When will most cars be able to drive fully automatically? Projections of 18,970 survey respondents

Bazilinskyy, Pavlo; Kyriakidis, Miltos; Dodou, Dimitra; Winter, Joost de

doi:10.1016/j.trf.2019.05.008

Cited by 27 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies have pointed to automation misuse (e.g., prolonged hands-free driving, ignoring warnings to place hands back on the steering wheel, testing the limits of the operational design domain, mode confusion, engagement in secondary activities, using the system in bad weather conditions) [ 4 – 8 ]. These safety-critical behaviors may have been induced by the marketing and media, exaggerating the capabilities of automated vehicles and their expected market release [ 9 – 14 ]. A second plausible explanation pertains to the nature of partial automation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived safety and trust in SAE Level 2 partially automated cars: Results from an online questionnaire

Nordhoff

Stapel

et al. 2021

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present online study surveyed drivers of SAE Level 2 partially automated cars on automation use and attitudes towards automation. Respondents reported high levels of trust in their partially automated cars to maintain speed and distance to the car ahead (M = 4.41), and to feel safe most of the time (M = 4.22) on a scale from 1 to 5. Respondents indicated to always know when the car is in partially automated driving mode (M = 4.42), and to monitor the performance of their car most of the time (M = 4.34). A low rating was obtained for engaging in other activities while driving the partially automated car (M = 2.27). Partial automation did, however, increase reported engagement in secondary tasks that are already performed during manual driving (i.e., the proportion of respondents reporting to observe the landscape, use the phone for texting, navigation, music selection and calls, and eat during partially automated driving was higher in comparison to manual driving). Unsafe behaviour was rare with 1% of respondents indicating to rarely monitor the road, and another 1% to sleep during partially automated driving. Structural equation modeling revealed a strong, positive relationship between perceived safety and trust (β = 0.69, p = 0.001). Performance expectancy had the strongest effects on automation use, followed by driver engagement, trust, and non-driving related task engagement. Perceived safety interacted with automation use through trust. We recommend future research to evaluate the development of perceived safety and trust in time, and revisit the influence of driver engagement and non-driving related task engagement, which emerged as new constructs related to trust in partial automation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived safety and trust in SAE Level 2 partially automated cars: Results from an online questionnaire

Nordhoff

Stapel

et al. 2021

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Crowdsourcing is an efficient data collection method (see [20] for an overview of 15 such studies). In certain cases, results are more robust than data obtained in a comparable lab setting [21].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Attention of Pedestrians in Traffic Scenes: A Crowdsourcing Experiment

Bazilinskyy

Dodou

Winter

2021

Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a crowdsourced experiment, the effects of distance and type of the approaching vehicle, traffic density, and visual clutter on pedestrians' attention distribution were explored. 966 participants viewed 107 images of diverse traffic scenes for durations between 100 and 4000 ms. Participants' eye-gaze data were collected using the TurkEyes method. The method involved briefly showing codecharts after each image and asking the participants to type the code they saw last. The results indicate that automated vehicles were more often glanced at than manual vehicles. Measuring eye gaze without an eye tracker is promising.

show abstract

“…Each year, more than 1.35 million fatal accidents occur on the roads worldwide (World Health Organization 2018). An analysis of 65 countries showed that drivers from lowincome countries have the highest probability of dying in traffic, with a correlation of -0.78 between road traffic death rate and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (Bazilinskyy et al 2019).…”

Section: Objective Risk and Perceived Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…National differences in crash statistics may be attributable to national differences in driving behavior. A questionnaire study by Bazilinskyy et al (2019), for example, found that respondents from countries with a lower GDP per capita report a higher number of violations such as tailgating, using a phone behind the wheel, or racing away from traffic lights. The underlying causes of national differences in driving behavior are unknown, however.…”

Section: Objective Risk and Perceived Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk perception: A study using dashcam videos and participants from different world regions

Bazilinskyy

Eisma

Dodou

et al. 2020

Traffic Injury Prevention

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Research has shown that perceived risk is a vital variable in the understanding of road traffic safety. Having experience in a particular traffic environment can be expected to affect perceived risk. More specifically, drivers may readily recognize traffic hazards when driving in their own world region, resulting in high perceived risk (the expertise hypothesis). Oppositely, drivers may be desensitized to traffic hazards that are common in their own world region, resulting in low perceived risk (the desensitization hypothesis). This study investigated whether participants experienced higher or lower perceived risk for traffic situations from their region compared to traffic situations from other regions. Methods: In a crowdsourcing experiment, participants viewed dashcam videos from four regions: India, Venezuela, United States, and Western Europe. Participants had to press a key when they felt the situation was risky. Results: Data were obtained from 800 participants, with 52 participants from India, 75 from Venezuela, 79 from the United States, 32 from Western Europe, and 562 from other countries. The results provide support for the desensitization hypothesis. For example, participants from India perceived low risk for hazards (e.g., a stationary car on the highway) that were perceived as risky by participants from other regions. At the same time, support for the expertise hypothesis was obtained, as participants in some cases detected hazards that were specific to their own region (e.g., participants from Venezuela detected inconspicuous roadworks in a Venezuelan city better than did participants from other regions). Conclusion: We found support for the desensitization hypothesis and the expertise hypothesis. These findings have implications for cross-cultural hazard perception research.

show abstract

When will most cars be able to drive fully automatically? Projections of 18,970 survey respondents

Cited by 27 publications

References 35 publications

Perceived safety and trust in SAE Level 2 partially automated cars: Results from an online questionnaire

Perceived safety and trust in SAE Level 2 partially automated cars: Results from an online questionnaire

Visual Attention of Pedestrians in Traffic Scenes: A Crowdsourcing Experiment

Risk perception: A study using dashcam videos and participants from different world regions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About