Supporting Left-Turn Safety: Evaluating Ecological Augmented Reality Head-Up Display Interfaces in Dynamic Traffic Scenarios

Abstract

With the increasing adoption of augmented reality head-up displays (AR-HUDs) in vehicles, there is a growing need for effective interface design to support driver performance in complex traffic scenarios. While AR-HUDs offer advantages over traditional heads-up displays by presenting dynamic, context-relevant information, they may also increase cognitive load and introduce safety concerns. This study investigates the effectiveness of an ecological interface design (EID) method applied to AR-HUDs for unprotected left turns. Two experiments were conducted, assessing subjective evaluations, behavioral performance, and eye movement metrics. Experiment 1 compared ecological, virtual traffic light, and no interface conditions, while Experiment 2 explored the consistency of ecological interface effects under varying speeds of oncoming traffic. The results indicate that the ecological interface significantly improved drivers’ subjective experience, decision-making speed, and safe turning rates. In addition, it enhanced search efficiency and reduced distraction. However, an interaction effect between vehicle speed and interface presence revealed that ecological interfaces may amplify the perceptual effect of environmental variables. These findings provide practical guidance for the development of AR-HUD systems, emphasizing the value of EID while highlighting the need for balanced integration with environmental cues.

Keywords

ecological interface unprotected left-turn gap acceptance behavior automotive interactive interface augmented reality head-up displays

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ministry of Public Security of the People’s Republic of China. 2024 Road Traffic Accident Statistics Bulletin. Ministry of Public Security of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing, China, 2024. https://www.mps.gov.cn/n2254314/n6409334/n9194010/c9939035/content.html. Accessed January 18, 2025.

Abdeljaber

Younis

Alhajyaseen

Analysis of the Trajectories of Left–Turning Vehicles at Signalized Intersections. Transportation Research Procedia, Vol. 48, 2020, pp. 1288–1295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2020.08.152.

Yang

Huang

Study on the Collision Avoidance Strategy at Unsignalized Intersection Based on PreScan Simulation. In Proc., 13th COTA International Conference of Transportation Professionals (CICTP2013), Shenzhen, China, August 13–16, 2013, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, pp. 1315–1321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.149.

Wang

Zhao

Peng

LeBlanc

D. J.

Analysis of Unprotected Intersection Left–Turn Conflicts Based on Naturalistic Driving Data. In Proc., 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), Los Angeles, CA, June 11–14, 2017, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp. 218–223. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2017.7995723

Choi

E. H.

Crash Factors in Intersection–Related Crashes: An On–scene Perspective. Publication HS–811 366. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2010.

Hang

Z. C.

Discussion on the Setting of Left Turn Intersection. Urbanism and Architecture, Vol. 9, 2020, pp. 168–169.

Goyani

Pawar

Gore

Jain

Arkatkar

Investigation of Traffic Conflicts at Unsignalized Intersection for Reckoning Crash Probability Under Mixed Traffic Conditions. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 13, 2019, pp. 2091–2110.

Spek

A. C. E.

Wieringa

P. A.

Janssen

W. H.

Intersection Approach Speed and Accident Probability. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2006, pp. 155–171.

Chan

C. Y.

Ragland

D. R.

Shladover

S. E.

Misener

J. A.

Marco

Observations of Driver Time Gap Acceptance at Intersections in Left–Turn Across–Path–Opposite–Direction Scenarios. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2005. 1910: 10–19.

10.

Yan

Zhang

Fang

L. Q.

Traffic Risk Analysis at Intersections with New Signal Controller Based on Simulation. Journal of North China University of Science and Technology: Natural Science Edition, Vol. 4, 2018, pp. 64–69.

11.

Hong

J. L.

Gao

B. Z.

Dong

S. Y.

Chen

Y. F.

Wang

Y. H.

Chen

Key Problems and Research Progress of Energy Saving Optimization for Intelligent Connected Vehicles. China Journal of Highway and Transport, Vol. 34, No. 11, 2021, pp. 306–334.

12.

Bareiss

Scanlon

Sherony

Gabler

H. C.

Crash and Injury Prevention Estimates for Intersection Driver Assistance Systems in Left Turn Across Path/Opposite Direction Crashes in the United States. Traffic Injury Prevention, Vol. 20, Supplement 2, 2019, pp. S157–S161. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2019.1610945.

13.

