Suppr超能文献

沃尔沃和英菲尼迪驾驶员对特定碰撞避免技术的体验。

Volvo and Infiniti drivers' experiences with select crash avoidance technologies.

机构信息

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Arlington, Virginia 22201, USA.

出版信息

Traffic Inj Prev. 2010 Jun;11(3):270-8. doi: 10.1080/15389581003735600.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Vehicle-based crash avoidance systems can potentially reduce crashes, but success depends on driver acceptance and understanding. This study gauged driver use, experience, and acceptance among early adopters of select technologies.

METHODS

Telephone interviews were conducted in early 2009 with 380 owners of Volvo vehicles equipped with forward collision warning with autobrake, lane departure warning, side-view assist, and/or active bi-xenon headlights and 485 owners of Infiniti vehicles with lane departure warning/prevention.

RESULTS

Most owners kept systems turned on most of the time, especially forward collision warning with autobrake and side-view assist. The exception was lane departure prevention; many owners were unaware they had it, and the system must be activated each time the vehicle is started. Most owners reported being safer with the technologies and would want them again on their next vehicles. Perceived false or unnecessary warnings were fairly common, particularly with side-view assist. Some systems were annoying, especially lane departure warning. Many owners reported safer driving behaviors such as greater use of turn signals (lane departure warning), increased following distance (forward collision warning), and checking side mirrors more frequently (side-view assist), but some reported driving faster at night (active headlights).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite some unnecessary or annoying warnings, most Volvo and Infiniti owners use crash avoidance systems most of the time. Among early adopters, the first requirement of effective warning systems (that owners use the technology) seems largely met. Systems requiring activation by drivers for each trip are used less often. Owner experience with the latest technologies from other automobile manufacturers should be studied, as well as for vehicles on which technologies are standard (versus optional) equipment. The effectiveness of technologies in preventing and mitigating crashes and injuries, and user acceptance of interfaces, should be examined as more vehicles with advanced technologies penetrate the fleet.

摘要

目的

车载防撞系统有可能减少事故,但成功与否取决于驾驶员的接受度和理解程度。本研究旨在评估特定技术早期采用者的驾驶员使用、体验和接受程度。

方法

2009 年初,对 380 名沃尔沃汽车(配备自动紧急制动的前方碰撞警告、车道偏离警告、侧视辅助和/或主动双氙气大灯)和 485 名英菲尼迪汽车(配备车道偏离警告/预防)车主进行了电话访谈。

结果

大多数车主将系统大部分时间保持开启状态,尤其是配备自动紧急制动的前方碰撞警告和侧视辅助系统。车道偏离预防系统是个例外,许多车主不知道他们拥有该系统,每次启动车辆时都必须激活它。大多数车主表示,有了这些技术他们感觉更安全,希望在下一辆车上再次使用这些技术。感知到虚假或不必要的警告相当普遍,尤其是侧视辅助系统。有些系统很烦人,尤其是车道偏离警告。许多车主报告称,他们的驾驶行为更安全,例如更频繁地使用转向灯(车道偏离警告)、保持更大的跟车距离(前方碰撞警告)和更频繁地检查侧视镜(侧视辅助),但有些车主报告称夜间驾驶速度更快(主动大灯)。

结论

尽管有些警告是不必要或烦人的,但大多数沃尔沃和英菲尼迪车主大部分时间都会使用防撞系统。在早期采用者中,有效的警告系统(即车主使用该技术)的首要要求似乎已经基本得到满足。需要驾驶员每次出行都激活的系统使用频率较低。应该研究其他汽车制造商最新技术的车主体验,以及作为标准(而非可选)设备的车辆上的技术。随着越来越多具有先进技术的车辆进入车队,应检查技术在预防和减轻事故和伤害方面的有效性以及用户对界面的接受程度。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验