• 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

打破挫败循环:将奈瑟的感知循环模型应用于半自动驾驶汽车的驱动因素。

Breaking the cycle of frustration: Applying Neisser's Perceptual Cycle Model to drivers of semi-autonomous vehicles.

机构信息

University of Southampton, United Kingdom.

Edinburgh Napier University, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Appl Ergon. 2020 May;85:103037. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103037. Epub 2020 Jan 10.

DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103037
PMID:31932264
Abstract

Semi-autonomous cars are already on the road and highly autonomous cars will soon be with us. Little is understood about how drivers will adapt to the changing relationship with their vehicle, but to ensure safety and consumer acceptance, this insight is vital. To this end, an on-road study in a semi-autonomous vehicle was undertaken with six UK drivers. The 'think aloud' technique was employed and video and audio footage of their interaction with the vehicle was captured. Neisser's (1976) Perceptual Cycle Model (PCM) was used to analyse the data and three case studies are presented to highlight how poor synergy between driver and semi-autonomous vehicles can occur from the lens of Schema, Action or World information. Seven key design considerations are proposed to ensure a more positive and safer interaction between driver and autonomous vehicle to guide focus by manufacturers. Further evidence for the existence of a 'counter cycle' (Plant and Stanton, 2015) within the PCM is found and how this relates to the challenges of using verbal protocals expressed during a fast moving dynamic task is discussed.

摘要

自动驾驶汽车已经上路,高度自动驾驶汽车也即将面世。人们对驾驶员如何适应与车辆关系的变化知之甚少,但为了确保安全和消费者接受度,这种洞察力至关重要。为此,在一辆半自动驾驶汽车上进行了一项基于英国的驾驶员的上路研究。研究采用了“出声思考”技术,并记录了他们与车辆互动的视频和音频片段。利用 Neisser(1976)的感知循环模型(PCM)对数据进行了分析,并呈现了三个案例研究,从模式、动作或世界信息的角度突出了驾驶员和半自动驾驶汽车之间如何会出现协同不良的情况。提出了七个关键设计注意事项,以确保驾驶员和自动驾驶汽车之间更积极、更安全的互动,为制造商提供指导。还发现了 PCM 中存在“反向循环”(Plant 和 Stanton,2015)的进一步证据,以及在快速移动的动态任务中使用口头协议时如何与之相关的挑战进行了讨论。

相似文献

1
Breaking the cycle of frustration: Applying Neisser's Perceptual Cycle Model to drivers of semi-autonomous vehicles.打破挫败循环:将奈瑟的感知循环模型应用于半自动驾驶汽车的驱动因素。
Appl Ergon. 2020 May;85:103037. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103037. Epub 2020 Jan 10.
2
Safer than the average human driver (who is less safe than me)? Examining a popular safety benchmark for self-driving cars.比一般人类驾驶员更安全(而人类驾驶员不如我安全)?考察自动驾驶汽车的一项流行安全基准。
J Safety Res. 2019 Jun;69:61-68. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2019.02.002. Epub 2019 Feb 28.
3
Effectiveness and driver acceptance of a semi-autonomous forward obstacle collision avoidance system.半自动前向障碍物防撞系统的有效性和驾驶员接受度。
Appl Ergon. 2013 Sep;44(5):756-63. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2013.01.006. Epub 2013 Mar 1.
4
Challenges to Human Drivers in Increasingly Automated Vehicles.日益自动化的车辆对人类驾驶员的挑战。
Hum Factors. 2020 Mar;62(2):310-328. doi: 10.1177/0018720819900402. Epub 2020 Feb 5.
5
Advanced vehicle technologies and road safety: A scoping review of the evidence.先进车辆技术与道路安全:证据范围综述。
Accid Anal Prev. 2020 Nov;147:105741. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2020.105741. Epub 2020 Sep 24.
6
Who is to blame for crashes involving autonomous vehicles? Exploring blame attribution across the road transport system.谁应为自动驾驶汽车事故负责?探究道路运输系统中的责任归因。
Ergonomics. 2020 May;63(5):525-537. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2020.1744064. Epub 2020 Apr 3.
7
Some pitfalls in the promises of automated and autonomous vehicles.自动化和自主车辆的承诺存在一些陷阱。
Ergonomics. 2019 Apr;62(4):479-495. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2018.1498136. Epub 2019 Jan 29.
8
Transporting Children in Autonomous Vehicles: An Exploratory Study.自动驾驶车辆中的儿童运输:探索性研究。
Hum Factors. 2020 Mar;62(2):278-287. doi: 10.1177/0018720819853993. Epub 2019 Jul 3.
9
User expectations of partial driving automation capabilities and their effect on information design preferences in the vehicle.用户对部分驾驶自动化功能的期望及其对车辆信息设计偏好的影响。
Appl Ergon. 2020 Jan;82:102969. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2019.102969. Epub 2019 Oct 7.
10
Young drivers and their cars: Safe and sound or the perfect storm?年轻司机及其汽车:安全无虞还是完美风暴?
Accid Anal Prev. 2018 Jan;110:18-28. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2017.09.008. Epub 2017 Nov 6.

引用本文的文献

1
Thinking aloud on the road: Thematic differences in the experiences of drivers, cyclists, and motorcyclists.在路上的思考:司机、骑自行车者和骑摩托车者经历中的主题差异。
Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav. 2021 Nov;83:192-209. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2021.09.014.
2
Situation Awareness in Remote Operators of Autonomous Vehicles: Developing a Taxonomy of Situation Awareness in Video-Relays of Driving Scenes.自动驾驶车辆远程操作员的态势感知:构建驾驶场景视频中继中态势感知的分类法。
Front Psychol. 2021 Nov 10;12:727500. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.727500. eCollection 2021.