Carryover Effects of Highly Automated Convoy Driving on Subsequent Manual Driving Performance

Objective: In the present study, we tested to what extent highly automated convoy driving involving small spacing (“platooning”) may affect time headway (THW) and standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP) during subsequent manual driving. Background: Although many previous studies have reported beneficial effects of automated driving, some research has also highlighted potential drawbacks, such as increased speed and reduced THW during the activation of semiautomated driving systems. Here, we rather focused on the question of whether switching from automated to manual driving may produce unwanted carryover effects on safety-relevant driving performance. Method: We utilized a pre–post simulator design to measure THW and SDLP after highly automated driving and compared the data with those for a control group (manual driving throughout). Results: Our data revealed that THW was reduced and SDLP increased after leaving the automation mode. A closer inspection of the data suggested that specifically the effect on THW is likely due to sensory and/or cognitive adaptation processes. Conclusion: Behavioral adaptation effects need to be taken into account in future implementations of automated convoy systems. Application: Potential application areas of this research comprise automated freight traffic (truck convoys) and the design of driver assistance systems in general. Potential countermeasures against following at short distance as behavioral adaptation should be considered.

[1]  Lena Nilsson.  Safety effects of adaptive cruise controls in critical traffic situations , 1995 .

[2]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Behavioral Aspects of Automatic Vehicle Guidance: Relationship Between Headway and Driver Comfort , 1997 .

[3]  S. Fairclough,et al.  The effect of time headway feedback on following behaviour. , 1997, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[4]  H. Helson.  Adaptation-level as frame of reference for prediction of psychophysical data. , 1947, The American journal of psychology.

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

[6]  J. H. Cho,et al.  DRIVER BEHAVIOR WITH ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL , 2006 .

[7]  James R. Sayer,et al.  Heavy-Truck Drivers’ Following Behavior With Intervention of an Integrated, In-Vehicle Crash Warning System , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[8]  Joris C Verster,et al.  Standard operation procedures for conducting the on-the-road driving test, and measurement of the standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP) , 2011, International journal of general medicine.

[9]  R Fuller,et al.  A conceptualization of driving behaviour as threat avoidance. , 1984, Ergonomics.

[10]  Karel Brookhuis,et al.  Behavioural effects of Advanced Cruise Control Use - a meta-analytic approach , 2005 .

[11]  Andreas Keinath,et al.  Die Sensitivität verschiedener Maße zur Fahrzeugquerregelung im Vergleich , 2008 .

[12]  G B Grayson.  BEHAVIOURAL ADAPTATION: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE , 1996 .

[13]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  An on-road investigation of vehicle feedback and its role in driver cognition: Implications for cognitive ergonomics , 2001 .

[14]  Talib Rothengatter,et al.  Maintaining task set under fatigue: A study of time-on-task effects in simulated driving. , 2001 .

[15]  Charles C. Adams,et al.  Safety Aspects of CRT Touch Panel Controls in Automobiles , 1988 .

[16]  D de Waard,et al.  Assessing driver status: a demonstration experiment on the road. , 1991, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[17]  Mark Vollrath,et al.  Driving With a Partially Autonomous Forward Collision Warning System , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[18]  Jacob Beck,et al.  Adaptation-level theory. , 1974 .

[19]  Neville A Stanton,et al.  Driver behaviour with adaptive cruise control , 2005, Ergonomics.

[20]  Christina M. Rudin-Brown,et al.  BEHAVIOURAL ADAPTATION TO ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL (ACC): IMPLICATIONS FOR PREVENTIVE STRATEGIES , 2004 .

[21]  Eva-Maria Eick,et al.  Adaptation Effects in an Automated Car-Following Scenario , 2005 .

[22]  J. Gibson,et al.  A theoretical field-analysis of automobile-driving , 1938 .

[23]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Highly Automated Driving, Secondary Task Performance, and Driver State , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[24]  Marika Hoedemaeker,et al.  Driver behavior in an emergency situation in the Automated Highway System , 1999 .

[25]  Samantha Jamson,et al.  Behavioural Adaptation and Road Safety : Theory, Evidence and Action , 2013 .

[26]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  Where Is Computing Driving Cars? , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[27]  Karel Brookhuis,et al.  Contemporary Models of Behavioural Adaptation , 2013 .

[28]  A. Fairhall,et al.  Sensory adaptation , 2007, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[29]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Preface to the Special Section on Human Factors and Automation in Vehicles , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[30]  Woodrow Barfield,et al.  Human Factors Design of Automated Highway Systems , 2014 .

[31]  Gerald J.S. Wilde,et al.  Risk homeostasis theory and traffic accidents: propositions, deductions and discussion of dissension in recent reactions , 1988 .

[32]  H. Helson,et al.  Adaptation-level theory , 1964 .

[33]  Truls Vaa.  The Psychology of Behavioural Adaptation , 2013 .

[34]  H. Summala.  HIERARCHICAL MODEL OF BEHAVIOURAL ADAPTATION AND TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS , 1997 .