AUDI AG, D-85045 Ingolstadt, Germany.
Department of Psychology, Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Ostenstraße 25, D-85072 Eichstätt, Germany.
Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Jul;128:217-229. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.04.012. Epub 2019 May 4.
Adaptive ADAS that adjust warnings according to the driver´s current need for support offer a great potential to increase safety. However, it is crucial to understand how drivers deal with dynamically adapting technologies particularly in situations in which driver state monitoring fails and the system shows unexpected behavior. To better understand the consequences of unreliable adaptive ADAS on safety and to assess how failures of an adaptive FCW influence driving behavior, we conducted a driving simulator study with N = 48 participants. Participants experienced critical brake events in situations with and without a distracting secondary task. An adaptive FCW provided visual warnings to undistracted drivers but highly supportive visuo-haptic warnings (brake jerks or vibration) to distracted drivers. In 20% of brake events, however, the system unexpectedly provided incorrectly adapted warnings in which the combination of warning type and distraction was reversed. This adaptive FCW was compared to a non-adaptive standard FCW that provided visual warnings only. We found that incorrect warnings impaired driver reactions and safety in distracted drivers, and these adverse behavioral effects had two sources: (1) Violations of the drivers´ expectancies about the warning, and hence, behavioral adaptation. (2) The absence of the compensatory effect of the highly supportive warning in case of distraction. In contrast, correctly adapted warnings reduced decrements in brake reaction times and fully offset safety deficits associated with driver distraction. Crucially, however, an effectiveness evaluation of the adaptive system's potential to support drivers when correct warnings were elicited failed to demonstrate a benefit of the adaptive FCW over the non-adaptive FCW. Our results thus emphasize that a high reliability is crucial for adaptive ADAS to improve safety and to prevent adverse effects due to behavioral adaptation.
自适应 ADAS 根据驾驶员当前对支持的需求调整警告,具有提高安全性的巨大潜力。然而,了解驾驶员如何处理动态自适应技术至关重要,尤其是在驾驶员状态监测失败且系统显示意外行为的情况下。为了更好地了解不可靠的自适应 ADAS 对安全性的影响,并评估自适应 FCW 故障如何影响驾驶行为,我们进行了一项有 48 名参与者的驾驶模拟器研究。参与者在有和没有分心的次要任务的情况下经历了关键的制动事件。自适应 FCW 为未分心的驾驶员提供视觉警告,但为分心的驾驶员提供高度支持的视听觉警告(制动抖动或振动)。然而,在 20%的制动事件中,系统出人意料地提供了错误适应的警告,其中警告类型和分心的组合被颠倒了。与仅提供视觉警告的非自适应标准 FCW 相比,我们比较了这种自适应 FCW。我们发现,错误的警告会损害分心驾驶员的反应和安全性,这些不良行为影响有两个来源:(1)违反了驾驶员对警告的期望,从而导致行为适应。(2)在分心的情况下,高度支持性警告的补偿作用缺失。相比之下,正确适应的警告减少了制动反应时间的下降,并完全弥补了与驾驶员分心相关的安全缺陷。然而,至关重要的是,对正确警告引发时自适应系统支持驾驶员的潜力的有效性评估未能证明自适应 FCW 优于非自适应 FCW。因此,我们的研究结果强调了高可靠性对于自适应 ADAS 提高安全性和防止因行为适应而产生的不良影响至关重要。