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.

Performance in Takeover and Characteristics of Non-driving Related Tasks during Highly Automated Driving in Younger and Older Drivers

Age-Related Effects of Executive Function on Takeover Performance: A Simulator Study in Automated Driving

Age-related effects of executive function on takeover performance in automated driving

Age-related differences in takeover performance: A comparative analysis of older and younger drivers in prolonged partially automated driving

Impact of Age on Takeover Behavior in Automated Driving in Complex Traffic Situations: A Case Study of Beijing, China

Takeover performance of older drivers in automated driving: A review

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

Evaluating Effects of Cognitive Load, Takeover Request Lead Time, and Traffic Density on Drivers’ Takeover Performance in Conditionally Automated Driving

Is take-over time all that matters? The impact of visual-cognitive load on driver take-over quality after conditionally automated driving

Behavioral and physiological responses to takeovers in different scenarios during conditionally automated driving

Measuring Takeover Performance in Different Driving Scenarios: Considering the Influence of Non-Driving-Related Tasks and Takeover Request Lead Time

Effects of Non-Driving Related Task Modalities on Takeover Performance in Highly Automated Driving

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

From young to old: The effects of information presentation type, multimodal display, and age on situation awareness and processing time in automated vehicles

Determinants of take-over time from automated driving: A meta-analysis of 129 studies

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

Influence of non-driving related tasks on driving performance after takeover transition in conditionally automated driving

Effects of non-driving-related tasks on takeover performance in different takeover situations in conditionally automated driving

Transition in Different Critical Situations: How Non-Driving Related Tasks Affect Drivers’ Physiological Response and Takeover Behavior after Partial Automation Silent Failures

Effects of non-driving related tasks on readiness to take over control in conditionally automated driving

How Resource Demands of Nondriving-Related Tasks and Engagement Time Affect Drivers' Physiological Response and Takeover Performance in Conditional Automated Driving.