Interact or counteract? Behavioural observation of interactions between vulnerable road users and autonomous shuttles in Oslo, Norway

Abstract

The current paper presents the results of behavioural observations in a field experiment with automated shuttles in Oslo, Norway. Video observations were conducted at five fixed locations along a challenging 1.2 km automated shuttle line with varying traffic conditions. Observed interactions between vulnerable road users and automated shuttles were coded using a predefined codebook, which allowed a structured quantitative analysis. The paper identified several potentially risky types of situations in which the automated shuttles did not always behave according to the traffic rules. Generally, the automated shuttles failed to give way to pedestrians at pedestrian crossings in 26%–50% of the interactions. Right-turning shuttles failed to yield to cyclists going straight in 38% of the interactions at observation Site 1 (the only location where the automated shuttle takes a right turn). In majority of same direction interactions between cyclists and automated shuttles, the interactions resulted in the cyclist overtaking the automated shuttle, usually on the left-hand side. Generally, the paper found little evidence of road users trying to bully or otherwise take advantage of the defensive driving style of the automated shuttles and identified only a limited number of interactions in which a vulnerable road user behaved ignorant or aggressive towards the automated shuttles. In addition, the paper found very little indication of temporal effects that suggest changes in the interaction patterns over time.

“I trust Norway” – investigating acceptance of shared autonomous shuttles using open and closed questions in short-form street interviews

“…The main transport provider in the Oslo-region, Ruter, has completed several tests of SASs (Green et al, 2022). Research has found that several of these early tests violate traffic regulations and provoke evasive maneuvers from other road users (Ceunynck et al, 2022). These SASs have engendered dangerous situations with their slow and passive driving (Mirnig et al, 2022;Pokorny et al, 2021), and may be susceptible to be taken advantage of by other road users due to its' passive driving (Bjørnskau et al, 2023).…”

Investigating willingness to share autonomous shuttles with strangers: The mediating effects of trust and optimism

“…In this regard, trust may entail fears related to the social situation, data hacking, traffic safety, system performance and equipment failure, and other factors. Some recent pilots of SASs in Europe have found that the vehicles are too cautious while driving, creating concerns about SASs not being effective enough as a public transportation service and even detrimental to safety (Ceunynck et al, 2022;Pokorny et al, 2021). Thus, at present, SASs may not be technologically mature enough to claim a place in people's everyday transport (Mouratidis & Serrano, 2021).…”

“…Several pilots have been conducted in the Norwegian context, and the public transportation authority in the Oslo region, Ruter, has recently been attempting to implement SASs as part of their transport system. These pilots have found that autonomous buses were often in conflict with traffic regulations, provoking evasive maneuvers from cyclists and pedestrians (Ceunynck et al, 2022). This may further deteriorate the public perception of SASs.…”