Coming back into the loop: Drivers' perceptual-motor performance in critical events after automated driving.

Clicks: 257
ID: 13483
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #24 of 46 articles by views in accident; analysis and prevention

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
This driving simulator study, conducted as part of the EU AdaptIVe project, investigated drivers' performance in critical traffic events, during the resumption of control from an automated driving system. Prior to the critical events, using a between-participant design, 75 drivers were exposed to various screen manipulations that varied the amount of available visual information from the road environment and automation state, which aimed to take them progressively further 'out-of-the-loop' (OoTL). The current paper presents an analysis of the timing, type, and rate of drivers' collision avoidance response, also investigating how these were influenced by the criticality of the unfolding situation. Results showed that the amount of visual information available to drivers during automation impacted on how quickly they resumed manual control, with less information associated with slower take-over times, however, this did not influence the timing of when drivers began a collision avoidance manoeuvre. Instead, the observed behaviour is in line with recent accounts emphasising the role of scenario kinematics in the timing of driver avoidance response. When considering collision incidents in particular, avoidance manoeuvres were initiated when the situation criticality exceeded an Inverse Time To Collision value of ≈0.3s. Our results suggest that take-over time and timing and quality of avoidance response appear to be largely independent, and while long take-over time did not predict collision outcome, kinematically late initiation of avoidance did. Hence, system design should focus on achieving kinematically early avoidance initiation, rather than short take-over times.
Reference Key
louw2017comingaccident Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Louw, Tyron;Markkula, Gustav;Boer, Erwin;Madigan, Ruth;Carsten, Oliver;Merat, Natasha;
Journal accident; analysis and prevention
Year 2017
DOI
S0001-4575(17)30290-7
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.