Abstract
Passengers of automated vehicles will likely engage in non-driving related activities like reading and, therefore, be disengaged from the driving task. However, especially in critical situations such as unexpected pedestrian crossings, it can be assumed that passengers request information about the vehicle's intention and an explanation. Some concepts were proposed for such communication from the automated vehicle to the passenger. However, results are not comparable due to varying information content and scenarios. We present a comparative study in Virtual Reality (N=20) of four visualization concepts and a baseline with Augmented Reality, a Head-Up Display, or Lightbands. We found that all concepts were rated reasonable and necessary and increased trust, perceived safety, perceived intelligence, and acceptance compared to no visualization. However, when visualizations were compared, there were hardly any significant differences between them.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
