Abstract
Minor violations of traffic regulations are common today and partially socially accepted. Automated vehicles (AVs), however, will be obliged to keep to the letter of the law. This can lead to situations where user requests cause the AV to reach its legal boundaries, creating novel user-vehicle conflicts. To investigate whether traffic-violating driver interests are transferred to the automated context, we conducted an online survey with three conflict-prone scenarios (N=49). The results indicate that legally compliant AV behavior is desired but that users would intervene in the vehicle’s behavior to enforce interests. In a subsequent Virtual Reality study (N=30), we evaluated the effect of legal boundary-handling strategies (Responsibility and Control Shift, Responsibility Shift, No Shift) and other traffic participants’ violating traffic regulations on behavior, conflict, and trust in a legally conflict-prone parking scenario. Results show that conflict is perceived significantly higher in all strategies compared to the manual baseline, while situational trust in the vehicle is higher in the automated conditions but independent of the handling strategy.
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