Calvi

D’Amico

Ferrante

Bianchini Ciampoli

Evaluation of Augmented Reality Cues to Improve the Safety of Left–Turn Maneuvers in a Connected Environment: A Driving Simulator Study. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 148, 2020, p. 105793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105793.

14.

Rusch

M. L.

Jr. Schall, J. D. Lee, J. D. Dawson, and M. Rizzo. Augmented Reality Cues to Assist Older Drivers with Gap Estimation for Left–Turns. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 71, 2014, pp. 210–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.05.020.

15.

Moussa

Radwan

Hussain

Augmented Reality Vehicle System: Left–Turn Maneuver Study. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2012, pp. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2011.08.005.

16.

Rasmussen

J. Skills

, Rules, and Knowledge; Signals, Signs, and Symbols, and Other Distinctions in Human Performance Models. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. SMC–13, No. 3, 1983, pp. 257–266. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1983.6313160.

17.

Vicente

K. J.

Rasmussen

, Ecological Interface Design: Theoretical Foundations. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. 22, No. 4, 1992, pp. 589–606. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.156574.

18.

McIlroy

R. C.

Stanton

N. A.

Ecological Interface Design Two Decades on: Whatever Happened to the SRK Taxonomy?

IEEE Transactions on Human–Machine Systems, Vol. 45, No. 2, 2015, pp. 145–163. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2014.2369372.

19.

Y. K.

Application of Ecological Interface Design in a Side Collision Avoidance System. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, Vol. 36, No. 7, 2019, pp. 433–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2019.1677792.

20.

Lee

J. D.

Hoffman

J. D.

Stoner

H. A.

Seppelt

B. D.

Brown

M. D.

Application of Ecological Interface Design to Driver Support Systems. In Proc., 16th World Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, Maastricht, Netherlands, July 10–14, 2006.

21.

Kim

S. H.

Sabando

J. F.

Kim

W. H.

An Ecological Interface Design Approach for Developing Integrated and Advanced in–vehicle Information System. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 9, No. 16, 2016, p. 92038. https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i16/92038.

22.

Schewe

Vollrath

Visualizing Distances as a Function of Speed: Design and Evaluation of a Distance–Speedometer. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 64, 2019, pp. 260–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.05.012.

23.

Schewe

Vollrath

Ecological Interface Design Effectively Reduces Cognitive Workload—The Example of HMIs for Speed Control. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 72, 2020, pp. 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.05.009.

24.

Zuo

Design and Evaluation of Ecological Interface of Driving Warning System Based on AR–HUD. Sensors, Vol. 24, No. 24, 2024, p. 8010. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24248010.

25.

Liu

Y. C.

Wen

M. H.

Comparison of Head–Up Display (HUD) vs. Head–down Display (HDD): Driving Performance of Commercial Vehicle Operators in Taiwan. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, Vol. 61, No. 5, 2004, pp. 679–697.

26.

Kim

Gabbard

J. L.

Assessing Distraction Potential of Augmented Reality Head-Up Displays for Vehicle Drivers. Human Factors, Vol. 64, No. 5, 2022, pp. 852–865. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819844845.

27.

Smith

Streeter

Burnett

Gabbard

J. L.

Visual Search Tasks: The Effects of Head–Up Displays on Driving and Task Performance. In Proc., 7th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, Nottingham, UK, September 1–3, 2015, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, pp. 80–87.

28.

Currano

Park

S. Y.

Moore

D. J.

Lyons

Sirkin

Little Road Driving HUD: Heads–Up Display Complexity Influences Drivers’ Perceptions of Automated Vehicles. In Proc., 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Yokohama, Japan, May 8–13, 2021, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, pp. 1–15.

29.

Okabayashi

Sakata

Fukano

J. I.

Daidoji

Hashimoto

Ishikawa

Development of Practical Heads–Up Display for Production Vehicle Application. SAE Transactions, Vol. 98, 1989, pp. 638–647.

30.

Wickens

C. D.

Martin–Emerson

Larish

Attentional Tunneling and the Head–Up Display. Publication NASA–CR–194867. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C., 1993.

31.

Russell

Radlbeck

Atwood

Schaudt

W. A.

McLaughlin

Head-Up Displays and Distraction Potential. Publication DOT HS 813 293. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C., 2023.

32.

Amin

H. J.

Maurya

A. K.

A Review of Critical Gap Estimation Approaches at Uncontrolled Intersection in Case of Heterogeneous Traffic Conditions. Journal of Transport Literature, Vol. 9, No. 3, 2015, pp. 5–9. https://doi.org/10.1590/2238–1031.jtl.v9n3a1.

