Learning about advanced driver assistance systems – The case of ACC and FCW in a sample of Czech drivers

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour

Volumn 65, Issue , 2019, Pages 576-583

  Viktorová, Lucie ^a   Šucha, Matúš ^a  

^a PALACKÝ UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

Author keywords

Adaptive cruise control; Advanced driver assistance systems; Driver education; Forward collision warning; Technology acceptance

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE CONTROL SYSTEMS; ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL; AUTOMOBILE DRIVERS; DRIVER TRAINING;

ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL (ACC); CONTENT ANALYSIS; DRIVER EDUCATION; FORWARD COLLISION WARNINGS; IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS; INFORMATION USERS; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE; USER EXPERIENCE;

ADVANCED DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS;

EID: 85048757597     PISSN: 13698478     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2018.05.032     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Anderson, R.W.G., Hutchinson, T.P., Linke, B., Ponte, G., Analysis of crash data to estimate the benefits of emerging vehicle technology. 2011, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia Retrieved from http://casr.adelaide.edu.au/casrpubfile/1081/CASR094.pdf.
2. Beggiato, M., Krems, J.F., The evolution of mental model, trust and acceptance of adaptive cruise control in relation to initial information. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 18 (2013), 47–57.
3. Beggiato, M., Pereira, M., Petzoldt, T., Krems, J., Learning and development of trust, acceptance and the mental model of ACC. A longitudinal on-road study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 35 (2015), 75–84, 10.1016/j.trf.2015.10.005.
4. Benmimoun, M., Zlocki, A., & Eckstein, L. (2013). Behavioral changes and user acceptance of Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) and Forward Collision Warning (FCW): Key findings within a european naturalistic field operational test. In The 23rd international technical conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV), Seoul, Republic of Korea, May 27–30, 2013, 6 p.
5. Burnett, G., Diels, C., Driver acceptance of in-vehicle information, assistance and automated systems: An overview. Regan, M.A., Horberry, T., Stevens, A., (eds.) Driver Acceptance of New Technology: Theory, Measurement and Optimisation, 2014, Ashgate Publishing, UK, 137–151.
6. Coelingh, E., Jakobsson, L., Lind, H., & Lindman, M. (2007). Collision warning with auto brake: a real-life safety perspective. In Proceedings of the 20th international technical conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV), Lyon, France, June 18–21, 2007, 9 p.
7. Jenness, J. W., Lerner, N. D., Mazor, S., Osberg, J. S., & Tefft, B. C. (2008). Use of advanced in-vehicle technology by young and older early adopters. Survey results on adaptive cruise control systems. Report No. DOT HS 810 917. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
8. Jermakian, J.S., Crash avoidance potential of four passenger vehicle technologies. Accident Analysis and Prevention 43:3 (2011), 732–740, 10.1016/j.aap.2010.10.020.
9. Klauer, S. G., Neale, V.L., Dingus, T.A., Ramsey, D., Sudweeks, J. (2006). The impact of driver inattention on near-crash/crash risk: An analysis using the 100-car naturalistic driving study data, April 2006, DOT HS 810 594. Washington, DC: NHTSA.
10. Lang, B., Parkes, A., Cotter, S., Robbins, R., Diels, C., Vanhulle, P., … Kapplusch, J. P. (2007). Train-all integrated system for driver training and assessment using interactive education tools and new training curricula for all modes of road transport. TRAIN ALL Consortium.
11. Lee, S., Llaneras, E., Klauer, S. G., & Sudweek, J. (2007). Analyses of rear-end crashes and near-crashes in the 100-car naturalistic driving study to support rear-signaling countermeasure development, DOT HS 810 846. Washington, DC: NHTSA.
12. Larsson, A.F.L., Driver usage and understanding of adaptive cruise control. Applied Ergonomics 43 (2012), 501–506.
13. Llaneras, R. E. (2006). Exploratory study of early adopters, safety-related driving with advanced technologies. Report No. DOT HS 809 972. Washington, DC: National Highway Transportation Safety Administration.
14. Najm, W. G., Stearns, M. D., Howarth, H., Koopmann, J., & Hitz, J. (2006). Evaluation of an automotive rear-end collision avoidance system (Chapter 5). U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT HS 810 569. Cambridge, MA: Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center.
15. National Transportation Safety Board. (2015). The use of forward collision avoidance systems to prevent and mitigate rear-end crashes. Special Investigation Report NTSB/SIR-15-01. Washington, DC.
16. Ogitsu, T., & Mizoguchi, H. (2015). A study on driver training on advanced driver assistance systems by using a driving simulator. In International Conference on Connected Vehicles and Expo (ICCVE), Shenzhen (pp. 352–353). doi: 10.1109/ICCVE.2015.70.
17. Schleicher, S., Gelau, C., The influence of cruise control and adaptive cruise control on driving behaviour – A driving simulator study. Accident Analysis and Prevention 43:3 (2011), 1134–1139.
18. Smiley, A., Behavioral adaptation, safety, and intelligent transportation systems. Transportation Research Record 1724 (2000), 47–51, 10.3141/1724-07.
19. Sullivan, J. M., Flannagan, M. J., Pradhan, A. K., & Bao, S. (2016). Literature review of behavioral adaptation to advanced driver assistance systems. March 2016. Washington, DC: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.
20. Tsapi, A. (2015). Introducing Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) into drivers’ training and testing: The young learner drivers’ perspective. Master of Science Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Delft University of Technology. Available at: < https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:1c8f1bb7-c68e-4596-b341-a4f3bb70cdd9?collection=education>.
21. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2015. 2015 statistics of road traffic accidents in Europe and North America. Volume LIII. New York and Geneva: United Nations.