Abstract

In this paper we investigated if keeping the driver in the perception–action loop during automated driving can improve take-over behavior from conditionally automated driving. To meet this aim, we designed an experiment in which visual exposure (perception) and manual control exposure (action) were manipulated. In a dynamic driving simulator experiment, participants (n = 88) performed a non-driving related task either in a head-up display in the windshield (high visual exposure) or on a head-down display near the gear shift (low visual exposure). While driving, participants were either in an intermittent control-mode with four noncritical take-over situations (high manual control exposure), or in a continuous automation-mode throughout the ride (low manual control exposure). In all conditions, a critical take-over had to be carried out after an approximately 13 min ride. Measurements of take-over behavior showed that only high visual exposure had an effect on hands-on reaction time measurements. Both visual exposure and manual control exposure had small to medium sized main effects on time to system deactivation, the maximum velocity of the steering wheel, and the standard deviation of the steering wheel angle. The combined high visual – and high manual control exposure condition led to 0.55 s faster reaction time and 37% less steering variability in comparison to the worst case low visual – and low manual control exposure condition. Together, results corroborate that maintaining visual exposure and manual control exposure during automated driving can be efficacious and suggest that their positive effects are additive.

Highlights

  • The development and implementation of increasingly automated vehicles will remain relevant for the coming decades (Chan, 2017; Fagnant & Kockelman, 2015)

  • Akin to a planned treatment contrast we compared all conditions to the worst case situation, low visual and manual control exposure, which we considered as worst case scenario

  • The goal of this study was to investigate if maintaining visual exposure and manual control exposure during conditionally automated driving can keep the driver in the perception–action loop, and improve take-over reaction time and stability

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The development and implementation of increasingly automated vehicles will remain relevant for the coming decades (Chan, 2017; Fagnant & Kockelman, 2015). As long as automation is not fully continuous and robust (e.g. SAE Level 4/5), humans will remain an integral part of the human-vehicle-environment system (Hoffman, Hayes, Ford, & Hancock, 2002; Parasuraman & Wickens, 2008). Automating a task increasingly takes the human out of the task’s perception–action control loop (Merat et al, 2018; Mole et al, 2019; Sheridan & Verplank, 1978).

Objectives
Methods
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call