Manual drivers’ experience and driving behavior in repeated interactions with automated Level 3 vehicles in mixed traffic on the highway

In the near future, conditionally automated vehicles (CAVs; SAE Level 3) will travel alongside manual drivers (≤ SAE level 2) in mixed traffic on the highway. It is yet unclear how manual drivers will react to these vehicles beyond first contact when they interact repeatedly with multiple CAVs on longer highway sections or even during entire highway trips. In a driving simulator study, we investigated the subjective experience and behavioral reactions of N = 51 manual drivers aged 22 to 74 years (M = 41.5 years, SD = 18.1, 22 female) to driving in mixed traffic in repeated interactions with first-generation Level 3 vehicles on four highway sections (each 35 km long), each of which included three typical speed limits (80 km/h, 100 km/h, 130 km/h) on German highways. Moreover, the highway sections differed regarding the penetration rate of CAVs in mixed traffic (within-subjects factor; 0%, 25%, 50%, 75%). The drivers were assigned to one of three experimental groups, in which the CAVs differed regarding their external marking, (1) status eHMI, (2) no eHMI, and (3) a control group without information about the mixed traffic. After each highway section, drivers rated perceived safety, comfort, and perceived efficiency. Drivers were also asked to estimate the penetration rate of CAVs on the previous highway section. In addition, we analyzed drivers’ average speed and their minimum time headways to lead vehicles for each speed zone (80 km/h, 100 km/h, 130 km/h) as well as the percentage of safety critical interactions with lead vehicles (< 1 s time headway). Results showed that manual drivers experienced driving in mixed traffic, on average, as more uncomfortable, less safe and less efficient than driving in manual traffic, but not as dangerous. A status eHMI helps manual drivers identify CAVs in mixed traffic, but the eHMI had no effect on manual drivers’ subjective ratings or driving behavior. Starting at a level of 25% Level 3 vehicles in mixed traffic, participants' average speed decreased significantly. At the same time, the percentage of safety critical interactions with lead vehicles increased with an increasing penetration rate of CAVs. Accordingly, additional measures may be necessary in order to at least keep the existing safety level of driving on the highway.     

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.     

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.