We propose the concept of directive driving automation that positively influences drivers’ intentions to achieve shared goals. As a step toward directive driving automation, this survey study explored how social norms can persuade drivers to continue using driving automation. We tested social norm messages using a 2x2x2x2 factorial within-subject design: norm type (descriptive vs. injunctive), explanation (absent vs. present), spatial scale (local vs. global), and outcome criticality (safety-critical vs. non-safety-critical). The results suggest that framing messages as descriptive norms and providing explanations relevant to the driver can encourage them to continue using automation, especially with safety-critical outcomes. This study highlights the importance of considering message characteristics in persuasive interventions to promote the safe use of driving automation.
BewsN.MartinsN. (2002). An evaluation of the facilitators of trustworthiness. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 28(4), 14–19.
2.
BurnkrantR. E.UnnavaH. R. (1995). Effects of self-referencing on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(1), 17–26.
3.
ChenD.LavalJ. A.AhnS.ZhengZ. (2012). Microscopic traffic hysteresis in traffic oscillations: A behavioral perspective. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 46(10), 1440–1453.
4.
ChiouE. K.LeeJ. D. (2021). Trusting Automation: Designing for Responsivity and Resilience. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 001872082110099.
5.
ChristoffersenK.WoodsD. D. (2002). How to make automated systems team players. Advances in Human Performance and Cognitive Engineering Research, 2, 1–12.
6.
CialdiniR. B. (2003). Crafting normative messages to protect the environment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(4), 105–109.
7.
CialdiniR. B.GoldsteinN. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 55, 591–621.
8.
CialdiniR. B.KallgrenC. A.RenoR. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 201–234). Elsevier.
9.
CialdiniR. B.RenoR. R.KallgrenC. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015.
10.
DesarboW. S.RamaswamyV.CohenS. H. (1995). Market segmentation with choice-based conjoint analysis. Marketing Letters, 6(2), 137–147.
11.
FagnantD. J.KockelmanK. (2015). Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: Opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 77, 167–181.
12.
FoggB. J. (1999). Persuasive technologie301398. Communications of the ACM, 42(5), 26–29.
13.
GassR. H.SeiterJ. S. (2011). Persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining (4th ed). Allyn & Bacon.
14.
GoldsteinN. J.CialdiniR. B.GriskeviciusV. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 472–482.
KallgrenC. A.RenoR. R.CialdiniR. B. (2000). A focus theory of normative conduct: When norms do and do not affect behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(8), 1002–1012.
LeeJ.RheemH.LeeJ. D.SzczerbaJ. F.TsimhoniO. (2022). Teaming with your car: Redefining the driver–automation relationship in highly automated vehicles. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 17(1), 155534342211326.
19.
MerrittS. M. (2011). Affective processes in human–automation interactions. Human Factors, 53(4), 356–370.
20.
MertensS.HerberzM.HahnelU. J.BroschT. (2022). The effectiveness of nudging: A meta-analysis of choice architecture interventions across behavioral domains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(1), e2107346118.
21.
MeskeC.PotthofT. (2017). The DINU-model—A process model for the design of nudges. Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), 2587–2597.
NicollsM.TrueloveV.StefanidisK. B. (2022). The impact of descriptive and injunctive norms on engagement in mobile phone use while driving in young drivers: A systematic review. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 175, 106774.
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.rproject.org/
27.
RoyS. K.ShekharV. (2010). Dimensional hierarchy of trustworthiness of financial service providers. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28(1), 47–64.
28.
ScannellL.GiffordR. (2013). Personally relevant climate change: The role of place attachment and local versus global message framing in engagement. Environment and Behavior, 45(1), 60–85.
29.
ThalerR. H.SunsteinC. R. (2009). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness (Rev. and expanded ed). Penguin Books.
30.
ThompsonS. C.ArmstrongW.ThomasC. (1998). Illusions of control, underestimations, and accuracy: A control heuristic explanation. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 143–161.
31.
TorningK.Oinas-KukkonenH. (2009). Persuasive system design: State of the art and future directions. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, 1–8.
32.
ZhengZ.AhnS.ChenD.LavalJ. (2011). Freeway traffic oscillations: Microscopic analysis of formations and propagations using wavelet transform. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 17, 702–716.
