Impact of the driver’s visual engagement on situation awareness and takeover quality

During automated driving (SAE Level 3), drivers can delegate control of the vehicle and monitoring of the road to an automated system. They may then devote themselves to tasks other than driving and gradually lose situational awareness (SA). This could result in difficulty in regaining control of the vehicle when the automated system requires it. In this simulator study, the level of SA was manipulated through the time spent performing a non-driving task (NDRT), which alternated with phases where the driver could monitor the driving scene, prior to a critical takeover request (TOR). The SA at the time of TOR, the visual behaviour after TOR, and the takeover quality were analysed. The results showed that monitoring the road just before the TOR allowed the development of limited perception of the driving situation, which only partially compensated for the lack of a consolidated mental model of the situation. The quality of the recovery, assessed through the number of collisions, was consistent with the level of development of SA. The analysis of visual behaviour showed that engagement in the non-driving task at the time of TOR induced a form of perseverance in consulting the interface where the task was displayed, to the detriment of checking the mirrors. These results underline the importance of helping the driver to restore good SA well in advance of a TOR.     

Negations in syllogistic reasoning: Evidence for a heuristic–analytic conflict

Research indicates that cognitive age differences can be influenced by metacognitive factors. This research has generally focused on simple memory tasks. Age differences in working memory (WM) performance are pronounced, but are typically attributed to basic cognitive deficits rather than metacognitive factors. However, WM performance can be influenced by strategic behaviour that might be driven by metacognitive monitoring. In the current project, we attempted to connect these lines of research by examining age differences in metacognitive WM monitoring and strategies. In Experiment 1, younger and older adult participants completed a computerized operation span task in conditions that either required or did not require monitoring reports. Participants in the monitoring condition predicted and postdicted global performance for each block and rated their responses following each trial within a block. In Experiment 2, participants also reported their trial-level strategic approach. In contrast to the age equivalence typically found for simple memory monitoring, results demonstrated age differences in WM monitoring accuracy. Overall age differences in strategy use were not found, but using effective strategies benefited older adults' performance more than younger adults'. Furthermore, age-related differences in the WM task appear to be mediated by the accuracy of performance monitoring.     

Secondary task engagement and vehicle automation – Comparing the effects of different automation levels in an on-road experiment

Recent and upcoming advances in vehicle automation are likely to change the role of the driver from one of actively controlling a vehicle to one of monitoring the behaviour of an assistant system and the traffic environment. A growing body of literature suggests that one possible side effect of an increase in the degree of vehicle automation is the tendency of drivers to become more heavily involved in secondary tasks while the vehicle is in motion. However, these studies have mainly been conducted in strictly controlled research environments, such as driving simulators and test tracks, and have mainly involved either low levels of automation (i.e., automation of longitudinal control by Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC)) or Highly automated driving (i.e., automation of both longitudinal and lateral control without the need for continuous monitoring). This study aims to replicate these effects during an on-road experiment in everyday traffic and to extend previous findings to an intermediate level of automation, in which both longitudinal and lateral control are automated but the driver must still monitor the traffic environment continuously (so-called Partial automation). N = 32 participants of different age groups and different levels of familiarity with ACC drove in rush-hour traffic on a highway segment. They were assisted by ACC, ACC with steering assistance (ACC+SA), or not at all. The results show that while subjective and objective driving safety were not influenced by the degree of automation, drivers who were already familiar with ACC increased the frequency of interactions with an in-vehicle secondary task in both assisted drives. However, participants generally rated performing the secondary task as less effortful when being assisted, regardless of the automation level (ACC vs. ACC+SA). The results of this on-road experiment thus validate previous findings from more-controlled research environments and extend them to Partially automated driving.     

Controllability of Partially Automated Driving functions – Does it matter whether drivers are allowed to take their hands off the steering wheel?

Different motor vehicle manufacturers have recently introduced assistance systems that are capable of both longitudinal and lateral vehicle control, while the driver still has to be able to take over the vehicle control at all times (so-called Partial Automation). While these systems usually allow hands-free driving only for short time periods (e.g., 10 s), there has been little research whether allowing longer time periods of hands-off driving actually has a negative impact on driving safety in situations that the automation cannot handle alone. Altogether, two partially automated assistance systems, differing in the permitted hands-off intervals (Hands-off system vs. Hands-on system, n = 20 participants per assistance condition, age 25–70 years) were implemented in the driving simulation with a realistic take-over concept. The Hands-off system is defined by having a permitted hands-off interval of 120 s, while the Hands-on system is defined by a permitted hands-off interval of 10 s. Drivers’ reactions at a functional system limit were tested under conditions of high ecological validity: while driving in a traffic jam, participants unexpectedly encountered a time-critical situation, consisting of a vehicle at standstill that appeared suddenly and required immediate action. A visual-auditory take-over request was issued to the drivers. Regardless of the hands-off interval, all participants brought the vehicle to a safe stop. In spite of a stronger brake reaction with the Hands-on system, no significant differences between assistance levels were found in brake reaction times and the criticality of the situation. The reason for this may be that most of the drivers kept contact with the steering wheel, even in the Hands-off condition. Neither age nor prior experience with ACC was found to impact the results. The study thus demonstrates that permitting longer periods of hands-off driving does not necessarily lead to performance deficits of the driver in the case of take-over situations, if a comprehensive take-over concept is implemented.     

Driving next to automated vehicle platoons: How do short time headways influence non-platoon drivers’ longitudinal control?

Advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) are taking over an increasing part of the driving task and are supporting the introduction of semi- and fully automated vehicles. As a consequence, a mixed traffic situation is developing where vehicles equipped with automated systems taking over the lateral and longitudinal control of the vehicle will interact with unequipped vehicles (UV) that are not fitted with such automated systems. Different forms of automation are emerging and it appears that regardless of which form is going to become popular on our roads, there is a consensus developing that it will be accompanied by a reduction in time headway (THW). The present simulator study examined whether a ‘contagion’ effect from the short THW held in platoons on the UV drivers would occur. Thirty participants were asked to follow a lead vehicle (LV) on a simulated motorway in three different traffic conditions: surrounding traffic including (1) platoons with short following distance (THW = 0.3 s), (2) large following distance (THW = 1.4 s) or (3) no platoons at all. Participants adapted their driving behaviour by displaying a significant shorter average and minimum THW while driving next to a platoon holding short THWs as when THW was large. They also spent more time keeping a THW below a safety threshold of 1 s. There was no carryover effect from one platoon condition to the other, which can be interpreted as an effect that is not lasting in time. The results of this study point out the importance of examining possibly negative behavioural effects of mixed traffic on UV drivers.