The effect of reliability on drivers’ trust and behavior in conditional automation
The development of automated vehicles continues unabated. The human factor challenges of designing safe automated driving systems are critical as the first several generations of automated vehicles are expected to be semi-autonomous, requiring frequent transfers of control between the driver and vehicle. Conditional automation raises particular concerns about drivers being out of the loop. A driving simulator study was performed with 20 participants to study driving with conditional automation. We observed driver performance and measured comfort as an indicator of the development of trust in the system. One scenario used a more capable automation system that was able to respond to most events by slowing or changing lanes on its own. The other scenario used a less capable automation system that issued takeover requests for all events. Participants drove both scenarios in counterbalanced order and experienced the different capabilities as changes in reliability. The automation would behave one way in the first work zone and a different way in the second. We observed three types of comfort profiles over the course of the drives. Several behavioral measures, notably gaze, showed effects of reliability variations. Trust calibrated during the first-driven scenario was seen to affect behavior during the second one, and this effect was more pronounced in the older age group, and most pronounced for women in that group.
KeywordsTrust in automation Conditional automation Automated vehicles Reliability
This research was funded by the Safer-Sim University Transportation Center.
- Blanco M, Atwood J, Vasquez HM, Trimble TE, Fitchett V, Radlbeck J, Fitch GM, Russell SM, Green CA, Cullinane B, Morgan JF (2015) Human factors evaluation of level 2 and level 3 automated driving concepts. Report DOT HS 812 182, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
- Flemisch F, Heesen M, Hesse T, Kelsch J, Schieben A, Beller J (2012) Towards a dynamic balance between humans and automation: authority, ability, responsibility and control in shared and cooperative control situations. Cogn Technol Work 14(1):3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-011-0191-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hergeth S (2016) Automation trust in conditional automated driving systems: approaches to operationalization and design. Ph.D. Thesis. Saint Mary’s University, Technische Universitat ChemnitzGoogle Scholar
- Lee JD, Moeckli J, Brown TL, Roberts SC, Schwarz C, Yekhshatyan L, Nadler E, Liang Y, Victor T, Marshall D, Davis C (2013) Distraction detection and mitigation through driver feedback. Report DOT HS 811 547A, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
- NHTSA (2017) Automated driving systems 2.0. Retrieved from https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13069a-ads2.0_090617_v9a_tag.pdf.. Accessed 10 Sept 2018
- Price MA, Venkatraman V, Gibson M, Lee J, Mutlu B (2016) Psychophysics of trust in vehicle control algorithms. Paper presented at the SAE Technical Paper SeriesGoogle Scholar
- R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/
- SAE (2016) Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles (surface vehicle recommended practice: superseding J3016 Jan 2014). In: J3016Google Scholar
- Schwarz C, Keum C, Brown T, Gaspar J (2016) Transfer from highly automated to manual control: performance & trust. Retrieved from Iowa City, IA. http://safersim.nads-sc.uiowa.edu/final_reports/UI_4_Y2_FinalReport.pdf. Accessed 10 Sept 2018
- Schwarz C, Brown TL, Gaspar JG, Keum C (2017) Transfer from highly automated to manual control: performance and trust. Paper presented at the Enhanced Safety of VehiclesGoogle Scholar
- Wickens CD, Xu X (2002) Automation trust, reliability and attention. Technical Report AHFD-02-14/MAAD-02-2, Urbana-ChampaignGoogle Scholar
- Wickens CD, Hollands JG, Banbury S, Parasuraman R (2015) Engineering psychology & human performance. Psychology Press, HoveGoogle Scholar