Unskilled and unaware: Subpar users of automated driving systems make spurious decisions

Adjunct Proceedings - 10th International ACM Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, AutomotiveUI 2018

Volumn , Issue , 2018, Pages 159-163

  Forster, Yannick ^a   Hergeth, Sebastian ^a   Naujoks, Frederik ^a   Krems, Josef F ^b  

^a BMW GROUP   (Germany)

^b CHEMNITZ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Automated driving; Method development; Preference performance dissociation; User study

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; DISSOCIATION; USER INTERFACES;

AUTOMATED DRIVING; AUTOMATED DRIVING SYSTEMS; DRIVING SIMULATOR STUDY; FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS; HUMAN MACHINE INTERFACE; METHOD DEVELOPMENT; PERCEIVED USABILITY; USER STUDY;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 85063139147     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/3239092.3265960     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (13)

1. John Brooke. 1996. SUS - A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry 194, 189.
2. George E. Cooper and Robert P. Harper Jr. 1969. The use of pilot rating in the evaluation of aircraft handling qualities. Advisory Group for aerospace research and development Neuilly-Sur-Seine (France).
3. Yannick Forster, Sebastian Hergeth, Frederik Naujoks, and Josef F. Krems. 2018. How usability can save the day. Methodological considerations for making automated driving a success story. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.
4. Yannick Forster, Frederik Naujoks, and Alexandra Neukum. 2016. Your Turn or My Turn?: Design of a Human-Machine Interface for Conditional Automation. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. ACM.
5. Yannick Forster, Frederik Naujoks, Alexandra Neukum, and Lynn Huestegge. 2017. Driver compliance to take-over requests with different auditory outputs in conditional automation. Accident; analysis and prevention 109, 18-28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap. 2017.09.019.
6. Justin Kruger and David Dunning. 1999. Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77, 6, 1121.
7. Frederik Naujoks, Sebastian Hergeth, Andreas Keinath, Katharina Wiedemann, and Nadja Schömig. 2018. Use Cases for Assessing, Testing, and Validating the Human Machine Interface of Automated Driving Systems. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
8. Frederik Naujoks, Katharina Wiedemann, Nadja Schömig, Oliver Jarosch, and Christian Gold. 2018. Expert-based controllability assessment of control transitions from automated to manual driving. MethodsX 5, 579-592. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2018.05.007.
9. Alexandra Neukum, Tom Lübbecke, Hans-Peter Krüger, Christoph Mayser, and Joachim Steinle. 2008. ACC-Stop&Go: Fahrerverhalten an funktionalen Systemgrenzen. 5. Workshop Fahrerassistenzsysteme-FAS.
10. Jakob Nielsen and Jonathan Levy. 1994. Measuring usability: preference vs. performance. Communications of the ACM 37, 4, 66-75.
11. SAE. 2016. Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to On-Road Motor Vehicle Automated Driving Systems, J3016R. Retrieved from.
12. Alan Stevens, Allan Quimby, A. Board, Tanita Kersloot, and Peter Burns. 2002. Design Guidelines for safety in-vehicle information systems. TRL Limited.
13. Jinke D. Van Der Laan, Adriaan Heino, and Dick De Waard. 1997. A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telematics. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 5, 1, 1-10.