This study explores subjective and objective driving style similarity to identify how similarity can be used to develop driver-compatible vehicle automation.
Background
Similarity in the ways that interaction partners perform tasks can be measured subjectively, through questionnaires, or objectively by characterizing each agent’s actions. Although subjective measures have advantages in prediction, objective measures are more useful when operationalizing interventions based on these measures. Showing how objective and subjective similarity are related is therefore prudent for aligning future machine performance with human preferences.
Methods
A driving simulator study was conducted with stop-and-go scenarios. Participants experienced conservative, moderate, and aggressive automated driving styles and rated the similarity between their own driving style and that of the automation. Objective similarity between the manual and automated driving speed profiles was calculated using three distance measures: dynamic time warping, Euclidean distance, and time alignment measure. Linear mixed effects models were used to examine how different components of the stopping profile and the three objective similarity measures predicted subjective similarity.
Results
Objective similarity using Euclidean distance best predicted subjective similarity. However, this was only observed for participants’ approach to the intersection and not their departure.
Conclusion
Developing driving styles that drivers perceive to be similar to their own is an important step toward driver-compatible automation. In determining what constitutes similarity, it is important to (a) use measures that reflect the driver’s perception of similarity, and (b) understand what elements of the driving style govern subjective similarity.
BailensonJ. N.YeeN. (2005). Digital chameleons: Automatic assimilation of nonverbal gestures in immersive virtual environments. Psychological Science, 16(10), 814–819. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01619.x
2.
BasuC.YangQ.HungermanD.SinahalM.DraqanA. D. (2017). Do you want your autonomous car to drive like you?2017 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), 6–9 March 2017, Vienna Austria, 417–425.
3.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:1406.5823.
4.
BellemH.ThielB.SchraufM.KremsJ. F. (2018). Comfort in automated driving: An analysis of preferences for different automated driving styles and their dependence on personality traits. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 55, 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.02.036
5.
BergerC. R.CalabreseR. J. (1974). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1(2), 99–112.
6.
BrückY.NiermannD.TrendeA.LüdtkeA. (2021). Investigation of Personality traits and driving styles for individualization of autonomous vehicles. International Conference on Intelligent Human Systems Integration, 1322, 78–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68017-6_12
ChenK.-T.ChenH.-Y. W. (2019). Driving style clustering using naturalistic driving data. Transportation Research Record, 2673(6), 176–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119845360
9.
ChenZ.WangX.GuoQ.TarkoA. (2022). Towards human-like speed control in autonomous vehicles: A mountainous freeway case. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 166, 106566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2022.106566
10.
De VisserE. J.MonfortS. S.McKendrickR.SmithM. A.McKnightP. E.KruegerF.ParasuramanR. (2016). Almost human: Anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(3), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000092
11.
DettmannA.HartwichF.RoßnerP.BeggiatoM.FelbelK.KremsJ.BullingerA. C. (2021). Comfort or not? Automated driving style and user characteristics causing human discomfort in automated driving. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 37(4), 331–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1860518
12.
FengY.PickeringS.ChappellE.IravaniP.BraceC. (2018). Driving style analysis by classifying real-world data with support vector clustering. 20183rd IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Engineering (ICITE),Singapore, September 2018, 264–268.
13.
FolgadoD.BarandasM.MatiasR.MartinsR.CarvalhoM.GamboaH. (2018). Time alignment measurement for time series. Pattern Recognition, 81, 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2018.04.003
14.
FountasG.PantangiS. S.HulmeK. F.AnastasopoulosP. C. (2019). The effects of driver fatigue, gender, and distracted driving on perceived and observed aggressive driving behavior: A correlated grouped random parameters bivariate probit approach. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 22, 100091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amar.2019.100091
15.
GiorginoT. (2009). Computing and visualizing dynamic time warping alignments in R: the dtw package. Journal of Statistical Software, 31(7), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v031.i07
16.
GriescheS.NicolayE.AssmannD.DotzauerM.KäthnerD. (2016). Should my car drive as I do? What kind of driving style do drivers prefer for the design of automated driving functions. Braunschweiger Symposium, 10(11), 185–204.
17.
HartwichF.BeggiatoM.DettmannA.KremsJ. F. (2015). Drive me comfortable: Customized automated driving styles for younger and older drivers. 8. VDI-Tagung “Der Fahrer Im, 21, 442–456.
18.
HasenjägerM.WersingH. (2017). Personalization in advanced driver assistance systems and autonomous vehicles: A review. 2017 Ieee 20th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (Itsc), 16-19 October 2017, 1–7.
19.
KayeS.-A.LewisI.FreemanJ. (2018). Comparison of self-report and objective measures of driving behavior and road safety: A systematic review. Journal of Safety Research, 65, 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2018.02.012
20.
KeoghE. J.PazzaniM. J. (2001). Derivative dynamic time warping. Proceedings of the 2001 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining,1–11.
21.
KerwinT.BushmanB. J. (2020). Measuring the perception of aggression in driving behavior. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 145, 105709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105709
22.
