Work in Progress

Using Task Switching to Explain Effects of Non-Driving Related Activities on Takeover and Manual Driving Behavior Following Level 3 Automated Driving

Authors:

Klaus BenglerAuthors Info & Claims

AutomotiveUI '22: Adjunct Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications

Pages 44 - 47

https://doi.org/10.1145/3544999.3552314

Published: 17 September 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Effects of non-driving related activities performed during Level 3 automated driving phases on following takeover behavior have been investigated in multiple studies. If studies refer to a theoretical basis, usually the task switching paradigm is referred to, while at the same time multiple task performance theories are applied to explain effects of previously performed non-driving related activities on following takeover behavior. In this article, we apply task switching theory to explain and predict non-driving related activities’ effects on takeover and following manual driving behavior. Additionally, we report experimental work in progress that investigates the theoretical basis in a real driving setting on a test track using a Wizard-of-Oz vehicle to simulate Level 3 driving automation in traffic jams on highways. We aim to contribute to differentiation approaches for non-driving related activities’ effects on takeover and following manual driving behavior. Furthermore, this study can provide insights into user behavior under real driving situations.

References

[1]

Alan D. Baddeley and Graham Hitch. 1974. Working Memory. In The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. Advances in Research and Theory, Gordon H. Bower, Ed. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8. Academic Press, New York, San Francisco, London, 47–89.

[2]

Tobias Hecht, Anna Feldhütter, Kathrin Draeger, and Klaus Bengler. 2020. Non-driving Related Activities in Automated Driving – An Analysis of Non-Driving What Do You Do? An Analysis of Non-Driving Related Activities During a 60 Minutes Conditionally Automated Highway Drive. In Human Systems Engineering and Design II, Tareq Ahram, Waldemar Karwowski, Stefan Pickl and Redha Taiar, Eds. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 182–188.

[3]

Tobias Hecht, Stefan Kratzert, and Klaus Bengler. 2020. The Effects of a Predictive HMI and Different Transition Frequencies on Acceptance, Workload, Usability, and Gaze Behavior during Urban Automated Driving. Information 11, 2, 73.

[4]

Oliver Jarosch, Christian Gold, Frederik Naujoks, Bernhard Wandtner, Claus Marberger, Galia Weidl, and Michael Schrauf. 2019. The Impact of Non-Driving Related Tasks on Take-over Performance in Conditionally Automated Driving – A Review of the Empirical Evidence. In 9. Tagung Automatisiertes Fahren, München.

[5]

Andrea Kiesel, Marco Steinhauser, Mike Wendt, Michael Falkenstein, Kerstin Jost, Andrea M. Philipp, and Iring Koch. 2010. Control and Interference in Task Switching - A Review. Psychological bulletin 136, 5, 849–874.

[6]

Karl C. Klauer and Zengmei Zhao. 2004. Double dissociations in visual and spatial short-term memory. Journal of experimental psychology. General 133, 3, 355–381.

[7]

Robert H. Logie and Marian van der Meulen. 2009. Fragmenting and integrating visuospatial working memory. In The visual world in memory, James R. Brockmole, Ed. Current issues in memory. Psychology Press, Hove, 1–32.

[8]

Frederik Naujoks, Dennis Befelein, Katharina Wiedemann, and Alexandra Neukum. 2017. A Review of Non-driving-related Tasks Used in Studies on Automated Driving. In Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation. AHFE 2017, Stanton N., Ed. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 597. Springer Cham, 525–537.

[9]

G. Repovs and A. Baddeley. 2006. The multi-component model of working memory: explorations in experimental cognitive psychology. Neuroscience 139, 1, 5–21.

[10]

J. S. Rubinstein, D. E. Meyer, and J. E. Evans. 2001. Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance 27, 4, 763–797.

[11]

SAE International/ISO. 2021. Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, SAE J3016. SAE International, 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA, United States https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201806/. Retrieved March 17, 2021 from.

[12]

Elisabeth Shi and Klaus Bengler. 2022. Overall effects of non-driving related activities’ characteristics on takeover performance in the context of SAE Level 3: A meta-analysis. In 13th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics.

