An experimental study to investigate design and assessment criteria: What is important for communication between pedestrians and automated vehicles?

In the near future, more vehicles will have automated functions. The traffic system will be a shared space of automated and manually driven vehicles. In our study we focused on the perspective of vulnerable road users, namely pedestrians, in cooperative situations with automated vehicles. Established communication methods, such as eye-contact between pedestrians and drivers, may no longer work when automated vehicles represent the interaction partner. Therefore, we evaluated several human-machine-interfaces (HMI) in order to implement smooth and comfortable communication. We conducted a two-stage study consisting of an explorative focus group discussion with naïve pedestrians (n = 6), followed by an experimental video simulation study (n = 25) based on the results of the focus group discussion. From the focus group we sought member opinion about various HMI, upon presentation of acoustic and visual communication systems such as projections, displays and LED light strips, in addition to portable communication systems, specifically smart watches. On the basis of the focus group discussion, an evaluation criteria was derived. For the video simulation study, HMI designs were created with variations in position, type and coding of the message, and technology. These were assessed by 25 subjects according to the focus discussion derived evaluation criteria: recognizability, unambiguousness, interaction comfort and intuitive comprehensibility. The results show that direct instructions to cross the street are preferred over status information of the vehicle and that large-scale text-based messages from the vehicle to the pedestrian, deliver better results. Design recommendations for HMIs for communication between automated vehicles are derived, and the extent external HMIs may supplement informal communication strategies such as vehicle movement or braking maneuvers, is discussed.

[1]  Sarah Schmidt,et al.  Pedestrians at the kerb – Recognising the action intentions of humans , 2009 .

[2]  Sowmya Somanath,et al.  Communicating Awareness and Intent in Autonomous Vehicle-Pedestrian Interaction , 2018, CHI.

[3]  Michael Armstrong Blau.  Driverless Vehicles’ Potential Influence on Cyclist and Pedestrian Facility Preferences , 2015 .

[4]  Monique Hennink,et al.  Focus Group Discussions , 2013 .

[5]  Berthold Färber.  Kommunikationsprobleme zwischen autonomen Fahrzeugen und menschlichen Fahrern , 2015 .

[6]  Atze Dijkstra,et al.  From bicycle crashes to measures: Brief overview of what we know and do not know (yet) , 2013 .

[7]  Marjan Hagenzieker,et al.  Safe interaction between cyclists, pedestrians and automated vehicles. What do we know and what do we need to know? , 2016 .

[8]  Shuchisnigdha Deb,et al.  Pedestrians’ Receptivity Toward Fully Automated Vehicles: Research Review and Roadmap for Future Research , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[9]  L. Bainbridge.  Ironies of Automation , 1982 .

[10]  Hsiu-Fang Hsieh,et al.  Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis , 2005, Qualitative health research.

[11]  Rainer Banse,et al.  Potential safety effects of a frontal brake light for motor vehicles , 2018 .

[12]  Ian Walker,et al.  Signals are informative but slow down responses when drivers meet bicyclists at road junctions. , 2005, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[13]  Matúš Šucha.  Pedestrians and drivers: their encounters at zebra crossings , 2014 .

[14]  Wendy Ju,et al.  Embodied Design Improvisation for Autonomous Vehicles , 2016 .

[15]  Nicolas Guéguen,et al.  A pedestrian’s stare and drivers’ stopping behavior: A field experiment at the pedestrian crossing , 2015 .

[16]  Alex Fridman,et al.  To Walk or Not to Walk: Crowdsourced Assessment of External Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Displays , 2017, ArXiv.

[17]  Malte Risto,et al.  Human-Vehicle Interfaces: The Power of Vehicle Movement Gestures in Human Road User Coordination , 2017 .

[18]  Michael P. Clamann,et al.  Evaluation of Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Communication Displays for Autonomous Vehicles , 2017 .

[19]  Marcelo H. Ang,et al.  Pedestrian Notification Methods in Autonomous Vehicles for Multi-Class Mobility-on-Demand Service , 2016, HAI.

[20]  Wendy Ju,et al.  Ghost driver: A field study investigating the interaction between pedestrians and driverless vehicles , 2016, 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).

[21]  Wuhong Wang,et al.  Analysis of the Influence of Pedestrians’ eye Contact on Drivers’ Comfort Boundary During the Crossing Conflict , 2016 .

[22]  Tobias Lagström,et al.  AVIP - Autonomous vehicles' interaction with pedestrians - An investigation of pedestrian-driver communication and development of a vehicle external interface , 2016 .

[23]  Josef F. Krems,et al.  The Right Moment for Braking as Informal Communication Signal Between Automated Vehicles and Pedestrians in Crossing Situations , 2017 .

[24]  Satoshi Kitazaki,et al.  Effects of Non-Verbal Communication Cues on Decisions and Confidence of Drivers at an Uncontrolled Intersection , 2017 .