• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

运用回顾性言语描述和网络分析对比紧急情况下驾驶员行为的不同模型。

Contrasting models of driver behaviour in emergencies using retrospective verbalisations and network analysis.

作者信息

Banks Victoria A, Stanton Neville A

机构信息

a Civil, Maritime, Environmental Engineering and Science Unit, Faculty of Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton , Southampton , UK.

出版信息

Ergonomics. 2015;58(8):1337-46. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1005175. Epub 2015 Feb 2.

DOI:10.1080/00140139.2015.1005175
PMID:25643157
Abstract

UNLABELLED

Automated assistance in driving emergencies aims to improve the safety of our roads by avoiding or mitigating the effects of accidents. However, the behavioural implications of such systems remain unknown. This paper introduces the driver decision-making in emergencies (DDMiEs) framework to investigate how the level and type of automation may affect driver decision-making and subsequent responses to critical braking events using network analysis to interrogate retrospective verbalisations. Four DDMiE models were constructed to represent different levels of automation within the driving task and its effects on driver decision-making. Findings suggest that whilst automation does not alter the decision-making pathway (e.g. the processes between hazard detection and response remain similar), it does appear to significantly weaken the links between information-processing nodes. This reflects an unintended yet emergent property within the task network that could mean that we may not be improving safety in the way we expect.

PRACTITIONER SUMMARY

This paper contrasts models of driver decision-making in emergencies at varying levels of automation using the Southampton University Driving Simulator. Network analysis of retrospective verbalisations indicates that increasing the level of automation in driving emergencies weakens the link between information-processing nodes essential for effective decision-making.

摘要

未标注

驾驶紧急情况中的自动辅助旨在通过避免或减轻事故影响来提高道路安全性。然而,此类系统对行为的影响仍不明确。本文引入紧急情况下驾驶员决策(DDMiEs)框架,以研究自动化水平和类型如何影响驾驶员决策以及随后对紧急制动事件的反应,使用网络分析来审视回顾性言语报告。构建了四个DDMiEs模型来代表驾驶任务中不同自动化水平及其对驾驶员决策的影响。研究结果表明,虽然自动化不会改变决策路径(例如,危险检测和反应之间的过程保持相似),但它似乎确实显著削弱了信息处理节点之间的联系。这反映了任务网络中一种意外但又出现的特性,这可能意味着我们可能没有以预期的方式提高安全性。

从业者总结

本文使用南安普顿大学驾驶模拟器对比了不同自动化水平下紧急情况下驾驶员决策模型。对回顾性言语报告的网络分析表明,在驾驶紧急情况中提高自动化水平会削弱有效决策所需的信息处理节点之间的联系。

相似文献

1
Contrasting models of driver behaviour in emergencies using retrospective verbalisations and network analysis.运用回顾性言语描述和网络分析对比紧急情况下驾驶员行为的不同模型。
Ergonomics. 2015;58(8):1337-46. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1005175. Epub 2015 Feb 2.
2
What the drivers do and do not tell you: using verbal protocol analysis to investigate driver behaviour in emergency situations.驾驶员的所言与所未言:运用口语报告分析法调查紧急情况下驾驶员的行为。
Ergonomics. 2014;57(3):332-42. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2014.884245. Epub 2014 Feb 20.
3
Driver-centred vehicle automation: using network analysis for agent-based modelling of the driver in highly automated driving systems.以驾驶员为中心的车辆自动化:在高度自动化驾驶系统中使用网络分析进行基于智能体的驾驶员建模。
Ergonomics. 2016 Nov;59(11):1442-1452. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2016.1146344. Epub 2016 Feb 25.
4
Highly automated driving, secondary task performance, and driver state.高度自动化驾驶、次要任务表现与驾驶员状态。
Hum Factors. 2012 Oct;54(5):762-71. doi: 10.1177/0018720812442087.
5
How does a collision warning system shape driver's brake response time? The influence of expectancy and automation complacency on real-life emergency braking.碰撞预警系统如何塑造驾驶员的刹车反应时间?期望和自动化满足感对现实生活中紧急刹车的影响。
Accid Anal Prev. 2015 Apr;77:72-81. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.01.018. Epub 2015 Feb 17.
6
Does assisted driving behavior lead to safety-critical encounters with unequipped vehicles' drivers?辅助驾驶行为是否会导致与未配备车辆驾驶员的安全关键相遇?
Accid Anal Prev. 2016 Oct;95(Pt A):149-56. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.07.003. Epub 2016 Jul 18.
7
What determines the take-over time? An integrated model approach of driver take-over after automated driving.是什么决定了接管时间?自动驾驶后驾驶员接管的综合模型方法。
Accid Anal Prev. 2015 May;78:212-221. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.02.023. Epub 2015 Mar 17.
8
Autonomous emergency braking systems adapted to snowy road conditions improve drivers' perceived safety and trust.适用于雪地路况的自动紧急制动系统可提高驾驶员的感知安全性和信任度。
Traffic Inj Prev. 2018 Apr 3;19(3):332-337. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2017.1407411. Epub 2018 Feb 23.
9
Effects of Task-Induced Fatigue in Prolonged Conditional Automated Driving.任务诱导疲劳对长时间条件自动化驾驶的影响。
Hum Factors. 2019 Nov;61(7):1186-1199. doi: 10.1177/0018720818816226. Epub 2019 Jan 18.
10
Assessing drivers' response during automated driver support system failures with non-driving tasks.通过非驾驶任务评估自动驾驶员支持系统故障期间驾驶员的反应。
J Safety Res. 2017 Jun;61:149-155. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2017.02.009. Epub 2017 Mar 1.