Use Patterns Among Early Adopters of Adaptive Cruise Control

Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate use patterns among early adopters of adaptive cruise control (ACC). Background: Extended use of ACC may influence a driver’s behavior in the long term, which can have unintended safety consequences. Method: The authors examined the use of a motion-based simulator by 24 participants (15 males and 9 females). Cluster analysis was performed on drivers’ use of ACC and was based on their gap settings, speed settings, number of warnings issued, and ACC disengaged. The data were then examined on the basis of driving performance measures and drivers’ subjective responses to trust in ACC, understanding of system operations, and driving styles. Driving performance measures included minimum time headway, adjusted minimum time to collision, and drivers’ reaction time to critical events. Results: Three groups of drivers were observed on the basis of risky behavior, moderately risky behavior, and conservative behavior. Drivers in the conservative group stayed farther behind the lead vehicle than did drivers in the other two groups. Risky drivers responded later to critical events and had more ACC warnings issued. Conclusion: Safety consequences with ACC may be more prevalent in some driver groups than others. The findings suggest that these safety implications are related to trust in automation, driving styles, understanding of system operations, and personalities. Application: Potential applications of this research include enhanced design for next-generation ACC systems and countermeasures to improve safe driving with ACC.

[1]  M. Kenward,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap , 2007 .

[2]  Christina M. Rudin-Brown,et al.  Investigation of Behavioral Adaptation to Lane Departure Warnings , 2002 .

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

[4]  D. Hand,et al.  Advising on research methods: A consultant's companion , 2011 .

[5]  Raghavan Srinivasan,et al.  Effect of Selected In-Vehicle Route Guidance Systems on Driver Reaction Times , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[6]  Timothy L Brown.  Adjusted Minimum Time-to-Collision (TTC): A Robust Approach to Evaluating Crash Scenarios , 2005 .

[7]  Mohamed Abdel-Aty,et al.  Validating a driving simulator using surrogate safety measures. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[8]  Hironori Suzuki,et al.  Effect of adaptive cruise control (ACC) on traffic throughput , 2003 .

[9]  Huei Peng,et al.  String stability analysis of adaptive cruise controlled vehicles , 2000 .

[10]  Linda Ng Boyle,et al.  Impact of traveler advisory systems on driving speed: some new evidence , 2004 .

[11]  R. Blackman,et al.  A driving-simulator test of Wilde's risk homeostasis theory. , 1994 .

[12]  M. Hoedemaeker,et al.  Driving behaviour with ACC and the acceptance by individual drivers , 2000, ITSC2000. 2000 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems. Proceedings (Cat. No.00TH8493).

[13]  B Biehl,et al.  IMPROVED SAFETY THROUGH IMPROVED TECHNICAL MEASURES , 1994 .

[14]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[15]  R West,et al.  DECISION MAKING, PERSONALITY AND DRIVING STYLE AS CORRELATES OF INDIVIDUAL ACCIDENT RISK , 1992 .

[16]  David Hinkley,et al.  Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife , 2008 .

[17]  Petros A. Ioannou,et al.  Evaluation of the Environmental Effects of Intelligent Cruise Control Vehicles , 2001 .

[18]  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.

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

[20]  Brian N. Fildes,et al.  Young Novice Driver Subtypes: Relationship to High-Risk Behavior, Traffic Accident Record, and Simulator Driving Performance , 1999, Hum. Factors.

[21]  Dot Hs.  Use of Advanced In-Vehicle Technology By Young and Older Early Adopters , 2008 .

[22]  Frank Flemisch,et al.  Automation spectrum, inner / outer compatibility and other potentially useful human factors concepts for assistance and automation , 2008 .

[23]  James R. Sayer,et al.  Automatic Target Acquisition Autonomous Intelligent Cruise Control (AICC): Driver Comfort, Acceptance, and Performance in Highway Traffic , 1995 .

[24]  Fabrice Vienne,et al.  Trust and the use of adaptive cruise control: a study of a cut-in situation , 2006, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[25]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  Adaptive cruise control design for active congestion avoidance , 2008 .

[26]  Bonnie M. Muir,et al.  Trust in automation. I: Theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems , 1994 .

[27]  S Fosser,et al.  An investigation of behavioural adaptation to airbags and antilock brakes among taxi drivers. , 1997, Accident; analysis and prevention.

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

[29]  R Parasuraman,et al.  Designing automation for human use: empirical studies and quantitative models , 2000, Ergonomics.

[30]  John D. Lee,et al.  Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[31]  Thomas J Triggs,et al.  Driving simulator validation for speed research. , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[32]  Woodrow Barfield,et al.  THE EFFECT OF MOTORIST INFORMATION ON COMMUTER BEHAVIOR: CLASSIFICATION OF DRIVERS INTO COMMUTER GROUPS , 1993 .

[33]  Marika Hoedemaeker,et al.  Behavioural adaptation to driving with an adaptive cruise control (ACC) , 1998 .

[34]  Nicholas J. Ward.  Automation of task processes: An example of intelligent transportation systems , 2000 .

[35]  Linda Ng Boyle,et al.  Drivers' Understanding of Adaptive Cruise Control Limitations , 2009 .

[36]  Linda Ng Boyle,et al.  Differences in Off-Road Glances: Effects on Young Drivers’ Performance , 2010 .

[37]  Mark S. Young,et al.  Drive-by-wire: The case of driver workload and reclaiming control with adaptive cruise control , 1997 .

[38]  Matthew Witte,et al.  Effect of cellular telephone conversations and other potential interference on reaction time in a braking response. , 2003, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[39]  Fred L. Mannering,et al.  An exploration of the offset hypothesis using disaggregate data: The case of airbags and antilock brakes , 2006 .

[40]  Gudrun Klinker,et al.  Effect of active cruise control design on glance behaviour and driving performance , 2006 .

[41]  Farida Saad,et al.  Behavioural adaptations to new driver support systems: some critical issues , 2004, 2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37583).

[42]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Performance Consequences of Automation-Induced 'Complacency' , 1993 .