Cyclists frequently face numerous hazards on the road. Often those hazards are posed by motorised vehicles. Advanced support systems that alert cyclists to potential dangers could enhance their safety. However, research in this area, particularly regarding hazard notifications for cyclists, remains sparse. This work assesses bi-modal early hazard notification concepts (combining visual cues with either auditory or tactile feedback) provided at head level (smart glasses with speakers, tactile headband). They are detailing the nature of the hazard, its direction relative to the cyclist, and the timing of exposure. This work investigates cyclists' preference and perception of the proposed concepts for two hazardous situations originating from interactions with vehicles: ‘dooring’, the hazard of a potential collision with an opening door of a parked vehicle (evaluated through a test track study, N = 32) and ‘being overtaken’ which poses the hazard of being cut off or hit by the overtaking vehicle (assessed in a bicycle simulator study, N = 21). The study involved comparisons of supported and unsupported rides, focusing on their impact on usability, intuitiveness, workload, and perceived safety. Our findings reveal varied preferences for the supporting feedback modality, with 56% favouring visual-auditory and 31% visual-tactile. The participants rated user experience, intuitiveness and perceived safety for the use of both concepts quite high. Further, the workload for assisted rides was rated as equally low as for unassisted rides.
Read full abstract