Physiological measurements in social acceptance of self driving technologies

Abstract

The goal of the present study is to examine the cognitive/affective physiological correlates of passenger travel experience in autonomously driven transportation systems. We investigated the social acceptance and cognitive aspects of self-driving technology by measuring physiological responses in real-world experimental settings using eye-tracking and EEG measures simultaneously on 38 volunteers. A typical test run included human-driven (Human) and Autonomous conditions in the same vehicle, in a safe environment. In the spectrum analysis of the eye-tracking data we found significant differences in the complex patterns of eye movements: the structure of movements of different magnitudes were less variable in the Autonomous drive condition. EEG data revealed less positive affectivity in the Autonomous condition compared to the human-driven condition while arousal did not differ between the two conditions. These preliminary findings reinforced our initial hypothesis that passenger experience in human and machine navigated conditions entail different physiological and psychological correlates, and those differences are accessible using state of the art in-world measurements. These useful dimensions of passenger experience may serve as a source of information both for the improvement and design of self-navigating technology and for market-related concerns.

Physiological measurements of passengers in self-driving cars encountering unexpected road events

“…The most notable result of the EEG analyses showed a signi cant difference in frontal alpha asymmetry for human and self-driving conditions suggesting lower values during the novel experience of the vehicle navigating by itself. This replicates previous ndings that participants preferred the situation when the vehicle was driven by a human driver over the self-driving mode [15]. As it was hypothesized earlier, lack of perceived control over the movement of the vehicle [30,31] is a possible explanation of the observed disparity here.…”

“…We recorded and analyzed EEG, eye movement, head movement and blinking frequency in relation to driving conditions and road events. Despite some contrasts, our results were comparable to earlier ndings [15]. The expanded design allowed us to see possible interactions between the effect of driving modes and the experienced events.…”

“…In a previous pilot study, electroencephalography (EEG) and eye-movement data were collected in a 3minute-long real-world driving situation [15]. In the analyses, both measurement types signaled a difference between traditional and self-driving: participants' biological signals such as frontal alpha asymmetry and multifractal spectrum suggested higher preference for human driver in contrast to the autonomous driving mode.…”

“…

In a preliminary analysis investigating the EEG and eye movement patterns of car passengers' signi cant differences were reported in human driven and self-driving trials [15]. The differences suggested a preference and lower levels of anxiety in human driven conditions.

…”

The leading role of personality in concerns about autonomous vehicles

“…As technological innovations change and grow quickly, it appears reasonable to expect that individuals who can flexibly adapt to their environment and to new situations are more open to accepting AV technology. When participants were passengers in an AV driven by a human driver or in autonomous mode, Palatinus et al [ 58 ] found that the eye movement pattern of individuals with higher level of Ego-resilience was not affected as greatly by the difference between human and autonomous driving conditions compared to those with lower level of Ego-resilience. This suggests that a higher level of Ego-resilience was accompanied by lower alertness or arousal when the vehicle was driving without human control, which might be explained by better and more flexible adaptation to the unfamiliar driving situation.…”