Abstract
The introduction of highly and fully automated vehicles (SAE levels 4 and 5) will change the drivers’ role from an active driver to a more passive on-board user. Due to this shift of control, secondary tasks may become primary tasks. The question that arises is how much information needs to be conveyed via an internal Human-Machine Interface (iHMI) to fulfill users’ information requirements. Previous research on iHMI regarding lower automation levels has shown that user require different information respectively. The present study focuses on how users’ information requirements change for highly automated driving (SAE level 4) when the on-board user is distracted with a secondary task opposed to when the user is non-distracted. Twelve participants experienced different driving conditions and were asked to rate their attention distributions to other traffic participants. Results show clearly that users rated their attention distribution to other traffic participants significantly lower in automated distracted mode compared to automated non-distracted mode and manual driving. Furthermore, the question of users’ information requirements was translated into iHMI design preferences. For this purpose, four different iHMI prototypes based on a 360° LED light-band communicating via color-coded interaction design, which proved to work well for lower levels, were evaluated regarding the information richness level sufficient for users for highly automated driving (SAE level 4). Results show that the sufficient information richness level is conditional upon gender. Implications for future research and applied issues will be discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
31 December 2022
In an older version of this paper, there was error in figure 2. This has been corrected
References
Meyer, G., Deix, S.: Research and innovation for automated driving in Germany and Europe. In: Meyer, G., Beiker, S. (eds.) Road Vehicle Automation. LNM, pp. 71–81. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05990-7_7
Society of Automotive Engineers: Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. SAE, Michigan (J3016_201806) (2018)
Carsten, O., Martens, M.H.: How can humans understand their automated cars? HMI principles, problems and solutions. Cogn. Technol. Work 21(1), 3–20 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0484-0
Kun, A.L., Boll, S., Schmidt, A.: Shifting gears: user interfaces in the age of autonomous driving. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 15(1), 32–38 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/MPRV.2016.14
Bengler, K., Rettenmaier, M., Fritz, N., Feierle, A.: From HMI to HMIs: towards an HMI framework for automated driving. Information 11(2), 61 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/info11020061
Beggiato, M., Hartwich, F., Schleinitz, K., Krems, J., Othersen, I., Petermann-Stock, I.: What would drivers like to know during automated driving? Information needs at different levels of automation. In: 7th Conference on Driver Assistance (2015). https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.1.2462.6007
Dziennus, M., Kelsch, J., Schieben, A.: Ambient light – an integrative, LED based interaction concept or different levels of automation. In: 32. VDI/VW Gemeinschaftstagung Fahrerassistenzsysteme, Wolfsburg, 8–9 November 2016, pp. 103–110 (2016)
Dziennus, M., Kelsch, J., Schieben, A.: Ambient light based interaction concept for an integrative driver assistance system: a driving simulator study. In: de Waard, D., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Europe Chapter 2015 Annual Conference, Groningen, NL, pp. 171–182 (2016)
Pfromm, M., Cieler, S., Bruder, R.: Driver assistance via optical information with spatial reference. In: 16th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC 2013) (2013)
Wilbrink, M., Schieben, A., Oehl, M.: Reflecting the automated vehicle’s perception and intention. In: IUI 2020: 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Cagliari Italy, pp. 105–107 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3379336.3381502
Franke, T., Attig, C., Wessel, D.: A personal resource for technology interaction: development and validation of the affinity for technology interaction (ATI) scale. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 35(6), 456–467 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150
Fastenmeier, W., Gstalter, H.: Contribution of psychological models and methods for the evaluation of driver assistance systems. Zeitschrift für Arbeitswissenschaft (ZfA) 62, 15–24 (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lau, M., Wilbrink, M., Dodiya, J., Oehl, M. (2020). Users’ Internal HMI Information Requirements for Highly Automated Driving. In: Stephanidis, C., Antona, M., Ntoa, S. (eds) HCI International 2020 – Late Breaking Posters. HCII 2020. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1294. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60703-6_75
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60703-6_75
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-60702-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-60703-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)