Practice makes better - Learning effects of driving with a multi-stage collision warning.

Advanced driver assistance systems like (forward) collision warnings can increase traffic safety. As safety-critical situations (especially in urban traffic) can be diverse, integrated adaptive systems (such as multi-stage warnings) need to be developed and examined in a variety of use cases over time instead of the more common approach of testing only one-time effectiveness in the most relevant use case. Thus, this driving simulator experiment investigated a multi-stage collision warning in partially repetitive trials (T) of various safety-critical situations (scenarios confronting drivers with hazards in form of pedestrians, obstacles or preceding vehicles). Its output adapted according to the drivers' behavior in two warning stages (W1 - warning for moderate deceleration in less critical situations; W2 - urgent warning for strong, fast braking in more critical situations). To analyze how much drivers benefit from the assistance when allowed practice with it, the driving behavior and subjective ratings of 24 participants were measured over four trials. They comprised a baseline without assistance (T1) and three further trials with assistance - a learning phase repeating the scenarios from T1 twice (T2 + T3) and a concluding transfer drive with new scenarios (T4). As expected, the situation criticality in the urgent warning (W2) scenarios was rated higher than in the warning (W1) scenarios. While the brake reaction time differed more between the W1 scenarios, the applied brake force differed more between the W2 scenarios. However, the scenario factor often interacted with the trial factor. Since in later warning stages reaction time reductions become finite, the reaction strength gains importance. Overall the drivers benefited from the assistance. Both warning stages led to faster brake reactions (of similar strength) in all three assisted trials compared to the baseline, which additionally improved successively over time (T1-T3, T1 vs. T4, T2 vs. T4). Moreover, the drivers applied the gained knowledge from the learning phase to various new situations (transfer: faster brake reactions in T4 compared to T1 or T2). The well accepted and positively rated (helpful and understandable) two-stage collision warning can thus be recommended as it facilitates accident mitigation by earlier decelerations. Practice with advanced driver assistance systems (even in driving simulators) should be endorsed to maximize their benefits for traffic safety and accident prevention.

[1]  Frederik Naujoks,et al.  Behavioral adaptation caused by predictive warning systems – The case of congestion tail warnings , 2014 .

[2]  Nazan Aksan,et al.  Individual differences in cognitive functioning predict effectiveness of a heads-up lane departure warning for younger and older drivers. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[3]  S. Breznitz Cry Wolf: The Psychology of False Alarms , 1984 .

[4]  Jessica B. Cicchino,et al.  Effectiveness of forward collision warning and autonomous emergency braking systems in reducing front-to-rear crash rates. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[5]  Mark Vollrath,et al.  The influence of attention allocation and age on intersection accidents , 2016 .

[6]  Miguel Leitão,et al.  Reaction to a Critical Situation during Driving with Adaptive Cruise Control for Users and Non-Users of the System , 2015 .

[7]  Samantha Jamson,et al.  - Behavioural Adaptation: Methodological and Measurement Issues , 2013 .

[8]  Alexandra Neukum,et al.  Effectiveness of advisory warnings based on cooperative perception , 2015 .

[9]  Claus Marberger,et al.  Iterative Design and Assessment of an Audio Visual Warning Concept for Car2x Communication Systems , 2010 .

[10]  Matias Viström,et al.  Effects of forward collision warning and repeated event exposure on emergency braking , 2013 .

[11]  David J. LeBlanc,et al.  Forward collision warning: preliminary requirements for crash alert timing , 2001 .

[12]  Wendy A. Rogers,et al.  Warning Research: An Integrative Perspective , 2000, Hum. Factors.

[13]  P A Hancock,et al.  Alarm effectiveness in driver-centred collision-warning systems. , 1997, Ergonomics.

[14]  Marika Hoedemaeker,et al.  Impacts of a Congestion Assistant on driving behaviour and acceptance using a driving simulator , 2007 .

[15]  B Schlag,et al.  Elderly drivers in Germany--fitness and driving behavior. , 1993, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[16]  Miguel Leitão,et al.  Driver's behavioral adaptation to adaptive cruise control (ACC): the case of speed and time headway. , 2014, Journal of safety research.

