Applicability of risky decision-making theory to understand drivers' behaviour during transitions of control in vehicle automation

Decision-making, Behavioural modeling, Automated vehicles. This work presents a consideration of the applicability of risky decision-making theory models as a tool to understand drivers’ take-over behaviour from vehicle automation, while also incorporating the “Out of the Loop” concept and the process of Situation Awareness Recovery. A methodological discussion is provided, and implications for the processes involved in system design developments are presented. Finally, the paper concludes that the process of evidence accumulation in risky decision-making theory models has strong parallels with the process of Situation Awareness recovery. We argue that evidence accumulation models can be used as a tool to understand what information is used by drivers for achieving safe transitions of control from automation so that this knowledge can be used for a better, and more human-centred design of future in-vehicle interfaces. In the end, this paper presents one theoretical model as a practical implementation of the theory discussed in experimental datasets.

[1]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Design and Evaluation for Situation Awareness Enhancement , 1988 .

[2]  Lisanne Bainbridge,et al.  Ironies of automation , 1982, Autom..

[3]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  Requirements for cooperative vehicle guidance , 2013, 16th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC 2013).

[4]  Andreas Glöckner,et al.  The Dynamics of Decision Making in Risky Choice: An Eye-Tracking Analysis , 2012, Front. Psychology.

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

[6]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Are you in the loop? Using gaze dispersion to understand driver visual attention during vehicle automation , 2017 .

[7]  D. M. Hoedemaeker,et al.  Modeling driver behaviour with different degrees of automation : a hierarchical decision framework of interacting mental models , 1998 .

[8]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  “Take over!” How long does it take to get the driver back into the loop? , 2013 .

[9]  H. Simon,et al.  Theories of Decision-Making in Economics and Behavioural Science , 1966 .

[10]  C. Trevarthen Review: Cognition and Reality: Principles and Implications of Cognitive Psychology , 1977 .

[11]  Nikolaos Gkikas Ergonomics Issues with Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) , 2016 .

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

[13]  M. Sivak The Information That Drivers Use: Is it Indeed 90% Visual? , 1996, Perception.

[14]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Were they in the loop during automated driving? Links between visual attention and crash potential , 2016, Injury Prevention.

[15]  Kathrin Zeeb,et al.  What determines the take-over time? An integrated model approach of driver take-over after automated driving. , 2015, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[16]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  EZ does it! Extensions of the EZ-diffusion model , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[17]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Multiple mental models, automation strategies, and intelligent vehicle systems , 1999, Proceedings 199 IEEE/IEEJ/JSAI International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (Cat. No.99TH8383).

[18]  Marilyn L Shaw,et al.  Attending to multiple sources of information: I. The integration of information in decision making , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[19]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Coming back into the loop: Drivers' perceptual-motor performance in critical events after automated driving. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[20]  J. Nash Equilibrium Points in N-Person Games. , 1950, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  H. Simon,et al.  Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations , 1978 .

[22]  A. Wierzbicki A Mathematical Basis for Satisficing Decision Making , 1982 .

[23]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Models of Human Decision-Making as Tools for Estimating and Optimizing Impacts of Vehicle Automation , 2018, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

[24]  Jacob L. Orquin,et al.  Attention and choice: a review on eye movements in decision making. , 2013, Acta psychologica.

[25]  Nikolaos Gkikas,et al.  Automotive ergonomics : driver-vehicle interaction , 2012 .

[26]  Andrew M. Parker,et al.  Maximizers versus satisficers: Decision-making styles, competence, and outcomes , 2007, Judgment and Decision Making.

[27]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Situation Awareness: Review of Mica Endsley's 1995 Articles on Situation Awareness Theory and Measurement , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[28]  Riender Happee,et al.  Modeling take-over performance in level 3 conditionally automated vehicles. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[29]  Louis Tijerina,et al.  Driver brake vs. steer response to sudden forward collision scenario in manual and automated driving modes , 2017 .

[30]  A. K. Basu A Theory of Decision-Making , 1973, The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare.

[31]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics , 2005 .

[32]  Rocky Ross,et al.  Mental models , 2004, SIGA.

[33]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Engaging in NDRTs affects drivers’ responses and glance patterns after silent automation failures , 2019, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour.

[34]  G. Underwood,et al.  Driving Experience and the Functional Field of View , 1999, Perception.

[35]  J. March Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice , 1978 .

[36]  Mohan M. Trivedi,et al.  Looking at Humans in the Age of Self-Driving and Highly Automated Vehicles , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles.

[37]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Transition to manual: driver behaviour when resuming control from a highly automated vehicle , 2014 .

[38]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  The overconstraint of response time models: Rethinking the scaling problem , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[39]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  The Out-of-the-Loop Performance Problem and Level of Control in Automation , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[40]  Joel Johansson,et al.  Automation Expectation Mismatch: Incorrect Prediction Despite Eyes on Threat and Hands on Wheel , 2018, Hum. Factors.

[41]  Charles A. Green,et al.  The “Out-of-the-Loop” concept in automated driving: proposed definition, measures and implications , 2018, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[42]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  The simplest complete model of choice response time: Linear ballistic accumulation , 2008, Cognitive Psychology.

[43]  J. Gregory Trafton,et al.  Situation Awareness Recovery , 2014, Hum. Factors.