<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel rdf:about="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36531">
<title>it - Information Technology 63(2) - April 2021</title>
<link>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36531</link>
<description/>
<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36537"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36534"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36533"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36536"/>
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
<dc:date>2026-07-23T18:36:04Z</dc:date>
</channel>
<item rdf:about="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36537">
<title>Evaluating feedback requirements for trust calibration in automated vehicles</title>
<link>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36537</link>
<description>Evaluating feedback requirements for trust calibration in automated vehicles
Wintersberger, Philipp; Janotta, Frederica; Peintner, Jakob; Löcken, Andreas; Riener, Andreas
The inappropriate use of automation as a result of trust issues is a major barrier for a broad market penetration of automated vehicles. Studies so far have shown that providing information about the vehicle’s actions and intentions can be used to calibrate trust and promote user acceptance. However, how such feedback could be designed optimally is still an open question. This article presents the results of two user studies. In the first study, we investigated subjective trust and user experience of (N=21) participants driving in a fully automated vehicle, which interacts with other traffic participants in virtual reality. The analysis of questionnaires and semi-structured interviews shows that participants request feedback about the vehicle’s status and intentions and prefer visual feedback over other modalities. Consequently, we conducted a second study to derive concrete requirements for future feedback systems. We showed (N=56) participants various videos of an automated vehicle from the ego perspective and asked them to select elements in the environment they want feedback about so that they would feel safe, trust the vehicle, and understand its actions. The results confirm a correlation between subjective user trust and feedback needs and highlight essential requirements for automatic feedback generation. The results of both experiments provide a scientific basis for designing more adaptive and personalized in-vehicle interfaces for automated driving.
</description>
<dc:date>2021-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36534">
<title>Who’s in charge?</title>
<link>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36534</link>
<description>Who’s in charge?
Novakazi, Fjollë; Johansson, Mikael; Erhardsson, Gustav; Lidander, Linnéa
Fully automated drive still lies far ahead in the future. Therefore, vehicles with multiple modes of operation will not disappear fully as many road types, traffic and weather conditions will not allow fully automated drive. Instead, fragmented trips with regard to automation will prevail, where drivers will have different levels of automation available at different times. Given this scenario and the complexity of vehicles offering multiple levels of automation with different driving modes depending on prevailing conditions, the need for drivers to understand their responsibility during the different modes becomes critical. The aim of this paper is to contribute to further understanding of how perceived control influences the driver’s mode awareness of and responsibility for the driving task by reporting on an on-road Wizard-of-Oz study under real driving conditions. The results show that when confronted with a vehicle offering both a level 2 and a level 4 driving automation system, drivers have difficulty in determining whether control is allocated to them or to the system. Further results show that perceived control and responsibility for the driving task are closely linked, and that the driver’s perception of the driving system influence how they interact with it. Finally, conclusions are drawn regarding the way perceived control influences mode awareness when interacting with a vehicle that features multiple levels of automation.
</description>
<dc:date>2021-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36533">
<title>User interfaces for automated vehicles</title>
<link>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36533</link>
<description>User interfaces for automated vehicles
Pfleging, Bastian; Sadeghian, Shadan; Dey, Debargha
Article User interfaces for automated vehicles was published on June 1, 2021 in the journal it - Information Technology (volume 63, issue 2).
</description>
<dc:date>2021-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36536">
<title>First encounter effects in testing of highly automated vehicles during two experimental occasions – The need for recurrent testing</title>
<link>http://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/36536</link>
<description>First encounter effects in testing of highly automated vehicles during two experimental occasions – The need for recurrent testing
Andersson, Jonas; Habibovic, Azra; Rizgary, Daban
To explore driver behavior in highly automated vehicles (HAVs), independent researchers are mainly conducting short experiments. This limits the ability to explore drivers’ behavioral changes over time, which is crucial when research has the intention to reveal human behavior beyond the first-time use. The current paper shows the methodological importance of repeated testing in experience and behavior related studies of HAVs. The study combined quantitative and qualitative data to capture effects of repeated interaction between drivers and HAVs. Each driver (n=8n=8) participated in the experiment on two different occasions (∼90 minutes) with one-week interval. On both occasions, the drivers traveled approximately 40 km on a rural road at AstaZero proving grounds in Sweden and encountered various traffic situations. The participants could use automated driving (SAE level 4) or choose to drive manually. Examples of data collected include gaze behavior, perceived safety, as well as interviews and questionnaires capturing general impressions, trust and acceptance. The analysis shows that habituation effects were attenuated over time. The drivers went from being exhilarated on the first occasion, to a more neutral behavior on the second occasion. Furthermore, there were smaller variations in drivers’ self-assessed perceived safety on the second occasion, and drivers were faster to engage in non-driving related activities and become relaxed (e. g., they spent more time glancing off road and could focus more on non-driving related activities such as reading). These findings suggest that exposing drivers to HAVs on two (or more) successive occasions may provide more informative and realistic insights into driver behavior and experience as compared to only one occasion. Repeating an experiment on several occasions is of course a balance between the cost and added value, and future research should investigate in more detail which studies need to be repeated on several occasions and to what extent.
</description>
<dc:date>2021-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>