LeeJ. D.LiuS.-Y.DomeyerJ.DinparastDjadidA. (2021). Assessing drivers’ trust of automated vehicle driving styles with a two-part mixed model of intervention tendency and magnitude. Human Factors, 63, 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819880363
23.
LeeJ. D.McLaurinE. (2022). Not all car-following is equal: Identifying similar trajectories with time series feature-based clustering. Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting.
LeeK. M.JungY.NassC. (2011). Can user choice alter experimental findings in human–computer interaction? Similarity attraction versus cognitive dissonance in social responses to synthetic speech. Intl. Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 27(4), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2011.540473
26.
LehsingC.JüngerL.BenglerK. (2019). Don’t drive me my way: Subjective perception of autonomous braking trajectories for pedestrian crossings. Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium on Information and Communication Technology, 291–297. https://doi.org/10.1145/3368926.3369692
27.
MaZ.ZhangY. (2021). Drivers trust, acceptance, and takeover behaviors in fully automated vehicles: Effects of automated driving styles and driver’s driving styles. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 159, 106238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106238
28.
MittenessC. R.DeJordyR.AhujaM. K.SudekR. (2016). Extending the role of similarity attraction in friendship and advice networks in angel groups. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(3), 627–655. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12135
29.
MoonY. E. (1996). Similarity effects in human-computer interaction: Effects of user personality, computer personality, and user control on attraction and attributions of responsibility [PhD Thesis]. Stanford University.
ParmetY.BorowskyA.YonaO.Oron-GiladT. (2015). Driving speed of young novice and experienced drivers in simulated hazard anticipation scenes. Human Factors, 57, 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720814548220
32.
PaschalidisE.HajiseyedjavadiF.WeiC.SolernouA.JamsonA. H.MeratN.RomanoR.BoerE. R. (2020). Deriving metrics of driving comfort for autonomous vehicles: A dynamic latent variable model of speed choice. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 28, 100133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amar.2020.100133
33.
ReevesB.NassC. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people (Vol. 10, p. 236605). Cambridge, UK.
34.
SagbergF.SelpiBianchi PiccininiG. F.EngströmJ.EngstromJ (2015). A review of research on driving styles and road safety. Human Factors, 57, 1248–1275. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815591313
35.
SarwarM. T.AnastasopoulosP. C.GolshaniN.HulmeK. F. (2017). Grouped random parameters bivariate probit analysis of perceived and observed aggressive driving behavior: A driving simulation study. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 13, 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amar.2016.12.001
36.
SchererS.DettmannA.HartwichF.PechT.BullingerA. C.WanielikG. (2015). How the driver wants to be driven-modelling driving styles in highly automated driving. 7. Tagung Fahrerassistenzsysteme.
37.
StrayerD. L.DrewsF. A.CrouchD. J. (2006). A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver. Human Factors, 48, 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872006777724471
38.
SunX.LiJ.TangP.ZhouS.PengX.LiH. N.WangQ. (2020). Exploring personalised autonomous vehicles to influence user trust. Cognitive Computation, 12(6), 1170–1186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-020-09757-x
39.
Taubman-Ben-AriO.SkvirskyV. (2016). The multidimensional driving style inventory a decade later: Review of the literature and re-evaluation of the scale. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 93, 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.04.038
40.
TaylorJ.ZhouX.RouphailN. M.PorterR. J. (2015). Method for investigating intradriver heterogeneity using vehicle trajectory data: A dynamic time warping approach. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 73, 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2014.12.009
41.
TrendeA.GräfingD.WeberL. (2019). Personalized user profiles for autonomous vehicles. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications Adjunct Proceedings, September 2019,287–291.
42.
VerberneF. M.HamJ.MiddenC. J. (2015). Trusting a virtual driver that looks, acts, and thinks like you. Human Factors, 57(5), 895–909. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815580749
43.
VugtH. C. V.BailensonJ. N.HoornJ. F.KonijnE. A. (2008). Effects of facial similarity on user responses to embodied agents. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 17(2), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/1746259.1746261
44.
WangW.XiJ.ZhaoD. (2018). Driving style analysis using primitive driving patterns with Bayesian nonparametric approaches. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 20(8), 2986–2998. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2018.2870525
45.
WickhamH.AverickM.BryanJ.ChangW.McGowanL. D.FrançoisR.GrolemundG.HayesA.HenryL.HesterJ.KuhnM.PedersenT. L.MillerE.BacheS. M.MüllerK.OomsJ.RobinsonD.SeidelD. P.SpinuV.TakahashiKVaughanDWilkeCWooKYutaniH. (2019). Welcome to the tidyverse. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(43), 1686. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686
46.
ZhuB.JiangY.ZhaoJ.HeR.BianN.DengW. (2019). Typical-driving-style-oriented personalized adaptive cruise control design based on human driving data. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 100, 274–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2019.01.025
47.
ZieglerC.-N.LausenG. (2004). Analyzing correlation between trust and user similarity in online communities. International Conference on Trust Management, 2995, 251–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24747-0_19
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
