Abstract:Understanding driver behavior of conditionally automated driving is necessary to ensure a safe transition from automated to manual driving. This study aimed to examine the difference in take-over performance between high crash risk (HCR) and lower crash risk (LCR) drivers in emergency take-over situations during conditionally automated driving. In the current simulator study, a 3 x 3 (within-subjects) factorial design was used, including the task factors (no task, reading the news, and watching a video) and time budget factors (time budget = 3 s, 4 s, and 5 s). Forty-eight participants completed a WA drive on an approximately 10 km long two-way six-lane urban road. The participants firstly were in manual control and then switched to the automated driving mode at a speed of 50 km/h. The automated driving system was able to detect a broken car in the ego-lane and requested the driver to take over the control of the vehicle. There are at least one or two other vehicles or motorcycles on each side of the ego-vehicle, resulting in fewer escape paths. For the two non-handheld non-driving-related tasks (NDRTs), the participants were asked to be fully engaged in a task without any need to monitor the road environments. Each participant completed nine emergency take-over situations. The participants were classified into two groups that were labeled LCR (N <= 2) and HCR drivers (N >= 3) according to the number of accidents per driver. The results show that LCR drivers had shorter brake reaction time compared to HCR drivers. For all drivers, the engagement in a task led to longer response times, and the time budget affected the longitudinal vehicle control. In addition, the task affected the response times for LCR and HCR drivers, but only the time budget affected the longitudinal vehicle control for LCR drivers. For all drivers, LCR and HCR drivers, the time budget and task affected the safety of take-over. Especially, the two non-handheld everyday tasks seem to have a similar effect on the drivers' workload. Therefore, the HCR drivers had a lower hazard perception compared to the LCR drivers, and the factor regarding the individual difference of driving ability in take-over situations should be considered to design safe take-over concepts for automated vehicles.

Understanding Driver Preferences for Secondary Tasks in Highly Autonomous Vehicles

Supporting Vulnerable Drivers with Rheumatism

The Public Requirements on Interior Facilities of Highly Automated Vehicles in China

Cross-Cultural Analysis of Young Drivers’ Preferences for In-Vehicle Systems and Behavioral Effects Caused by Secondary Tasks

Do Drivers Vary in Preferences for Automated Driving Styles Across Different Scenarios? Evidence from a Simulation Experiment.

Different UX between Automatic Cars and Driverless Cars

Research on Safety Evaluation Model for In-Vehicle Secondary Task Driving

Take-Over Performance and Safety Analysis Under Different Scenarios and Secondary Tasks in Conditionally Automated Driving

Understanding Take-over Performance of High Crash Risk Drivers During Conditionally Automated Driving

Measuring drivers’ takeover performance in varying levels of automation: Considering the influence of cognitive secondary task

Exploring the self-regulation of secondary task engagement in the context of partially automated driving: A pilot study

Effect of Similar Cognitive Secondary Tasks Under Different Levels on Takeover Performance within Various Time Windows for Transition Control from Automated to Manual Driving

Studying Driver’s Perception Arousal and Takeover Performance in Autonomous Driving

Shaping driver-vehicle interaction in autonomous vehicles: How the new in-vehicle systems match the human needs

Impact of Visual Secondary Task on Young Drivers' Take-over Time in Automated Driving

A comparative study of state-of-the-art driving strategies for autonomous vehicles

Experience of drivers of all age groups in accepting autonomous vehicle technology

Impact of Secondary Task Immersion Duration on Take-Over Process of Conditional (L3) Automated Vehicles in an Off-Ramp Area

What Makes a Fantastic Passenger-Car Driver in Urban Contexts?

Influences of Level 2 Automated Driving on Driver Behaviors: A Comparison with Manual Driving

Risk Quantification and Prediction of Non-Driving-related Tasks on Driver's Critical Intervention Behavior in Autonomous Driving Scenarios