[13]

Elisabeth Shi and Alexander T. Frey. 2021. Non-driving related tasks during Level 3 automated driving phases - Measuring what users will be likely to do. Technology, Mind, and Behavior 2, 1.

[14]

E. E. Smith and J. Jonides. 1997. Working memory: a view from neuroimaging. Cognitive psychology 33, 1, 5–42.

[15]

Sónia Soares, António Lobo, Sara Ferreira, Liliana Cunha, and António Couto. 2021. Takeover performance evaluation using driving simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 13, 1.

[16]

C. Spence and J. Driver. 1998. Auditory and audiovisual inhibition of return. Perception & psychophysics 60, 1, 125–139.

[17]

United Nations Economic Commision for Europe. 2021. UN Regulation No. 157. UN Regulation No. 157. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/2020/81, Geneva.

[18]

Bradley W. Weaver and Patricia R. DeLucia. 2020. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Takeover Performance During Conditionally Automated Driving. Human factors, 18720820976476.

[19]

Christopher D. Wickens. 2002. Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 3, 2, 159–177.

[20]

Kathrin Zeeb, Manuela Härtel, Axel Buchner, and Michael Schrauf. 2017. Why is steering not the same as braking? The impact of non-driving related tasks on lateral and longitudinal driver interventions during conditionally automated driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 50, 65–79.

[21]

Bo Zhang, de Winter, Joost C F, Silvia Varotto, Riender Happee, and Marieke Martens. 2019. Determinants of take-over time from automated driving: A meta-analysis of 129 studies. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 64, 285–307.

Cited By

Xu JFard MZhang NDavy JRobinson S(2024)Cognitive load and task switching in drivers: Implications for road safety in semi-autonomous vehiclesTransportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour10.1016/j.trf.2024.11.005107(1175-1197)Online publication date: Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2024.11.005

Index Terms

Using Task Switching to Explain Effects of Non-Driving Related Activities on Takeover and Manual Driving Behavior Following Level 3 Automated Driving
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
  2. Interaction design

Recommendations

From reading to driving: priming mobile users for take-over situations in highly automated driving
MobileHCI '18: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services

Highly automated vehicles, occasionally require users to resume vehicle control from non-driving related tasks by issuing cues called take-over request (TOR). Due to being engaged in non-driving related tasks (NDRT), users have a decreased level of ...
Manual takeover after highly automated driving: Influence of budget time and Lane Change Assist on takeover performance
ECCE '21: Proceedings of the 32nd European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics

The current study aimed at investigating the effectiveness of additional assistance system to support driver performance during a takeover request in a conditionally automated vehicle, that is, Level 3 of SAE taxonomy. Seventy drivers participated in ...
The Relationship Between Drowsiness Level and Takeover Performance in Automated Driving
HCI in Mobility, Transport, and Automotive Systems. Driving Behavior, Urban and Smart Mobility
Abstract
Although automated driving systems can perform dynamic driving tasks, at its lower levels, human drivers must still take over control of the vehicle whenever a Take Over Request (TOR) is issued. Human factors such as drowsiness may affect driver ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

AutomotiveUI '22: Adjunct Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications

September 2022

225 pages

ISBN:9781450394284

DOI:10.1145/3544999

General Chairs:
Yong Gu Ji
Yonsei University, South Korea
,
Myounghoon Jeon
Virginia Tech, USA

Copyright © 2022 Owner/Author.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 September 2022

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Work in progress
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

AutomotiveUI '22

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

AutomotiveUI '22: 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications

September 17 - 20, 2022

Seoul, Republic of Korea

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 248 of 566 submissions, 44%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
171
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)27
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 29 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Xu JFard MZhang NDavy JRobinson S(2024)Cognitive load and task switching in drivers: Implications for road safety in semi-autonomous vehiclesTransportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour10.1016/j.trf.2024.11.005107(1175-1197)Online publication date: Nov-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2024.11.005

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten