Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1109/ITSC.2018.8569686guideproceedingsArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesConference Proceedingsacm-pubtype
research-article

“Peace of Mind”, An Experiential Safety Framework for Automated Driving Technology Interactions

Published: 04 November 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Current automated driving systems assume drivers continuously monitor the vehicle. Meanwhile, fully automated vehicles aim at not requiring human intervention for their safely operation. The industry is currently debating how these novel systems can be certified under functional safety standards. In this paper, we argue that the current safety picture is not comprehensive enough, since it alienates users. We propose experiential safety as a complement to existing functional safety and to develop a framework for experiential safety interactions between the user and automation in automated driving environments. To support the experiential safety design model, we provide an overview of the user-centered research on experiential automation safety, which includes results from online surveys, personal interviews, and gamified group workshops. We explore current user behaviors by focusing on what makes them feel safe as drivers and passengers, and how unexpected events and automation responses might impact their perception of safety. Among the highlighted results, we show how mismatched expectations and unexpected behaviors from autonomous vehicles can lead to frustration and compromised trust. We also show how automation feedback to the user can generate stress and anxiety if not properly configured and how a cooperative relationship between automation and the driver leads to more satisfying driving experiences. Finally, we present guidelines for the experiential safety to be applied by automotive engineers and designers in their development of automated driving technologies.

References

[2]
Litman, T. (2017). Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://www.vtpi.org/avip.pdf.
[3]
Shalev-Shwartz, S., Shammah, S., & Shashua, A. (2017). On a Formal Model of Safe and Scalable Self-driving Cars. arXiv preprint arXiv:.
[4]
O'Kelly, M., Abbas, H., & Mangharam, R. (2017, September). Computer-aided design for safe autonomous vehicles. In Resilience Week (RWS), 2017 (pp. 90–96). IEEE.
[5]
SAE International. (2016). Human Factors Definitions for Automated Driving and Related Research Topics (J3114 Ground Vehicle Standard). Retrieved from https://saemobilus.sae.org/content/J3114_201612.
[6]
Jamson, A., Merat, N., Carsten, O., & Lai, F. (2013). Behavioural changes in drivers experiencing highly-automated vehicle control in varying traffic conditions. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 30, 116–125.
[7]
Endsley, M.R. (2017). Autonomous Driving Systems: A Preliminary Naturalistic Study of the Tesla Model S. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 11 (3), 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555343417695197.
[8]
Banks, V.A., Eriksson, A., O'Donoghue, J., & Stanton, N.A. (2018). Is partially automated driving a bad idea? Observations from an on-road study. Applied Ergonomics, 68(October 2017), 138–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.11.010.
[9]
Martens, M.H., & Van Winsum, W. (2000). Measuring distraction: the peripheral detection task. Soesterberg, Netherlands: TNO Human Factors.
[10]
Kidd, D.G., Hagoski, B.K., Tucker, T.G., & Chiang, D.P. (2015). The effectiveness of a rearview camera and parking sensor system alone and combined for preventing a collision with an unexpected stationary or moving object. Human factors, 57 (4), 689–700.
[11]
Eckoldt, K., Knobel, M., Hassenzahl, M., & Schumann, J. (2012). An experiential perspective on advanced driver assistance systems. it-Information Technology Methoden und innovative Anwendungen der Informatik und Informationstechnik, 54 (4), 165–171.
[12]
Rödel, C., Stadler, S., Meschtscherjakov, A., & Tscheligi, M. (2014, September). Towards autonomous cars: the effect of autonomy levels on acceptance and user experience. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 1–8). ACM.
[13]
Hassenzahl, M., & Klapperich, H. (2014, October). Convenient, clean, and efficient?: the experiential costs of everyday automation. In Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational (pp. 21–30). ACM.
[14]
Smith, M.K. (2001, 2010). ‘David A. Kolb on experiential learning’, the encyclopedia of informal education. [http://infed.org/mobi/david-a-kolb-on-experiential-learning/].

Index Terms

  1. “Peace of Mind”, An Experiential Safety Framework for Automated Driving Technology Interactions
      Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image Guide Proceedings
      2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC)
      Nov 2018
      3947 pages
      ISBN:978-1-7281-0321-1

      Publisher

      IEEE Press

      Publication History

      Published: 04 November 2018

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • 0
        Total Citations
      • 0
        Total Downloads
      • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 28 Dec 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      View Options

      View options

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media