Volvo and Infiniti Drivers’ Experiences With Select Crash Avoidance Technologies

Braitman, Keli A.; McCartt, Anne Taylor; Zuby, David S.; Singer, Jeremiah

doi:10.1080/15389581003735600

Cited by 90 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Participants' higher trust in side-view assist than in other systems in the current study mirrors the large proportion of owners who report they always keep these systems turned on and would want them in their next vehicle (Braitman et al 2010;Cicchino and McCartt 2015). Yet trust differed by implementation even for this system that was most trusted overall.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…Past research has shown that drivers find lane departure warning annoying (Braitman et al 2010;Cicchino and McCartt 2015;Eichelberger and McCartt 2014;, and the current study found that they also do not strongly trust this system either. Annoyance and lukewarm feelings of trust might explain why lane departure warning systems are deactivated more often than other warning systems (Flannagan et al 2016;Reagan and McCartt 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…Drivers do not always use production driver assistance technologies (Braitman et al 2010;Cicchino and McCartt 2015;Eichelberger and McCartt 2014;Flannagan et al 2016;Reagan and McCartt 2016), and lack of trust may be one reason for nonuse. In this study, trust varied both among different types of technology and among different implementations of the same technology when used in real driving conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Observed and self-reported evidence demonstrates that drivers do not always keep assistance technologies turned on and that use varies considerably by system type (Braitman et al 2010;Cicchino and McCartt 2015;Eichelberger and McCartt 2014;Flannagan et al 2016;Reagan and McCartt 2016). For instance, Reagan and McCartt (2016) reported that even though nearly all Honda vehicles with forward collision warning observed at service centers had that system turned on, lane departure warning was activated in only 32% of vehicles.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Driver trust in five driver assistance technologies following real-world use in four production vehicles

Kidd

Cicchino

Reagan

et al. 2017

Traffic Injury Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Information about drivers' experiences with driver assistance technologies in real driving conditions is sparse. This study characterized driver interactions with forward collision warning, adaptive cruise control, active lane keeping, side-view assist, and lane departure warning systems following real-world use. Methods: Fifty-four Insurance Institute for Highway Safety employees participated and drove a 2016 Toyota Prius, 2016 Honda Civic, 2017 Audi Q7, or 2016 Infiniti QX60 for up to several weeks. Participants reported mileage and warnings from the technologies in an online daily-use survey. Participants reported their level of agreement with five statements regarding trust in an online post-use survey. Responses were averaged to create a composite measure of trust ranging from −2 (strongly disagree) to +2 (strongly agree) for each technology. Mixed-effect regression models were constructed to compare trust among technologies and separately among the study vehicles. Participants' free-response answers about what they liked least about each system were coded and examined. Results: Participants reported driving 33,584 miles during 4 months of data collection. At least one forward collision warning was reported in 26% of the 354 daily reports. The proportion of daily reports indicating a forward collision warning was much larger for the Honda (70%) than for the Audi (18%), Infiniti (15%), and Toyota (10%).Trust was highest for side-view assist (0.98) and lowest for active lane keeping (0.20). Trust in side-view assist was significantly higher than trust in active lane keeping and lane departure warning (0.53). Trust in active lane keeping was significantly lower than trust in adaptive cruise control (0.67) and forward collision warning (0.71). Trust in adaptive cruise control was higher for the Audi (0.72) and Toyota (0.75) compared with the Honda (0.30), and significantly higher for the Infiniti (0.93). Trust in Infiniti's side-view assist (0.58) was significantly lower than trust in Audi (1.17) and Honda (1.23) systems. Coding of answers to free-response questions showed that more than 80% of complaints about Honda's adaptive cruise control were about the way it functioned and/or performed. Infiniti's side-view assist was the only one with complaints mentioning circumstances where it was used. Trust in forward collision warning, lane departure warning, and active lane keeping was not significantly different among vehicles. Conclusions: Driver trust varied among driver assistance technologies, and trust in adaptive cruise control and side-view assist differed among vehicles. Trust may affect real-world use of driver assistance technologies and limit the opportunity for the systems to provide their intended benefits.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Driver trust in five driver assistance technologies following real-world use in four production vehicles

Kidd

Cicchino

Reagan

et al. 2017

Traffic Injury Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is important to understand whether drivers react appropriately under these circumstances. Survey research has shown that vehicle owners often do not understand the capabilities and limitations of advanced vehicle systems (Jenness, et al, 2008;Braitman, et al, 2010;McDonald, et al, 2016), but there is a need to understand how drivers' knowledge (or lack of knowledge) about vehicle safety systems actually influences driving behavior.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Familiarity and Distraction Affect Drivers’ Responses to In-Vehicle Warnings for a Hazard that is Not Yet Visible

Jenness

Benedick

Huey

2017

Proceedings of the 9th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design: Dri

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary: On-road experiments measured drivers' initial responses to in-vehicle emergency electronic brake light (EEBL) warnings indicating hard braking by some vehicle in the lane ahead. Participants drove within a platoon of four research vehicles on an Interstate highway with other traffic present. Speed and time gap between the participant's vehicle and the vehicle immediately ahead were measured before and after a warning was triggered. This paper examines the effects of prior training about EEBL warnings and driver distraction on responses to the warning when the hazard (braking vehicle in lane ahead) was blocked from view by an intervening vehicle. An EEBL warning, if effective, should encourage drivers to immediately reduce their speed and increase the time gap between their vehicle and the vehicle ahead. We hypothesized that the warning would be more effective for drivers who had received training about the meaning of EEBL warnings as compared to naïve drivers; and more effective for visually distracted drivers as compared to drivers who were looking ahead but saw no hazard when the warning was triggered. Results suggest that speed reductions following onset of the warning were increased by training and decreased by distraction. The EEBL warning elicited the most robust response from drivers who were not distracted and from those had been trained about the warning system. There was no evidence for an interaction between these two factors. These results suggest that training drivers about vehicle safety systems may increase proper behavioral responses, thereby increasing the effectiveness of in-vehicle warnings.

show abstract

The More You Know, The More You Can Trust: Drivers’ Understanding of the Advanced Driver Assistance System

Cho

Heo

2020

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volvo and Infiniti Drivers’ Experiences With Select Crash Avoidance Technologies

Cited by 90 publications

References 2 publications

Driver trust in five driver assistance technologies following real-world use in four production vehicles

Driver trust in five driver assistance technologies following real-world use in four production vehicles

Familiarity and Distraction Affect Drivers’ Responses to In-Vehicle Warnings for a Hazard that is Not Yet Visible

The More You Know, The More You Can Trust: Drivers’ Understanding of the Advanced Driver Assistance System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About