A Framework of Vehicle-Human Communication Features at Traffic Intersections to Enhance Trust and Situation Awareness

Abstract

Vehicle manufacturers are advancing their automated driving system (ADS) capabilities with enhanced transparency features. Research supports driving assistants (DA) and augmented reality (AR) displays for conveying the ADS status, actions, and road environment elements. However, providing continuous or irrelevant information degrades driving performance and attitudes towards the ADS. Therefore, the current study sought to create a framework for specific communication features that would enhance drivers’ trust and situation awareness via DA and AR stimuli. Participants watched various driving scenarios and provided their desired communication features to improve trust and situation awareness across modalities. Results identified key themes consistent across events (i.e., current/intended vehicle actions) as well as context-dependent themes such as police presence or pedestrian detection and location. In contrast, auditory cues were identified as redundant across events. These findings can support researchers to focus on relevant information to enhance drivers’ attitudes, awareness, and safety while operating ADS-equipped vehicles.

Keywords

Surface Transportation Augmented Reality Automated Driving System Driving Assistant Autonomous Vehicle Communication

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alpers

B., S.

Cornn

K., E.

Feitzinger

Khaliq

Park

S. Y.

Beigi

Joseph Hills-Bunnell

Hyman

Deshpande

Yajima

Leifer

Aquino Shluzas

(2020). Capturing Passenger Experience in a Ride-Sharing Autonomous Vehicle: The Role of Digital Assistants in User Interface Design. 12th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409120.3410639

Beggiato

Hartwich

Schleinitz

Krems

Othersen

Petermann-Stock

(2015). What would drivers like to know during automated driving? Information needs at different levels of automation. 7th Conference on Driver Assistance, 6.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Cohen-Lazry

Borowsky

Oron-Gilad

(2017). The Effects of Continuous Driving-Related Feedback on Drivers’ Response to Automation Failures. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 61(1), 1980–1984. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213601974

Colley

Bräuner

Lanzer

Walch

Baumann

Rukzio

(2020). Effect of Visualization of Pedestrian Intention Recognition on Trust and Cognitive Load. 12th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 181–191. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409120.3410648

Colley

Krauss

Lanzer

Rukzio

(2021). How Should Automated Vehicles Communicate Critical Situations?: A Comparative Analysis of Visualization Concepts. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 5(3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3478111

Zhou

Tilbury

Robert

L. P.

Yang

X. J.

(2021). Designing Alert Systems in Takeover Transitions: The Effects of Display Information and Modality. 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409118.3475155

Forster

Naujoks

Neukum

(2017). Increasing anthropomorphism and trust in automated driving functions by adding speech output. 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 365–372. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2017.7995746

Goncharov

(2022). Autonomous Vehicle Companies and Their ML. Weights & Biases. https://wandb.ai/ivangoncharov/AVs-report/reports/Autonomous-Vehicle-Companies-And-Their-ML–VmlldzoyNTg1Mjc1

10.

Jing

Shang

Chen

Zhi

(2022). The impact of different AR-HUD virtual warning interfaces on the takeover performance and visual characteristics of autonomous vehicles. Traffic Injury Prevention, 23(5), 277–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2022.2055752

11.

Kettle

Lee

Y.-C.

(2022). Augmented Reality for Vehicle-Driver Communication: A Systematic Review. Safety, 8(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety8040084

12.

Kettle

Lee

Y.-C.

(2023). User Experiences of Well-Being Chatbots. Human Factors. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208231162453

13.

Koo

Kwac

Steinert

Leifer

Nass

(2015). Why did my car just do that? Explaining semi-autonomous driving actions to improve driver understanding, trust, and performance. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 9(4), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-014-0227-2

14.

Koo

Shin

Steinert

Leifer

(2016). Understanding driver responses to voice alerts of autonomous car operations. International Journal of Vehicle Design, 70(4), 377. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVD.2016.076740

15.

Large

D. R.

Burnett

Anyasodo

Skrypchuk

(2016). Assessing Cognitive Demand during Natural Language Interactions with a Digital Driving Assistant. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 67–74. https://doi.org/10.1145/3003715.3005408

16.

Large

D. R.

Burnett

Clark

(2019). Lessons from Oz: Design guidelines for automotive conversational user interfaces. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: Adjunct Proceedings, 335–340. https://doi.org/10.1145/3349263.3351314

17.

Zhang

Yang

Kang

Chai

Shi

Zeng

(2021). Take over Gradually in Conditional Automated Driving: The Effect of Two-stage Warning Systems on Situation Awareness, Driving Stress, Takeover Performance, and Acceptance. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 37(4), 352–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1860514

18.

Petermeijer

Bazilinskyy

Bengler

de Winter

(2017). Take-over again: Investigating multimodal and directional TORs to get the driver back into the loop. Applied Ergonomics, 62, 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.02.023

19.

Politis

Langdon

Adebayo

Bradley

Clarkson

P. J.

Skrypchuk

Mouzakitis

Eriksson

Brown

J. W. H.

Revell

Stanton

(2018). An Evaluation of Inclusive Dialogue-Based Interfaces for the Takeover of Control in Autonomous Cars. 23rd International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, 601–606. https://doi.org/10.1145/3172944.3172990

20.

Ruijten

Terken

Chandramouli

(2018). Enhancing Trust in Autonomous Vehicles through Intelligent User Interfaces That Mimic Human Behavior. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 2(4), 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti2040062

21.

SAE International. (2021). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles (J3016_202104).

22.

Vlakveld

van Nes

de Bruin

Vissers

van der Kroft

(2018). Situation awareness increases when drivers have more time to take over the wheel in a Level 3 automated car: A simulator study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 58, 917–929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.07.025

23.

Waytz

Heafner

Epley

(2014). The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 113–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.01.005

24.

Wintersberger

Nicklas

Martlbauer

Hammer

Riener

(2020). Explainable Automation: Personalized and Adaptive UIs to Foster Trust and Understanding of Driving Automation Systems. 12th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409120.3410659

25.

Zeeb

Buchner

Schrauf

(2016). Is take-over time all that matters? The impact of visual-cognitive load on driver take-over quality after conditionally automated driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 92, 230–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.04.002