceptions. Additionally, qualitative methodologies, such as focus groups or interviews, might provide deeper insights into the underlying reasons for certain attitudes. Exploring potential intervention strategies to address safety concerns and increase public trust in WPT technologies would also be beneficial.