External HMIs and Their Effect on the Interaction Between Pedestrians and Automated Vehicles

Song, Youngsup; Lehsing, Christian; Fuest, Tanja; Bengler, Klaus

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-73888-8_3

Cited by 52 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Using a variety of theoretical and practical considerations, the approach finally results in a set of use cases that are relevant to evaluate the usability of an eHMI. The intersection scenario represents the use case that has been studied most often in previous work on eHMIs [1,[3][4][5]7,8,[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23]. To the best of our knowledge, there has only been one study that used a narrow area as a use case of an eHMI so far [49], and there has been no study that has examined a merging scenario.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, if an eHMI directly addresses its message to a specific road user, interactions with more than one non-automated road user quickly become very complex and require an extended approach to deduce use cases. For example, many previous studies have examined eHMI signals that tell pedestrians to "walk," "go ahead," or "don't walk" [8,16,22], that project green arrows [8] or crosswalks [17] on the road surface in front of the vehicle or show a green pedestrian in the windscreen [22]. If another traffic participant feels addressed by such an eHMI signal that was initially directed to another road user, the situation can become very critical.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…eHMI concepts that communicated the vehicle's intention to stop [10] or gave a concrete request for action ("Walk!" or "Ok") [16] increased pedestrians' willingness to cross the road in a shared space compared to interactions without an eHMI. In addition, two studies found that pedestrians needed less time to make their decision to cross or not cross the road with than without an eHMI [6,17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority of studies have examined interactions in urban areas in a low speed range where communication was required to negotiate the right of way. The most frequently investigated use cases so far have been interactions with pedestrians at crosswalks [4,6,9,12,[17][18][19][21][22][23] or crossing situations with an ambiguous right of way, e.g., shared spaced or parking areas [1,8,[10][11][12][13][14]16,18,20,24,25]. While prior work has already developed frameworks to derive use cases to test the in-vehicle HMIs of automated driving systems [26][27][28][29], there has been very limited research on taxonomies for use cases of eHMIs [30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Standardized Test Procedure for External Human–Machine Interfaces of Automated Vehicles

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on external human–machine interfaces (eHMIs) has recently become a major area of interest in the field of human factors research on automated driving. The broad variety of methodological approaches renders the current state of research inconclusive and comparisons between interface designs impossible. To date, there are no standardized test procedures to evaluate and compare different design variants of eHMIs with each other and with interactions without eHMIs. This article presents a standardized test procedure that enables the effective usability evaluation of eHMI design solutions. First, the test procedure provides a methodological approach to deduce relevant use cases for the evaluation of an eHMI. In addition, we define specific usability requirements that must be fulfilled by an eHMI to be effective, efficient, and satisfying. To prove whether an eHMI meets the defined requirements, we have developed a test protocol for the empirical evaluation of an eHMI with a participant study. The article elucidates underlying considerations and details of the test protocol that serves as framework to measure the behavior and subjective evaluations of non-automated road users when interacting with automated vehicles in an experimental setting. The standardized test procedure provides a useful framework for researchers and practitioners.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Standardized Test Procedure for External Human–Machine Interfaces of Automated Vehicles

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To study perception, past visualization tools relied on pictures, photomontages, maps or simulation videos (e.g. see (Song, Lehsing, Fuest, & Bengler, 2018). An emerging interactive technology in the field of transportation studies are Virtual Reality (VR) tools which have opened a new window for practical applications and scientific investigations of human perception and behaviour.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of smartphone distraction on pedestrians’ crossing behaviour: An application of head-mounted immersive virtual reality

Sobhani

Farooq

2018

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviou

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A novel head-mounted virtual immersive/interactive reality environment (VIRE) is utilized to evaluate the behaviour of participants in three pedestrian road crossing conditions while 1) not distracted, 2) distracted with a smartphone, and 3) distracted with a smartphone with a virtually implemented safety measure on the road. Forty-two volunteers participated in our research who completed thirty successful (complete crossing) trials in blocks of ten trials for each crossing condition. For the two distracted conditions, pedestrians are engaged in a maze-solving game on a virtual smartphone, while at the same time checking the traffic for a safe crossing gap. For the proposed safety measure, smart flashing and color changing LED lights are simulated on the crosswalk to warn the distracted pedestrian who initiates crossing. Surrogate safety measures as well as speed information and distraction attributes such as direction and orientation of participant's head were collected and evaluated by employing a Multinomial Logit (MNL) model. Results from the model indicate that females have more dangerous crossing behaviour especially in distracted conditions; however, the smart LED treatment reduces this negative impact. Moreover, the number of times and the percentage of duration the head was facing the smartphone during a trial and a waiting time respectively increase the possibility of unsafe crossings; though, the proposed treatment reduces the safety crossing rate. Hence, our study shows that the smart LED light safety treatment indeed improves the safety of distracted pedestrians and enhances the successful crossing rate.

show abstract

Crossing the Street Across the Globe: A Study on the Effects of eHMI on Pedestrians in the US, Germany and China

Weber

Chadowitz

Schmidt

et al. 2019

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

External HMIs and Their Effect on the Interaction Between Pedestrians and Automated Vehicles

Cited by 52 publications

References 2 publications

Standardized Test Procedure for External Human–Machine Interfaces of Automated Vehicles

Standardized Test Procedure for External Human–Machine Interfaces of Automated Vehicles

Impact of smartphone distraction on pedestrians’ crossing behaviour: An application of head-mounted immersive virtual reality

Crossing the Street Across the Globe: A Study on the Effects of eHMI on Pedestrians in the US, Germany and China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About