LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Merat, N; Jamson, AH (2009)
Publisher: Shaker Publishing
Languages: English
Types: Other
Subjects:
This paper presents results from a study conducted for the European FP6 project CityMobil. The experiment described here is part of four cross-site experiments designed to study the human factors issues associated with various degrees of automated driving. Thirty-nine drivers were asked to drive a simulated route with two zones in a within-subjects design, with a main factor of automation. Driver behaviour in “manual” driving, where all driving manoeuvres and decisions were made by the drivers, was compared to “highly automated” driving, where lateral and longitudinal control of the driving task was dictated by the “automated system”. In this condition, drivers were asked to take their foot off the pedals and their hands off the steering wheel and allow the vehicle to be driven for them. Situation awareness in both driving environments was measured by computing drivers‟ response time to a series of unexpected/critical traffic events. Results showed that drivers‟ response to these events was significantly later in the highly automated condition, implying both reduced situation awareness and perhaps an excessive trust in the automated system.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Bainbridge, L. (1983). Ironies of automation. Automatica, 19, 775-779.
    • Endsley, M.R. (2000). Theoretical underpinnings of situation awareness: A critical review. In Endsley, M.R. & Gardland, D.J. (Eds). Situation Awareness Analysis and Measurement (pp. 1-23). Mahwa, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    • Endsley, M.R. & Kaber, D.B. (1999). Levels of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Ergonomics, 42, 462-492.
    • Flemisch, F., Kelsch, J., Löper, C., Schieben, A., & Schindler, J. (2008). Automation spectrum, inner/outer compatibility and other potentially useful human factors concepts for assistance and automation. In D. de Waard, G.R.J. Hockey, P.Nickel, and K.A. Brookhuis (Eds). Human Factors Issues in Complex System Performance (pp. 257-272). Maastricht, The Netherlands: Shaker Publishing.
    • Hancock, P.A. & Parasuraman, R. (1992). Human Factors and Safety in the Design of Hancock, P.A. & Parasuraman, R. (1992). Human Factors and safety in the design of Intelligent Vehicle-Highway Systems (IVHS). Journal of Safety Research, 23, 181-198.
    • Harris, D. & Harris, F.J. (2004). Evaluating the transfer of technology between application domains: a critical evaluation of the human component in the system. Technology in Society, 26, 551 565.
    • Kaber, D.B. & Endsley, M.R. The combined effect of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance with complex, dynamic control systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 41st Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA.
    • McKnight, A.J. & McKnight, A.S. (2003). Motor vehicle technology: automation of driving tasks. Retrieved from http://www.isd.mel.nist.gov/ research_areas/ research_engineering/Performance_Metrics/PerMIS_2003/Proceedings/McKni ght.pdf
    • Parasuraman, R., Molloy, R. & Singh, I.L. (1993). Performance consequences of automation-induced complacency . International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3, 1-23.
    • Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, and abuse. Human Factors, 39, 230-253.
    • Rudin-Brown, C.M. & Parker, H. (2004) Behavioural adaptation to adaptive cruise control (ACC): implications for preventive strategies. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 7, 59-76.
    • Seppelt, B.D. & Lee, J.D. (2007). Making adaptive cruise control (ACC) limits visible. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 65, 192-205.
    • Sheridan, T.B. & Verplanck, W.L. (1978). Human and computer control of undersea teleoperators. Technical Report. Man-machine systems laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
    • Stanton, N.A. & Marsden, P. (1996). From fly-by-wire to drive-by-wire: Safety implications of automation in vehicles. Safety Science, 24, 35-49.
    • Stanton, N.A. & Young, M.S. (1998). Vehicle automation and driving performance. Ergonomics, 41, 1014-1028.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article