使用 2 级车辆自动化时的驾驶员行为:一项混合自然研究。

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications Pub Date : 2023-12-20 DOI:10.1186/s41235-023-00527-5
Joel M Cooper, Kaedyn W Crabtree, Amy S McDonnell, Dominik May, Sean C Strayer, Tushig Tsogtbaatar, Danielle R Cook, Parker A Alexander, David M Sanbonmatsu, David L Strayer
{"title":"使用 2 级车辆自动化时的驾驶员行为:一项混合自然研究。","authors":"Joel M Cooper, Kaedyn W Crabtree, Amy S McDonnell, Dominik May, Sean C Strayer, Tushig Tsogtbaatar, Danielle R Cook, Parker A Alexander, David M Sanbonmatsu, David L Strayer","doi":"10.1186/s41235-023-00527-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Vehicle automation is becoming more prevalent. Understanding how drivers use this technology and its safety implications is crucial. In a 6-8 week naturalistic study, we leveraged a hybrid naturalistic driving research design to evaluate driver behavior with Level 2 vehicle automation, incorporating unique naturalistic and experimental control conditions. Our investigation covered four main areas: automation usage, system warnings, driving demand, and driver arousal, as well as secondary task engagement. While on the interstate, drivers were advised to engage Level 2 automation whenever they deemed it safe, and they complied by using it over 70% of the time. Interestingly, the frequency of system warnings increased with prolonged use, suggesting an evolving relationship between drivers and the automation features. Our data also revealed that drivers were discerning in their use of automation, opting for manual control under high driving demand conditions. Contrary to common safety concerns, our data indicated no significant rise in driver fatigue or fidgeting when using automation, compared to a control condition. Additionally, observed patterns of engagement in secondary tasks like radio listening and text messaging challenge existing assumptions about automation leading to dangerous driver distraction. Overall, our findings provide new insights into the conditions under which drivers opt to use automation and reveal a nuanced behavioral profile that emerges when automation is in use.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"8 1","pages":"71"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10733274/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Driver behavior while using Level 2 vehicle automation: a hybrid naturalistic study.\",\"authors\":\"Joel M Cooper, Kaedyn W Crabtree, Amy S McDonnell, Dominik May, Sean C Strayer, Tushig Tsogtbaatar, Danielle R Cook, Parker A Alexander, David M Sanbonmatsu, David L Strayer\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41235-023-00527-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Vehicle automation is becoming more prevalent. Understanding how drivers use this technology and its safety implications is crucial. In a 6-8 week naturalistic study, we leveraged a hybrid naturalistic driving research design to evaluate driver behavior with Level 2 vehicle automation, incorporating unique naturalistic and experimental control conditions. Our investigation covered four main areas: automation usage, system warnings, driving demand, and driver arousal, as well as secondary task engagement. While on the interstate, drivers were advised to engage Level 2 automation whenever they deemed it safe, and they complied by using it over 70% of the time. Interestingly, the frequency of system warnings increased with prolonged use, suggesting an evolving relationship between drivers and the automation features. Our data also revealed that drivers were discerning in their use of automation, opting for manual control under high driving demand conditions. Contrary to common safety concerns, our data indicated no significant rise in driver fatigue or fidgeting when using automation, compared to a control condition. Additionally, observed patterns of engagement in secondary tasks like radio listening and text messaging challenge existing assumptions about automation leading to dangerous driver distraction. Overall, our findings provide new insights into the conditions under which drivers opt to use automation and reveal a nuanced behavioral profile that emerges when automation is in use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46827,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"71\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10733274/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00527-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00527-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

车辆自动化正变得越来越普遍。了解驾驶员如何使用这项技术及其对安全的影响至关重要。在一项为期 6-8 周的自然主义研究中,我们采用了混合自然主义驾驶研究设计,结合独特的自然主义和实验控制条件,对驾驶员使用 2 级车辆自动化的行为进行了评估。我们的调查涵盖四个主要方面:自动驾驶的使用、系统警告、驾驶需求、驾驶员唤醒以及次要任务参与。在州际公路上,驾驶员被建议在他们认为安全的情况下使用 2 级自动驾驶系统,他们在 70% 以上的时间里都在使用。有趣的是,随着使用时间的延长,系统发出警告的频率也在增加,这表明驾驶员与自动驾驶功能之间的关系在不断发展。我们的数据还显示,驾驶员在使用自动驾驶时很有辨别力,在高驾驶需求条件下会选择手动控制。与常见的安全问题相反,我们的数据表明,与对照组相比,驾驶员在使用自动驾驶系统时的疲劳或烦躁程度并没有显著增加。此外,我们还观察到驾驶员参与收听广播和发送短信等次要任务的模式,这对现有的关于自动驾驶会导致危险的驾驶员分心的假设提出了挑战。总之,我们的研究结果为了解驾驶员选择使用自动驾驶的条件提供了新的视角,并揭示了使用自动驾驶时出现的细微行为特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Driver behavior while using Level 2 vehicle automation: a hybrid naturalistic study.

Vehicle automation is becoming more prevalent. Understanding how drivers use this technology and its safety implications is crucial. In a 6-8 week naturalistic study, we leveraged a hybrid naturalistic driving research design to evaluate driver behavior with Level 2 vehicle automation, incorporating unique naturalistic and experimental control conditions. Our investigation covered four main areas: automation usage, system warnings, driving demand, and driver arousal, as well as secondary task engagement. While on the interstate, drivers were advised to engage Level 2 automation whenever they deemed it safe, and they complied by using it over 70% of the time. Interestingly, the frequency of system warnings increased with prolonged use, suggesting an evolving relationship between drivers and the automation features. Our data also revealed that drivers were discerning in their use of automation, opting for manual control under high driving demand conditions. Contrary to common safety concerns, our data indicated no significant rise in driver fatigue or fidgeting when using automation, compared to a control condition. Additionally, observed patterns of engagement in secondary tasks like radio listening and text messaging challenge existing assumptions about automation leading to dangerous driver distraction. Overall, our findings provide new insights into the conditions under which drivers opt to use automation and reveal a nuanced behavioral profile that emerges when automation is in use.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.30%
发文量
96
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊最新文献
Delay discounting predicts COVID-19 vaccine booster willingness. Emotions in misinformation studies: distinguishing affective state from emotional response and misinformation recognition from acceptance. Acquiring complex concepts through classification versus observation. The roles of cognitive dissonance and normative reasoning in attributions of minds to robots. Older adults' recognition of medical terminology in hospital noise.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1