Evaluation of Imminent Take-Over Requests With Real Automation on a Test Track.

Abstract

Investigating take-over, driving, non-driving related task (NDRT) performance, and trust of conditionally automated vehicles (AVs) in critical transitions on a test track. Most experimental results addressing driver take-over were obtained in simulators. The presented experiment aimed at validating relevant findings while uncovering potential effects of motion cues and real risk. Twenty-two participants responded to four critical transitions on a test track. Non-driving related task modality (reading on a handheld device vs. auditory) and take-over timing (cognitive load) were varied on two levels. We evaluated take-over and NDRT performance as well as gaze behavior. Further, trust and workload were assessed with scales and interviews. Reaction times were significantly faster than in simulator studies. Further, reaction times were only barely affected by varying visual, physical, or cognitive load. Post-take-over control was significantly degraded with the handheld device. Experiencing the system reduced participants' distrust, and distrusting participants monitored the system longer and more frequently. NDRTs on a handheld device resulted in more safety-critical situations. The results confirm that take-over performance is mainly influenced by visual-cognitive load, while physical load did not significantly affect responses. Future take-over request (TOR) studies may investigate situation awareness and post-take-over control rather than reaction times only. Trust and distrust can be considered as different dimensions in AV research. Conditionally AVs should offer dedicated interfaces for NDRTs to provide an alternative to using nomadic devices. These interfaces should be designed in a way to maintain drivers' situation awareness. This paper presents a test track experiment addressing conditionally automated driving systems. Twenty-two participants responded to critical TORs, where we varied NDRT modality and take-over timing. In addition, we assessed trust and workload with standardized scales and interviews.