Acceptability and Acceptance of Autonomous Mobility on Demand

Distler, Verena; Lallemand, Carine; Bellet, Thierry

doi:10.1145/3173574.3174186

Cited by 83 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…22 %) vorstellen kann, ein Fahrzeug zu besitzen, welches gänzlich auf traditionelle Systeme zur Fahrzeugsteuerung (Lenkrad und Pedale) verzichtet. Auch daher wird bereits befürchtet, dass sich die Einführung und Demonstration von nicht perfekten Systemen sogar negativ auf die Bevölkerungsmeinung auswirken könnte (Distler et al 2018). Automatisierte Shuttles wie jenes in Bad Birnbach haben schließlich noch mit diversen, sich teils aus technischen oder gesetzlichen Gründen ergebenden, Nachteilen zu kämpfen.…”

Section: Literaturunclassified

Autonome Shuttlebusse im ÖPNV

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Literaturunclassified

Autonome Shuttlebusse im ÖPNV

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have and are experimenting with scheduling and dispatching services to optimise the efficiency of these pods [28]. These vehicles had been used on recent research projects investigating trust in automation, for example, to assess usefulness, ease of use and intention to use on-demand transportation [29,30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Driving Style: How Should an Automated Vehicle Behave?

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports on a study to investigate how the driving behaviour of autonomous vehicles influences trust and acceptance. Two different designs were presented to two groups of participants (n = 22/21), using actual autonomously driving vehicles. The first was a vehicle programmed to drive similarly to a human, “peeking” when approaching road junctions as if it was looking before proceeding. The second design had a vehicle programmed to convey the impression that it was communicating with other vehicles and infrastructure and “knew” if the junction was clear so could proceed without ever stopping or slowing down. Results showed non-significant differences in trust between the two vehicle behaviours. However, there were significant increases in trust scores overall for both designs as the trials progressed. Post-interaction interviews indicated that there were pros and cons for both driving styles, and participants suggested which aspects of the driving styles could be improved. This paper presents user information recommendations for the design and programming of driving systems for autonomous vehicles, with the aim of improving their users’ trust and acceptance.

show abstract

“…Until now, only few studies have been conducted that look into the future acceptance of autonomous buses [20,6]. Recent demonstration projects of autonomous buses have shown that passengers feel rather safe in automated buses [5], but, as noted by Rehrl et al [23] this is likely caused by the presence of a human operator, who is required by law during all drives. Rehrl et al also assume that fully 'unaccompanied' buses with higher driving speeds and mixed traffic, as can be expected to be introduced within the next years, will lead to a decrease in the passenger's sense of safety.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rehrl et al also assume that fully 'unaccompanied' buses with higher driving speeds and mixed traffic, as can be expected to be introduced within the next years, will lead to a decrease in the passenger's sense of safety. Several field studies report a discomfort with the level of technology and service of current autonomous buses [18,5]. A study comparing the user experience of an automated bus ride with one of a traditional group taxi drive [28] found that current obstacles for full acceptance of automated bus riding are related to low speed, but the authors suggest that technological improvement and optimized user interaction technology may relieve these barriers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“What’s the Robo-Driver up to?” Requirements for Screen-based Awareness and Intent Communication in Autonomous Buses

Fröhlich

Schatz

Buchta

et al. 2019

I-Com

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Autonomous buses are expected to become a cornerstone of future mobility systems. Especially during their introduction, passengers may require reassurance about the vehicle’s awareness of the situation on the road and of its intended next actions to further acceptance. In order to investigate the need and requirements for information about the vehicle’s awareness and intent from the perspective of first-time users, we conducted two user studies in a state-of-the-art autonomous bus at public demonstration spaces. In the first study, participants underwent a demonstration ride with the bus and were then asked about their needs for awareness and intent communication. The second study took participants on a ‘simulated ride’ within a stationary bus, in which typical scenarios of the road ahead were presented, together with different awareness and intent cues. Our results suggest that, first, future autonomous bus passengers may be in need of such awareness and intent communication screens. Second, we found that awareness and intent communication may be of greater importance for the indication of potential hazard recognition than for indicating route directions. Third, due to their complementary strengths, none of the three compared types of visual communication (text, icon and augmented reality) should be used in isolation.

show abstract

Acceptability and Acceptance of Autonomous Mobility on Demand

Cited by 83 publications

References 20 publications

Autonome Shuttlebusse im ÖPNV

Autonome Shuttlebusse im ÖPNV

Driving Style: How Should an Automated Vehicle Behave?

“What’s the Robo-Driver up to?” Requirements for Screen-based Awareness and Intent Communication in Autonomous Buses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About