33.

Pawar

D. S.

Patil

G. R.

Minor–Street Vehicle Dilemma While Maneuvering at Unsignalized Intersections. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems, Vol. 143, No. 8, 2017, p. 04017039. https://doi.org/10.1061/JTEPBS.0000066.

34.

Kim

Isleib

J. D.

Gabbard

J. L.

Virtual Shadow: Making Cross Traffic Dynamics Visible Through Augmented Reality Head up Display. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 60, No. 1, 2016, pp. 2093–2097. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213601474.

35.

Paschalidis

Choudhury

C. F.

Hess

Modelling the Effects of Stress on Gap–Acceptance Decisions Combining Data from Driving Simulator and Physiological Sensors. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 59, 2018, pp. 418–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.09.019.

36.

Crundall

Chapman

Trawley

Collins

Van Loon

Andrews

Underwood

Some Hazards are More Attractive than Others: Drivers of Varying Experience Respond Differently to Different Types of Hazard. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 45, 2012, pp. 600–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2011.09.049.

37.

Hart

S. G.

Staveland

L. E.

Development of NASA–TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. In Human Mental Workload ( Hancock

P. A.

Meshkati

, eds.), North–Holland, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1988. pp. 139–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166–4115(08)62386–9.

38.

Liang

L. L.

Zhao

Deng

Chinesization. Reliability and Validity Test of National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index. Chinese Nursing Research, Vol. 5, No. 5. 2019, p. 734. https://doi.org/10.12102/j.issn.1009–6493.2019.05.002.

39.

Taylor

R. M.

Situational Awareness Rating Technique SART: The Development of a Tool for Aircrew Systems Design. In Situational Awareness ( Endsley

M. R.

ed.), Routledge, London, 2017, pp. 111–128. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315087924–8.

40.

Van Der Laan

J. D.

Heino

De Waard

A Simple Procedure for the Assessment of Acceptance of Advanced Transport Telematics. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 5, No. 1, 1997, pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0968–090X(96)00025–3.

41.

Wang

Yang

Zhang

A New Dynamic Spatial Information Design Framework for AR–HUD to Evoke Drivers’ Instinctive Responses and Improve Accident Prevention. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, Vol. 183, 2024, p. 103194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2023.103194.

42.

Yan

Radwan

Guo

Effects of Major–Road Vehicle Speed and Driver Age and Gender on Left–Turn Gap Acceptance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 39, No. 4, 2007, pp. 843–852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.12.006.

43.

Sander

Opportunities and Limitations for Intersection Collision Intervention—A Study of Real World ‘Left Turn Across Path’ Accidents. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 99, 2017, pp. 342–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.12.011.

44.

Eyraud

Zibetti

Baccino

Allocation of Visual Attention While Driving with Simulated Augmented Reality. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behavior, Vol. 32, 2015, pp. 46–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.011.

45.

Merenda

Kim

Tanous

Gabbard

J. L.

Feichtl

Misu

Suga

Augmented Reality Interface Design Approaches for Goal–Directed and Stimulus–Driven Driving Tasks. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, Vol. 24, No. 11, 2018, pp. 2875–2885. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2018.2868531.

46.

Smith

Gabbard

J. L.

Burnett

Hare

Singh

Skrypchuk

Determining the Impact of Augmented Reality Graphic Spatial Location and Motion on Driver Behaviors. Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 96, 2021, p. 103510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103510.

47.

Karatas

Tanaka

Fujikakc

Yoshihara

Kanamori

Fuwamoto

Yoshida

Evaluation of AR–HUD Interface During an Automated Intervention in Manual Driving. In Proc., 2020 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), Las Vegas, NV, October 19–November 13, 2020, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp. 2158–2164. https://doi.org/10.1109/IV47402.2020.9304610.

48.

Yang

Zhao

Ren

Yan

Enhancing Spatial Learning During Driving: The Role of 3D Navigation Interface Visualization in AR–HUD. Geo–Spatial Information Science, 2025, pp. 1–17. [Online First]. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2024.2423776.

49.

Cheng

Y. N.

Zhong

Tian

L. W.

Does the AR–HUD System Affect Driving Behaviour? An Eye–tracking Experiment Study. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Vol. 18, 2023, p. 100767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2023.100767.

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.

0.02 MB

0.00 MB