International Conference on Human Interface and the Management of Information

HCI 2015: Human Interface and the Management of Information. Information and Knowledge in Context pp 233-242 | Cite as

Self-perception of Assister Driver Responsibility and Contribution in Mutual Assistance System

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9173)


Noting the current deep interest in advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), this study focuses on the “mutual assistance” paradigm, by which drivers mutually assist each other to promote a safer automobile culture. In our previous study, we examined the effectiveness of mutual assistance systems from both the recipient and assister sides using a driving simulator. In this paper, assister attitude changes, especially those related to their responsibility and contribution to an incident/accident, are compared for manual, semi-automatic and automatic warning scenarios. The results indicate that more positive attitude changes will result if “participants felt that he/she had some responsibility related to accident”. Additionally, it was determined that semi-automatic warnings were most likely to engender feelings of responsibility in an assister. These experimental results indicate that semi-automatic mutual assistance system is the most effective examined technique for reducing the target level of risk.


Mutual assistance Warning system Safety Target level of risk Attitude change 



The authors would like to thank researchers from the Japan Automobile Research Institute for their advice on this paper. They would also like to thank the participants in the experiments using the driving simulator for their cooperation. The authors thank anonymous reviewers for their constructive suggestions.


  1. 1.
    Zink, K.J., Ritter, A.: Mit Qualittszirkeln zu mehr Arbeitssicherheit: Praxisbeipiele f r die erfolgreiche pfung von Humanisierung und Wirtschaftlichkeit. Universum-Verl.-Anst, Wiesbaden (1992)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Trimpop, R.M.: Motivation zur arbeitssicherheit. Der Sicherheitsingenieur 4(5), 28–46 (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Trimpop, R.M.: The Psychology of Risk Taking Behaviour. Elsevier, North Holland (1994)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wilde, G.J.S.: Target Risk 2: A New Psychology of Safety and Health, 2nd edn. PDE Publications, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wilde, G.J.S.: The theory of risk homeostasis implications for safety and health. Risk Anal. 2(4), 209–225 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kurihashi, S., Matsuno, Y., Tanaka, K.: Evaluation of a mutual assistance system from both the recipient and assister sides. In: Proceedings of SICE Annual Conference 2014, pp. 1702–1707 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cabinet Office Government of Japan: White Paper on Disaster Management 2013 (2013), (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Katahira, S., Shibata, E., Monji, T.: Development of an advanced stereo camera system. In: Proceedings of 14th Asia Pacific Automotive Conference, SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-3591 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Taya, F., Kameda, Y., Ohta, Y.: NaviView: virtual slope visualization of a blind area at an intersection. In: Proceedings of 12th World Congress on ITS, pp. 1–8 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maslow, A.H.: A theory of human motivation. Psychol. Rev. 50, 370–396 (1943)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Information SystemsThe University of Electro-CommunicationsChofu, TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations