Trust in an Autonomously Driven Simulator and Vehicle Performing Maneuvers at a T-Junction with and Without Other Vehicles

Abstract

Autonomous vehicle (AV) technology is developing rapidly. Level 3 automation assumes the user might need to respond to requests to retake control. Levels 4 (high automation) and 5 (full automation) do not require human monitoring of the driving task or systems [1]: the AV handles driving functions and makes decisions based on continuously updated information. A gradual switch in the role of the human within the vehicle from active controller to passive passenger comes with uncertainty in terms of trust, which will likely be a key barrier to acceptability, adoption and continued use [2]. Few studies have investigated trust in AVs and these have tended to use driving simulators with Level 3 automation [3,4]. The current study used both a driving simulator and autonomous road vehicle. Both were operating at Level 3 autonomy although did not require intervention from the user; much like Level 4 systems. Forty-six participants completed road circuits (UK-based) with both platforms. Trust was measured immediately after different types of turns at a priority T-junction, increasing in complexity: e.g., driving left or right out of a T-junction; turning right into a T-junction; presence of oncoming/crossing vehicles. Trust was high across platforms: higher in the simulator for some events and higher in the road AV for others. Generally, and often irrespective of platform, trust was higher for turns involving an oncoming/crossing vehicle(s) than without traffic, possibly because the turn felt more controlled as the simulator and road AVs always yielded, resulting in a delayed maneuver. We also found multiple positive relationships between trust in automation and technology, and trust ratings for most T-junction turn events across platforms. The assessment of trust was successful and the novel findings are important to those designing, developing and testing AVs with users in mind. Undertaking a trial of this scale is complex and caution should be exercised about over-generalizing the findings.

Promoting trust in HAVs of following manual drivers through implicit and explicit communication during minimal risk maneuvers

“…Accordingly, clear and efficient explicit and implicit HAV communication to following drivers needs to be assured. Besides safety, HAV communication toward following manual drivers should provide a sufficient informative value to decrease perceived criticality of MRMs and to foster overall trust in automation, which is seen as a major factor to influence the designated market success of HAVs (Körber, 2019;Morgan et al, 2019;Paddeu et al, 2020). To promote acceptance of HAVs as omnipresent road users, trust must be developed through interactions that are characterized by high pragmatic quality (as a dimension of user experience).…”

Adoption Barriers of IoT in Large Scale Pilots

“…The current discourse on autonomous driving suggests that trust remains to be the number one barrier to its acceptance, adoption and continued use [49,50]. This lack of trust and skepticism are related to the perception of passenger safety and uncertainties regarding its use.…”

Study the Effect of eHMI Projection Distance and Contrast on People Acceptance in Blind-Spot Detection Scenario

“…These are displays screen [19], light strips [20,21], and projection systems [22][23][24]. These devices allow AVs to indicate their status [25], perception, or intention in interactive scenarios such as parking lots [26], T-junctions [27], overtaking scenarios on the highway [28], and bottleneck situations [29].…”