Driver Behaviour and User Acceptance of Cooperative Systems Based on Infrastructure-to-Vehicle Communication

  • Robert Kölbl
  • Susanne Fuchs
Conference paper



In the area of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) the development of co-operative systems is seen as one of the key means to ensure safe and efficient driving. The European Integrated Project COOPERS (Co-operative systems for intelligent road safety, focuses on the I2V communication systems transmit accurate, high-quality traffic information directly to vehicle groups in order to achieve the above objectives.


As a framework, the model of human information processing has been used with the integration of driver behavior and user acceptance. The former should show the short time effects such as driver reaction to certain events and the latter should assess the long-term behavior and its usage. The same methodology has been applied in a simulator study and in field tests.


In the simulator study the driver reduced the speed in all events. A reduction in speed could also be found in the field studies. In terms of user acceptance, the objective measurements could also be found in the subjective questionnaire results and fulfilled the expectations where the post-questionnaire results outperformed those of the pre-questionnaire.


The COOPERS system can provide a contribution to safe and efficient driving through the information provision and the raising of the attention at critical incidences. However, this can only be achieved if the provided information can be transmitted accurately, i.e. in time and in location, and with a high degree of certainty.


Driver behaviour User acceptance Information technology Telematics Human information processing I2v communication 



The research has been funded by the European Commission Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under the grant agreement no. 026814 Project COOPERS - Co-operative Networks for Intelligent Road Safety. Among others, the following persons have contributed to the elaboration of the related reports within the COOPERS project: Doris Bankosegger, Alexander Frötscher, Christoph Hecht, Mattias Hjort, Meng Lu, Selina Mardh, Mike McDonald, Jinan Piao, Andy Richards and Thomas Scheider.


  1. 1.
    Shladover SE (2005) Preparing the way for vehicle-infrastructure integration. California PATH research report, California Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mizutani H (2008) Field operation tests on the sangubashi section of metropolitan expressway no. 4. Advanced Cruise-Assist Highway System Research Association Accessed 22 Oct 2008
  3. 3.
    Böhm M, Frötscher A, McDonald M. Piao J (2007) Towards cooperative traffic management—an overview of the COOPERS project. In: Eurotransport Magazine: Issue 2, Russell Publishing Limited, Brasted, pp 72–75Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schweiger CL, Shammout K (2003) Strategies for improved traveller information. In: Transit Cooperative Research Program: Report 92, TRB, National Academies, Washington, pp 28–30Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    McDonald M (2007) Summary report on safety standards and indicators to improve the safety on roads. COOPERS Report D5-2100, Southampton, pp 70–79Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Federal Highway Administration (2001) Intelligent Transportation Systems benefits: 2001 update. FHWA-OP-01-024, U.S. Department of Transportation, Intelligent Systems Joint Program OfficeGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brookhuis KA, de Waard D, Janssen WH (2001) Behavioural impacts of advanced driver assistance systems—an overview. Eur J Trans Infrastruct Res 1(3):245–253, DelftGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carsten O, Nilsson L (2001) Safety assessment of driver assistance systems. Eur J Trans Infrastruct Res 1(3):225–243, DelftGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wickens CD, Hollands JG (2000) Engineering psychology and human performances. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vreeswijk J (2008) Driving simulator study for Intelligent Cooperative Intersection Safety systems (IRIS). In: Proceedings of the 7th European Congress and Exhibition on Intelligent Transport Systems and Services, CD-ROM, Ertico, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bischoff D (2007) Developing guidelines for managing driver workload and distraction associated with telematic devices., Washington
  12. 12.
    Ahmed KI et al. (1996) Models of freeway lane changing and gap acceptance behaviour. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory (ISTTT). LyonGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Toledo T, Koutsopoulos HN, Ahmed K (2007) Estimation of vehicle trajectories with locally weighted regression. Transp Res Rec 1999:161–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Toledo T, Koutsopoulos HN, Ben-Akiva M (2003) Modeling integrated lane-changing behaviour. Transp Res Rec 1857:30–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Toledo T, Koutsopoulos HN, Ben-Akiva M (2007) Integrated driving behaviour modeling. Transp Res C 15(2):96–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshar PR (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci 35:982–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Morris MG (1996) A longitudinal examination of information technology acceptance. In: School of business. Indiana University, IndianaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Smiley A, Grant B (1991) Behavioural adaptation and antilock brake systems. Presented at IEA 1991, Paris, July 1991Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia Srl 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Technology, Institute of Transportation Transport Planning and Traffic EngineeringViennaAustria
  2. 2.Brimatech Services GmbHViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations