Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
47 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Exploring the Influence of Driving Context on Lateral Driving Style Preferences: A Simulator-Based Study (2402.14432v3)

Published 22 Feb 2024 in eess.SY, cs.RO, and cs.SY

Abstract: Technological advancements focus on developing comfortable and acceptable driving characteristics in autonomous vehicles. Present driving functions predominantly possess predefined parameters, and there is no universally accepted driving style for autonomous vehicles. While driving may be technically safe and the likelihood of road accidents is reduced, passengers may still feel insecure due to a mismatch in driving styles between the human and the autonomous system. Incorporating driving style preferences into automated vehicles enhances acceptance, reduces uncertainty, and poses the opportunity to expedite their adoption. Despite the increased research focus on driving styles, there remains a need for comprehensive studies investigating how variations in the driving context impact the assessment of automated driving functions. Therefore, this work evaluates lateral driving style preferences for autonomous vehicles on rural roads, considering different weather and traffic situations. A controlled study was conducted with a variety of German participants utilizing a high-fidelity driving simulator. The subjects experienced four different driving styles, including mimicking of their own driving behavior under two weather conditions. A notable preference for a more passive driving style became evident based on statistical analyses of participants' responses during and after the drives. This study could not confirm the hypothesis that subjects prefer to be driven by mimicking their own driving behavior. Furthermore, the study illustrated that weather conditions and oncoming traffic substantially influence the perceived comfort during autonomous rides. The gathered dataset is openly accessible at https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/jhaselberger/idcld-subject-study-on-driving-style-preferences.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (206)
  1. The impacts of heavy rain on speed and headway behaviors: An investigation using the shrp2 naturalistic driving study data. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 91:371–384.
  2. A hazard-based duration model to quantify the impact of connected driving environment on safety during mandatory lane-changing. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 106:113–131.
  3. Andy, F. (2009). Discovering statistics using spss.
  4. Evaluation of driver-behavior models in real-world car-following task. In 2009 IEEE International Conference on Vehicular Electronics and Safety (ICVES), pages 113–118. IEEE.
  5. Arnett, J. (1994). Sensation seeking: A new conceptualization and a new scale. Personality and individual differences, 16(2):289–296.
  6. Association, W. M. et al. (2013). World medical association declaration of helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Jama, 310(20):2191–2194.
  7. Self-driving like a human driver instead of a robocar: Personalized comfortable driving experience for autonomous vehicles. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.03908.
  8. Evaluating rainy weather effects on driving behaviour dimensions of driving behaviour questionnaire. Journal of advanced transportation, 2022:1–10.
  9. A classification method for driver trajectories during curve-negotiation. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC), pages 3729–3734. IEEE.
  10. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics, 1:71–81.
  11. Do you want your autonomous car to drive like you? In 2017 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI, pages 417–425. IEEE.
  12. Physiological correlates of discomfort in automated driving. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 66:445–458.
  13. Komfopilot—comfortable automated driving. Smart automotive mobility: reliable technology for the mobile human, pages 71–154.
  14. A context aware system for driving style evaluation by an ensemble learning on smartphone sensors data. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 89:303–320.
  15. Can we study autonomous driving comfort in moving-base driving simulators? a validation study. Human factors, 59(3):442–456.
  16. Objective metrics of comfort: Developing a driving style for highly automated vehicles. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 41:45–54.
  17. Comfort in automated driving: An analysis of preferences for different automated driving styles and their dependence on personality traits. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 55:90–100.
  18. Bengtsson, J. (2001). Adaptive cruise control and driver modeling. Department of Automatic Control, Lund Institute of Technology.
  19. Differences between vehicle lateral displacement on the road and in a fixed-base simulator. Human factors, 44(2):303–313.
  20. Multimodel approach to personalized autonomous adaptive cruise control. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 4(2):321–330.
  21. Investigation of personality traits and driving styles for individualization of autonomous vehicles. In Intelligent Human Systems Integration 2021: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Intelligent Human Systems Integration (IHSI 2021): Integrating People and Intelligent Systems, February 22-24, 2021, Palermo, Italy, pages 78–83. Springer.
  22. Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature reviews neuroscience, 14(5):365–376.
  23. Vehicle-based studies of driving in the real world: The hard truth? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 58:162–174.
  24. How can humans understand their automated cars? hmi principles, problems and solutions. Cognition, Technology & Work, 21(1):3–20.
  25. Driving simulator validation for research on driving behavior at entrance of urban underground road. In 2015 International Conference on Transportation Information and Safety (ICTIS), pages 147–150. IEEE.
  26. semi-traj2graph identifying fine-grained driving style with gps trajectory data via multi-task learning. IEEE Transactions on Big Data, 8(6):1550–1565.
  27. A graphical modeling method for individual driving behavior and its application in driving safety analysis using gps data. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 63:118–134.
  28. Driving style recognition under connected circumstance using a supervised hierarchical bayesian model. Journal of advanced transportation, 2021:1–12.
  29. Driving style clustering using naturalistic driving data. Transportation research record, 2673(6):176–188.
  30. Curve speed model for driver assistance based on driving style classification. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, 11(8):501–510.
  31. Self-learning optimal cruise control based on individual car-following style. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 22(10):6622–6633.
  32. Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic press.
  33. Driving style analysis using data mining techniques. International Journal of Computers Communications & Control, 5(5):654–663.
  34. Covid-19 and its effects on the driving style of spanish drivers. Ieee Access, 9:146680–146690.
  35. Cox, I. J. (1991). Blanche-an experiment in guidance and navigation of an autonomous robot vehicle. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 7(2):193–204.
  36. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of consulting psychology, 24(4):349.
  37. Effects of environmental, vehicle and human factors on comfort in partially automated driving: A scenario-based study. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 86:392–401.
  38. Ein beitrag zur prädiktion des fahrstils. VDI Berichte, pages 47–59.
  39. A probabilistic model for driving-style-recognition-enabled driver steering behaviors. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 52(3):1838–1851.
  40. A wizard of oz field study to understand non-driving-related activities, trust, and acceptance of automated vehicles. In 12th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, pages 19–29.
  41. Comfort or not? automated driving style and user characteristics causing human discomfort in automated driving. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 37(4):331–339.
  42. An adaptive driver support system: User experiences and driving performance in a simulator. Human factors, 54(5):772–785.
  43. Keep calm and ride along: Passenger comfort and anxiety as physiological responses to autonomous driving styles. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pages 1–13.
  44. Driver steering behavior model based on lane-keeping characteristics analysis. In 17th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), pages 623–628. IEEE.
  45. Understanding and using factor scores: Considerations for the applied researcher. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 14(1):20.
  46. Risk of automated driving: Implications on safety acceptability and productivity. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 125:257–266.
  47. Characterizing driving styles with deep learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.03611.
  48. Towards user-focused vehicle automation: the architectural approach of the autoakzept project. In HCI in Mobility, Transport, and Automotive Systems. Automated Driving and In-Vehicle Experience Design: Second International Conference, MobiTAS 2020, Held as Part of the 22nd HCI International Conference, HCII 2020, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 19–24, 2020, Proceedings, Part I 22, pages 15–30. Springer.
  49. Exploring automated vehicle driving styles as a source of trust information. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 65:268–279.
  50. Autonomous vehicles: Building a test-bed prototype at a controlled environment. In 2020 IEEE 6th World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), page 1–6. IEEE.
  51. Behavioral correlates of individual differences in road-traffic crash risk: An examination of methods and findings. Psychological bulletin, 113(2):279.
  52. Beifahrer. eine untersuchung über die psychologischen und soziologischen aspekte des zusammenspiels von fahrer und beifahrer. Uniroyal Verkehrsuntersuchung, (26).
  53. Evans, L. (2004). Traffic safety.
  54. Assessing the impacts of driving environment on driving behavior patterns. Transportation, 47(3):1311–1337.
  55. Driving style analysis by classifying real-world data with support vector clustering. In 2018 3rd IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Engineering (ICITE), pages 264–268. IEEE.
  56. Der einfluss fahrfremder tätigkeiten und manöverlängsdynamik auf die komfort-und sicherheitswahrnehmung beim hochautomatisierten fahren. VW-Gemeinschaftstagung Fahrerassistenz und automatisiertes Fahren, Wolfsburg.
  57. Decision-making style, driving style, and self-reported involvement in road traffic accidents. Ergonomics, 36(6):627–644.
  58. Cross-cultural perspective of driving style in young adults: Psychometric evaluation through the analysis of the multidimensional driving style inventory. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 73:425–432.
  59. Gasser, T. (2013). Herausforderung automatischen fahrens und forschungsschwerpunkte. 6. Tagung Fahrerassistenz, München.
  60. Drivers’ lane-keeping ability in heavy rain: Preliminary investigation using shrp 2 naturalistic driving study data. Transportation research record, 2663(1):99–108.
  61. Utilizing naturalistic driving data for in-depth analysis of driver lane-keeping behavior in rain: Non-parametric mars and parametric logistic regression modeling approaches. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 90:379–392.
  62. Driving simulator validation for speed research. Accident analysis & prevention, 34(5):589–600.
  63. Modeling human lane keeping control in highway driving with validation by naturalistic data. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), pages 2507–2512. IEEE.
  64. Risk, hazard perception and perceived control.
  65. Should my car drive as i do? what kind of driving style do drivers prefer for the design of automated driving functions. In Braunschweiger Symposium, volume 10, pages 185–204.
  66. Driver performance under simulated and actual driving conditions: Validity and orthogonality. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 143:105593.
  67. Dimensions of driver stress. Ergonomics, 32(6):585–602.
  68. Older adults’ acceptance of fully automated vehicles: Effects of exposure, driving style, age, and driving conditions. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 150:105919.
  69. Effect of environmental factors and individual differences on subjective evaluation of human-like and conventional automated vehicle controllers. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 90:1–14.
  70. Modeling and prediction of driving behaviors using a nonparametric bayesian method with ar models. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 1(2):131–138.
  71. Weather and road geometry impact on longitudinal driving behavior: Exploratory analysis using an empirically supported acceleration modeling framework. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 67:193–213.
  72. Statistical-based approach for driving style recognition using bayesian probability with kernel density estimation. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, 13(1):22–30.
  73. Drive me comfortable: customized automated driving styles for younger and older drivers. 8. VDI-Tagung “Der Fahrer im, 21:442–456.
  74. Driving comfort, enjoyment and acceptance of automated driving–effects of drivers’ age and driving style familiarity. Ergonomics, 61(8):1017–1032.
  75. Self-perception versus objective driving behavior: Subject study of lateral vehicle guidance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.13104.
  76. A survey of personalization for advanced driver assistance systems. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 5(2):335–344.
  77. An individual driving behavior portrait approach for professional driver of hdvs with naturalistic driving data. Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022.
  78. Validation of the driver behaviour questionnaire using behavioural data from an instrumented vehicle and high-fidelity driving simulator. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 75:245–251.
  79. Attribute-based development of driver assistance systems. In 10th International Munich Chassis Symposium 2019: chassis. tech plus, pages 293–306. Springer.
  80. The romanian version of the multidimensional driving style inventory: Psychometric properties and cultural specificities. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 35:45–59.
  81. The effect of perceived control on risk taking 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(2):377–391.
  82. International Organization for Standardization (2019). ISO 8855:2013-11, road vehicles - vehicle dynamics and road-holding ability - vocabulary (ISO_8855:2011).
  83. Characterisation of motorway driving style using naturalistic driving data. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 69:72–79.
  84. jamovi project, T. (2023). jamovi (version 2.3).
  85. Towards an empirically determined scale of trust in computerized systems: distinguishing concepts and types of trust. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, volume 42, pages 501–505. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
  86. Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International journal of cognitive ergonomics, 4(1):53–71.
  87. Comparing subjective similarity of automated driving styles to objective distance-based similarity. Human factors, page 00187208221142126.
  88. Smartphones as an integrated platform for monitoring driver behaviour: The role of sensor fusion and connectivity. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 95:867–882.
  89. The identification of malaysian driving styles using the multidimensional driving style inventory. In MATEC Web of Conferences, volume 90, page 01004. EDP Sciences.
  90. Encoding human driving styles in motion planning for autonomous vehicles. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 1050–1056. IEEE.
  91. Comparison of self-report and objective measures of driving behavior and road safety: A systematic review. Journal of safety research, 65:141–151.
  92. Simulator sickness questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. The international journal of aviation psychology, 3(3):203–220.
  93. Study to assess the controllability after chassis component damages on the dynamic driving simulator. In Pfeffer, P., editor, 12th International Munich Chassis Symposium 2021, pages 11–42, Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  94. Effects of weather and weather forecasts on driver behaviour. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 10(4):288–299.
  95. Kleisen, L. (2011). The relationship between thinking and driving styles and their contribution to young driver road safety. University of Canberra Bruce, Australia.
  96. Körber, M. (2019). Theoretical considerations and development of a questionnaire to measure trust in automation. In Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018) Volume VI: Transport Ergonomics and Human Factors (TEHF), Aerospace Human Factors and Ergonomics 20, pages 13–30. Springer.
  97. Identification of aggressive driving from naturalistic data in car-following situations. Journal of safety research, 73:225–234.
  98. Predicting aggressive driving behavior: The role of macho personality, age, and power of car. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression, 28(1):21–29.
  99. Speed and acceleration as measures of driving style in young male drivers. Perceptual and motor skills, 85(1):3–16.
  100. Self-report instruments and methods. In Handbook of traffic psychology, pages 43–59. Elsevier.
  101. Can we trust self-reports of driving? effects of impression management on driver behaviour questionnaire responses. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 6(2):97–107.
  102. Automatisiertes fahren-so komfortabel wie möglich, so dynamisch wie nötig. In 30. VDI-VW-Gemeinschaftstagung dqFahrerassistenz und integrierte Sicherheitdq.
  103. Big data & analytics platform for adas/ad. In Bäker, B. and Unger, A., editors, Diagnose in mechatronischen Fahrzeugsystemen XIV, volume 14, pages 263–284. TUDpress, Dresden.
  104. A question of trust: An ethnographic study of automated cars on real roads. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on automotive user interfaces and interactive vehicular applications, pages 201–208.
  105. Assessing drivers’ trust of automated vehicle driving styles with a two-part mixed model of intervention tendency and magnitude. Human factors, 63(2):197–209.
  106. Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human factors, 46(1):50–80.
  107. Objektive erfassung und subjektive bewertung menschlicher trajektorienwahl in einer naturalistic driving study. In 9. VDI-Fachtagung" Der Fahrer im 21. Jahrhundert": Der Mensch im Fokus technischer Innovationen, pages 177–192. Springer-VDI-Verlag GmbH & Co. KG.
  108. An overview on study of identification of driver behavior characteristics for automotive control. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2014.
  109. Reliability and validity of the multidimensional driving style inventory in chinese drivers. Traffic injury prevention, 20(2):152–157.
  110. The relationship between sensation seeking and speed choice in road environments with different levels of risk. In Driving Assessment Conference, volume 10. University of Iowa.
  111. Drivers trust, acceptance, and takeover behaviors in fully automated vehicles: Effects of automated driving styles and driver’s driving styles. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 159:106238.
  112. A method for making a fair evaluation of driving styles in different scenarios with recommendations for their improvement. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine, 13(1):136–148.
  113. Questionnaire for "automated ride comfort assessment (arca)".
  114. Development and validation of the competitive state anxiety inventory-2. Competitive anxiety in sport, 3(1):117–190.
  115. Driving style recognition for intelligent vehicle control and advanced driver assistance: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 19(3):666–676.
  116. The effects of lane width, shoulder width, and road cross-sectional reallocation on drivers’ behavioral adaptations. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 104:65–73.
  117. A validation study of driving errors using a driving simulator. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 29:14–21.
  118. Classifying travelers’ driving style using basic safety messages generated by connected vehicles: Application of unsupervised machine learning. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 122:102917.
  119. Understanding trust and acceptance of automated vehicles: An exploratory simulator study of transfer of control between automated and manual driving. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 58:319–328.
  120. Driver’s style classification using jerk analysis. In 2009 IEEE workshop on computational intelligence in vehicles and vehicular systems, pages 23–28. IEEE.
  121. Park4u mate: Context-aware digital assistant for personalized autonomous parking. In 2021 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), pages 724–731. IEEE.
  122. Toward adaptive driving styles for automated driving with users’ trust and preferences. In 2022 17th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pages 940–944. IEEE.
  123. Relationships among driving styles, desire for control, illusion of control, and self-reported driving behaviors. Traffic injury prevention, 22(5):372–377.
  124. Norman, D. A. (2009). The way i see it memory is more important than actuality. Interactions, 16(2):24–26.
  125. Driving style: How should an automated vehicle behave? Information, 10(6):219.
  126. Tactical decisions for lane changes or lane following: Assessment of automated driving styles under real-world conditions. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 8(1):502–511.
  127. Multidimensional traffic locus of control scale (t-loc): factor structure and relationship to risky driving. Personality and individual differences, 38(3):533–545.
  128. Pacejka, H. (2005). Tire and vehicle dynamics. Elsevier.
  129. Adaptation of the multidimensional driving styles inventory for spanish drivers: Convergent and predictive validity evidence for detecting safe and unsafe driving styles. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 136:105413.
  130. Drivers’ evaluation of different automated driving styles: Is it both comfortable and natural? Human factors, page 00187208221113448.
  131. Situational awareness, drivers trust in automated driving systems and secondary task performance. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.05251.
  132. Happy driver: Investigating the effect of mood on preferred style of driving in self-driving cars. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction, pages 139–147.
  133. Pohlert, T. (2014). The Pairwise Multiple Comparison of Mean Ranks Package (PMCMR). R package.
  134. Reliability and validity of a spanish-language version of the multidimensional driving style inventory. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 17:75–87.
  135. Psychophysics of trust in vehicle control algorithms. Technical report, SAE Technical paper.
  136. Vehicle sensor data-based analysis on the driving style differences between operating indoor simulator and on-road instrumented vehicle. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23(2):144–160.
  137. Drivers’speed choice: An in-depth study. TRL report 326.
  138. Measuring drivers’ physiological response to different vehicle controllers in highly automated driving (had): Opportunities for establishing real-time values of driver discomfort. Information, 11(8):390.
  139. Literaturanalyse und methodenauswahl zur gestaltung von systemen zum hochautomatisierten fahren. FAT Schriftenreihe, 276.
  140. Analysis of rainfall impacts on platooned vehicle spacing and speed. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 15(4):395–403.
  141. A first approach to understanding and measuring naturalness in driver-car interaction. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, pages 1–10.
  142. Räsänen, M. (2005). Effects of a rumble strip barrier line on lane keeping in a curve. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 37(3):575–581.
  143. A lane keeping assist design: Adaptation to driving style based on aggressiveness. In 2019 American Control Conference (ACC), pages 5316–5321. IEEE.
  144. Errors and violations on the roads: a real distinction? Ergonomics, 33(10-11):1315–1332.
  145. Trust in close relationships. Journal of personality and social psychology, 49(1):95.
  146. Riley, V. (1989). A general model of mixed-initiative human-machine systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, volume 33, pages 124–128. Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
  147. Individual swift trust and knowledge-based trust in face-to-face and virtual team members. Journal of management information systems, 26(2):241–279.
  148. Technologie-roadmap für das autonome autofahren: Eine wettbewerbsorientierte technik-und marktstudie für deutschland. Technical report, Working Paper Forschungsförderung.
  149. Impact of narrower lane width: Comparison between fixed-base simulator and real data. Transportation research record, 2138(1):112–119.
  150. Drive me naturally: design and evaluation of trajectories for highly automated driving manoeuvres on rural roads. Technology for an Ageing Society, Postersession Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Europe.
  151. Do you shift or not? influence of trajectory behaviour on perceived safety during automated driving on rural roads. In HCI in Mobility, Transport, and Automotive Systems: First International Conference, MobiTAS 2019, Held as Part of the 21st HCI International Conference, HCII 2019, Orlando, FL, USA, July 26-31, 2019, Proceedings 21, pages 245–254. Springer.
  152. How do you want to be driven? investigation of different highly-automated driving styles on a highway scenario. In Advances in Human Factors of Transportation: Proceedings of the AHFE 2019 International Conference on Human Factors in Transportation, July 24-28, 2019, Washington DC, USA 10, pages 36–43. Springer.
  153. I care who and where you are–influence of type, position and quantity of oncoming vehicles on perceived safety during automated driving on rural roads. In HCI in Mobility, Transport, and Automotive Systems. Driving Behavior, Urban and Smart Mobility: Second International Conference, MobiTAS 2020, Held as Part of the 22nd HCI International Conference, HCII 2020, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 19–24, 2020, Proceedings, Part II 22, pages 61–71. Springer.
  154. Does driving experience matter? influence of trajectory behaviour on drivers’ trust, acceptance and perceived safety in automated driving. understanding human behaviour in complex systems. Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society Europe.
  155. Diskomfort im hochautomatisierten fahren—eine untersuchung unterschiedlicher fahrstile im fahrsimulator. Arbeit interdisziplinär analysieren—bewerten—gestalten, 65.
  156. Hitting the apex highly automated?–influence of trajectory behaviour on perceived safety in curves. In HCI International 2021-Late Breaking Papers: HCI Applications in Health, Transport, and Industry: 23rd HCI International Conference, HCII 2021, Virtual Event, July 24–29, 2021 Proceedings 23, pages 322–331. Springer.
  157. I also care in manual driving - Influence of type, position and quantity of oncoming vehicles on manual driving behaviour in curves on rural roads, pages 75 – 85.
  158. Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological monographs: General and applied, 80(1):1.
  159. Enhancing trust in autonomous vehicles through intelligent user interfaces that mimic human behavior. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 2(4):62.
  160. Saad, F. (2004). Behavioural adaptations to new driver support systems: some critical issues. In 2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (IEEE Cat. No. 04CH37583), volume 1, pages 288–293. IEEE.
  161. A review of research on driving styles and road safety. Human factors, 57(7):1248–1275.
  162. Grouped random parameters bivariate probit analysis of perceived and observed aggressive driving behavior: a driving simulation study. Analytic methods in accident research, 13:52–64.
  163. How the driver wants to be driven-modelling driving styles in highly automated driving. In 7. Tagung Fahrerassistenzsysteme.
  164. Wie will der “fahrer” automatisiert gefahren werden? überprüfung verschiedener fahrstile hinsichtlich des komforterlebens. In 32. VDI/VW-Gemeinschaftstagung Fahrerassistenzsysteme und automatisiertes Fahren.
  165. Use of driving simulators in chassis development-applications and potentials. In Reifen-Fahrwerk-Fahrbahn: im Spannungsfeld von Sicherheit und Umwelt, number 2398, pages 175–190. VDI Verlag GmbH.
  166. Auswirkungen von querschnittsgestaltung und längsgerichteten markierungen auf das fahrverhalten auf landstraßen.
  167. Identifikation von fahrertypen im kontext des automatisierten fahrens. Forsch Ingenieurwes, 85:945–955.
  168. A survey of public opinion about connected vehicles in the us, the uk, and australia. In 2014 International Conference on Connected Vehicles and Expo (ICCVE), pages 687–692. IEEE.
  169. Maveric: A data-driven approach to personalized autonomous driving. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.08595.
  170. Shouno, O. (2018). Deep unsupervised learning of a topological map of vehicle maneuvers for characterizing driving styles. In 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), pages 2917–2922. IEEE.
  171. Hardware and software for collecting microscopic trajectory data on naturalistic driving behavior. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 21(3):202–213.
  172. Discomfort in automated driving–the disco-scale. In HCI International 2013-Posters’ Extended Abstracts: International Conference, HCI International 2013, Las Vegas, NV, USA, July 21-26, 2013, Proceedings, Part II 15, pages 337–341. Springer.
