Tactical Driving Behavior With Different Levels of Automation

This paper investigated how different types of automation affect tactical driving behavior, depending on trust in the system. Previous research indicates that drivers wait for automation to act, delegating the monitoring of traffic situations. This would be especially true for those who have more trust in automation. Behavioral and gaze data from 30 participants driving an advanced simulator were recorded in four driving conditions, namely, manual driving, intentional car following, adaptive cruise control (ACC), and ACC with adaptive steering. Measures of trust in the systems were recorded with a questionnaire. Three fairly common traffic events requiring a driver response were analyzed. Trust in automation was high among the participants, and no associations between trust levels and behavior could be found. Drivers seem to make informed choices on when to let the automation handle a situation and when to switch it off manually or via the vehicle controls. If drivers did not expect the system to be able to handle the situation, they usually resumed control before the automation reached its limits. If the automation was expected to be able to deal with the situation, control was usually not resumed. In addition, situations were dealt with in a tactically different manner with automation than without. Controlling the car with automation systems is thus accepted by drivers as being a different undertaking than driving in manual mode.

[1]  N A Stanton,et al.  What's skill got to do with it? Vehicle automation and driver mental workload , 2007, Ergonomics.

[2]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

[3]  Edward Hoare,et al.  LONGITUDINAL DRIVER SUPPORT SYSTEMS , 1997 .

[4]  Daniel V. McGehee,et al.  Collision Warning Timing, Driver Distraction, and Driver Response to Imminent Rear-End Collisions in a High-Fidelity Driving Simulator , 2002, Hum. Factors.

[5]  Regina A. Pomranky,et al.  The role of trust in automation reliance , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[6]  N. Moray,et al.  Trust in automation. Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. , 1996, Ergonomics.

[7]  M R Endsley,et al.  Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. , 1999, Ergonomics.

[8]  Frank Gauterin,et al.  Effectiveness of forward collision warnings for different driver attention states , 2012, 2012 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium.

[9]  G. Underwood,et al.  Eye Movements during Intentional Car following , 2004, Perception.

[10]  T. Victor.  Keeping Eye and Mind on the Road , 2005 .

[11]  Laura Stanley,et al.  Conventional versus Moving-Map Navigation Methods , 2009 .

[12]  Mark R. Lehto,et al.  Foundations for an Empirically Determined Scale of Trust in Automated Systems , 2000 .

[13]  David Crundall,et al.  Effects of experience and processing demands on visual information acquisition in drivers , 1998 .

[14]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Measurement of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[15]  Mark W. Scerbo,et al.  Automation-induced complacency for monitoring highly reliable systems: the role of task complexity, system experience, and operator trust , 2007 .

[16]  J. Krems,et al.  The evolution of mental model, trust and acceptance of adaptive cruise control in relation to initial information , 2013 .

[17]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: 1. Detection, Search, and Attention. , 1977 .

[18]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[19]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Automatic and controlled processing revisited. , 1984, Psychological review.

[20]  J. Trnros,et al.  EFFECTS OF ACC ON DRIVER BEHAVIOUR, WORKLOAD AND ACCEPTANCE IN RELATION TO MINIMUM TIME HEADWAY , 2002 .

[21]  John A. Michon,et al.  A critical view of driver behavior models: What do we know , 1985 .

[22]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  AUTOMATING THE DRIVER'S CONTROL TASKS , 2001 .

[23]  Annika F L Larsson,et al.  Driver usage and understanding of adaptive cruise control. , 2012, Applied ergonomics.

[24]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Control Task Substitution in Semiautomated Driving , 2012, Hum. Factors.