[17]  Michael G. Lenné,et al.  Detection of Emergency Vehicles: Driver Responses to Advance Warning in a Driving Simulator , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[18]  A. Hamish Jamson,et al.  Potential benefits of an adaptive forward collision warning system , 2008 .

[19]  Martin Grein,et al.  SILAB—A Task Oriented Driving Simulation , 2005 .

[20]  Mark Vollrath,et al.  How to warn drivers in various safety-critical situations - Different strategies, different reactions. , 2018, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[21]  Mark Vollrath,et al.  HMI Strategy – Warnings and Interventions , 2018 .

[22]  Marc Pollefeys,et al.  The Stixel World: A medium-level representation of traffic scenes , 2017, Image Vis. Comput..

[23]  Mark Vollrath,et al.  How to present collision warnings at intersections?--a comparison of different approaches. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[24]  Lennart Bendewald,et al.  The “HMI tool kit” as a Strategy for the Systematic Derivation of User-Oriented HMI Concepts of Driver Assistance Systems in Urban Areas , 2018 .

[25]  Sebastian Engel,et al.  Car2Pedestrian-Communication: Protection of Vulnerable Road Users Using Smartphones , 2013 .

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

[27]  J. Krems,et al.  Learning and development of trust, acceptance and the mental model of ACC. A longitudinal on-road study , 2015 .

[28]  Alexandra Fort,et al.  Behavioural adaptation and effectiveness of a Forward Collision Warning System depending on a secondary cognitive task , 2014 .

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

[30]  Nils Lubbe,et al.  Brake reactions of distracted drivers to pedestrian Forward Collision Warning systems. , 2017, Journal of safety research.

[31]  L Tijerina,et al.  Comparative , 2003, Research Methods in International Law.

[32]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  HUMAN FACTORS DESIGN ISSUES FOR CRASH AVOIDANCE SYSTEMS , 1998 .

[33]  Bernhard Schmitz,et al.  Application of a Driver Intention Recognition Algorithm on a Pedestrian Intention Recognition and Collision Avoidance System , 2018 .

[34]  Andras Varhelyi,et al.  User-related assessment of a Driver Assistance System for Continuous Support – A field trial , 2015 .

[35]  Mark Vollrath,et al.  Perfect Timing , 2014, Hum. Factors.

[36]  David Shinar,et al.  Effects of an In-Vehicle Collision Avoidance Warning System on Short- and Long-Term Driving Performance , 2002, Hum. Factors.

[37]  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.

[38]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The benefits of imperfect diagnostic automation: a synthesis of the literature , 2007 .

[39]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  Warning Signal Design: A Key Human Factors Issue in an In-Vehicle Front-To-Rear-End Collision Warning System , 1992 .

[40]  C. Spence,et al.  Multisensory warning signals for event perception and safe driving , 2008 .

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

[42]  W Janssen,et al.  Behavioural effects of driver support , 1993 .

[43]  Alexandra Neukum,et al.  Cooperative warning systems: The impact of false and unnecessary alarms on drivers' compliance. , 2016, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[44]  Ali Khanafer,et al.  Successive Categorization of Perceived Urgency in Dynamic Driving Situations , 2009 .

[45]  Robert Gray,et al.  A Comparison of Tactile, Visual, and Auditory Warnings for Rear-End Collision Prevention in Simulated Driving , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[46]  Yuting Zhang,et al.  The influence of in-vehicle speech warning timing on drivers' collision avoidance performance at signalized intersections , 2015 .

[47]  John Richardson,et al.  Alarm timing, trust and driver expectation for forward collision warning systems. , 2006, Applied ergonomics.

[48]  Mark Vollrath,et al.  Timing of early warning stages in a multi stage collision warning system: drivers' evaluation depending on situational influences , 2016 .

[49]  Nick Joseph Rackoff,et al.  An Investigation of Age-Related Changes in Drivers Visual Search Patterns and Driving Performance and the Relation to Tests of Basic Functional Capacities , 1975 .

[50]  Dick de Waard,et al.  A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telematics , 1997 .