  173. How speed and visibility influence preferred headway distances in highly automated driving. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 64:485–494.
  174. Role of trust in decision making: Trusting humans versus trusting machines. In Paper session at the Academy of Management annual meeting, Anaheim, CA.
  175. User preferences, driving context or manoeuvre characteristics? exploring parameters affecting the acceptability of automated overtaking. Applied ergonomics, 109:103959.
  176. Spacek, P. (2005). Track behavior in curve areas: attempt at typology. Journal of transportation engineering, 131(9):669–676.
  177. Situational awareness and safety. Safety science, 39(3):189–204.
  178. Real autonomous driving from a passenger’s perspective: Two experimental investigations using gaze behaviour and trust ratings in field and simulator. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 66:15–28.
  179. Summala, H. (2007). Towards understanding motivational and emotional factors in driver behaviour: Comfort through satisficing. Modelling driver behaviour in automotive environments: Critical issues in driver interactions with intelligent transport systems, pages 189–207.
  180. Exploring personalised autonomous vehicles to influence user trust. Cognitive Computation, 12:1170–1186.
  181. The value of self-report measures as indicators of driving behaviors among young drivers. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 39:33–42.
  182. The multidimensional driving style inventory—scale construct and validation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 36(3):323–332.
  183. Assessment and profiling of driving style and skills. User Experience Design in the Era of Automated Driving, pages 151–176.
  184. Triggs, T. J. (1997). The effect of approaching vehicles on the lateral position of cars travelling on a two-lane rural road. Australian Psychologist, 32(3):159–163.
  185. Factor structure and measurement invariance of the multidimensional driving style inventory across gender and age: an esem approach. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 71:23–30.
  186. Strategic adaptations to lack of preview in driving. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 1(1):59–75.
  187. A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telematics. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 5(1):1–10.
  188. The relation between self-reported driving style and driving behaviour. a simulator study. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 56:245–255.
  189. Measuring driving styles: a validation of the multidimensional driving style inventory. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, pages 257–264.
  190. Influences of personal driving styles and experienced system characteristics on driving style preferences in automated driving. Applied Sciences, 13(15):8855.
  191. Systematic literature review on driving behavior. In 2017 IEEE 20th international conference on intelligent transportation systems (ITSC), pages 1–8. IEEE.
  192. Investigation of drivers’ thresholds of a subjectively accepted driving performance with a focus on automated driving. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 56:280–292.
  193. Driving style classification using a semisupervised support vector machine. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 47(5):650–660.
  194. Effect of personality traits on driving style: Psychometric adaption of the multidimensional driving style inventory in a chinese sample. PLoS one, 13(9):e0202126.
  195. Classification of automated lane-change styles by modeling and analyzing truck driver behavior: A driving simulator study. IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 3:772–785.
  196. Statistical and econometric methods for transportation data analysis. CRC press.
  197. The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. Journal of experimental social psychology, 52:113–117.
  198. Modellbasierte komfortbewertung von fahrerassistenzsystemen/model-based comfort evaluation of driver assistance systems. VDI-Berichte, (1900).
  199. Methodological considerations regarding motorcycle naturalistic riding investigations based on the use of gg diagrams for rider profile detection. Safety science, 129:104840.
  200. A comprehensive review of the development of adaptive cruise control systems. Vehicle system dynamics, 48(10):1167–1192.
  201. Rapid driving style recognition in car-following using machine learning and vehicle trajectory data. Journal of advanced transportation, 2019.
  202. Eu long-term dataset with multiple sensors for autonomous driving. In 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), page 10697–10704. IEEE.
  203. Implicit personalization in driving assistance: State-of-the-art and open issues. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 5(3):397–413.
  204. The exploration of autonomous vehicle driving styles: preferred longitudinal, lateral, and vertical accelerations. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on automotive user interfaces and interactive vehicular applications, pages 245–252.
  205. A partial reality experimental system for human-in-the-loop testing of connected and automated vehicle applications: Development, validation and applications. Road Vehicle Automation, pages 185–196.
  206. Sensation seeking in england and america: cross-cultural, age, and sex comparisons. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 46(1):139.
Citations (2)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now