ADAS at work: assessing professional bus drivers’ experience and acceptance of a narrow navigation system

Mikael Johansson1, Fredrick Ekman1, MariAnne Karlsson1, Helena Strömberg1, Johan Jönsson2
1Design and Human Factors, Industrial and Materials Science, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden
2Volvo Buses, Gothenburg, Sweden

Tóm tắt

Abstract

Due to the argued benefits of passenger comfort, cost savings, and road safety, the bus sector is showing increasing interest in advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS). Despite this growth of interest in ADAS and the fact that work tasks are sometimes complicated (especially docking at bus-stops which may occur several hundred times per shift), there has been little research into ADAS in buses. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop further knowledge of how professional bus drivers experience and accept an ADAS which can help them dock at bus-stops. The study was conducted on a public route in an industrial area with five different bus-stops. Ten professional bus drivers got to use a narrow navigation system (NNS) that could dock automatically at bus-stops. The participants’ experience and acceptance were investigated using objective as well as subjective data (during and after the test-drive) and data were collected using interviews, questionnaires, and video recordings. The participants indicated high levels of trust in and acceptance of the NNS and felt that it had multiple benefits in terms of cognitive and physical ergonomics, safety, and comfort. However, the relatively slow docking process (which was deemed comfortable) was also expected to negatively affect, e.g., timetabling, possibly resulting in high stress levels. Therefore, when investigating users’ acceptance of ADAS in a work context, it is important to consider acceptance in terms of the operation, use, and work system levels and how those levels interact and affect each other.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Abe G, Sato K, Itoh M (2018) Driver trust in automated driving systems: the case of overtaking and passing. IEEE Trans Hum Mach Syst 48(1):85–94. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2017.2781619

Adell E (2009) Driver experience and acceptance of driver support systems—a case of speed adaptation. Lund University, Lund

Ahlström C, Gink Lövgren M, Nilsson M, Dukic Willstrand T, Anund A (2019) The effect of an active steering system on city bus drivers’ muscle activity. Int J Occup Saf Ergon 25(3):377–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2018.1445465

Ajzen I, Fishbein M (2005) The influence of attitudes on behavior. The handbook of attitudes. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, pp 173–221

Bainbridge L (1983) Ironies of automation. In: Johannsen G, Rijnsdorp JE (eds) Analysis, design and evaluation of man-machine systems. Pergamon, pp 129–135

Blades L, Douglas R, Early J, Lo CY, Best R (2020) Advanced driver-assistance systems for city bus applications (0148–7191)

Bligård L-O, Johansson A (2019) Långtidsstudie av upplevda effekter av VDS (Volvo Dynamic Steering) hos bussförare på linje 55 (Long-term study of perceived effects of VDS (Volvo Dynamic Steering) in bus drivers on line 55): Chalmers University of Technology

Brookhuis K, de Waard D (2006) The consequences of automation for driver behaviour and acceptance. In: Proceedings of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA), pp 10–14

Castritius S-M, Hecht H, Möller J, Dietz CJ, Schubert P, Bernhard C, Hammer S (2020) Acceptance of truck platooning by professional drivers on German highways. A mixed methods approach. Appl Ergon. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103042

Collet C, Petit C, Champely S, Dittmar A (2003) Assessing workload through physiological measurements in bus drivers using an automated system during docking. Hum Fact 45(4):539–548. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.45.4.539.27082

Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Dekker S (2004) To engineer is to err. In: Sandom C, Harvey RS (eds) Human factors for engineers. Institution of Engineering and Technology, London, pp 137–150

Dukic Willstrand T, Anund A, Strand N, Nikolaou S, Touliou K, Gemou M, Faller F (2017) Deliverable 1.2—driver/rider models. Use cases and implementation scenarios, ADAS&ME project

Eason KD (1991) Ergonomic perspectives on advances in human-computer interaction. Ergonomics 34(6):721–741. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139108967347

Eckoldt K, Knobel M, Hassenzahl M, Schumann J (2012) An experiential perspective on advanced driver assistance systems. IT Inf Technol 54(4):165–171. https://doi.org/10.1524/itit.2012.0678

Ekman F, Johansson M, Bligård L-O, Karlsson M, Strömberg H (2019) Exploring automated vehicle driving styles as a source of trust information. Transport Res F Traffic Psychol Behav 65:268–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.07.026

Ekman F, Johansson M, Karlsson M, Strömberg H, Bligård L-O (2021) Trust in what? Exploring the interdependency between an automated vehicle’s driving style and traffic situations. Transport Res F Traffic Psychol Behav 76:59–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.10.012

Hancock PA, Kajaks T, Caird JK, Chignell MH, Mizobuchi S, Burns PC, Vrkljan BH (2020) Challenges to human drivers in increasingly automated vehicles. Hum Factors 62(2):310–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819900402

Hartwich F, Beggiato M, Krems JF (2018) Driving comfort, enjoyment and acceptance of automated driving–effects of drivers’ age and driving style familiarity. Ergonomics 61(8):1017–1032. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2018.1441448

Jun J, Park H, Cho I (2019) Study on initial adoption of advanced driver assistance system: integrated model of PMT and UTAUT 2. Total Qual Manag Bus Excell 30(sup1):83–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2019.1665820

Karlsson M (1996) User requirements elicitation—a framework for the study of the relation between user and artefact. Chalmers University of Technology

Karlsson ICM (2001) A holistic approach to usability. Paper presented at the systems, social and internationalization design aspects of human–computer interaction. Volume 2 of the Proceedings of HCI international 2001, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA

Leontiev AN (1981) The problem of activity in psychology. In: Wertsch JV (ed) The concept of activity in soviet psychology. Sharpe, Armonk, pp 31–71

Mård S (2006) Bussförares arbetsmiljö (Bus drivers' working environment) (03476030 (ISSN)). Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute, Linköping

Mele J (2018) Will fleets turn to advanced safety tech for improvement? FleetOwner. https://www.fleetowner.com/safety/article/21703052/will-fleets-turn-to-advanced-safety-tech-for-improvement. Accessed 10 Dec 2021

Mills AJ, Durepos G, Wiebe E (2010) Encyclopedia of case study research. SAGE Publications Inc, Thousand Oaks. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412957397

Novakazi F, Orlovska J, Bligård L-O, Wickman C (2020) Stepping over the threshold linking understanding and usage of automated driver assistance systems (ADAS). Transport Res Interdiscip Perspect 8:100252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100252

Nowakowski C, Shladover SE, Tan HS (2015) Heavy vehicle automation: human factors lessons learned. Procedia Manuf 3:2945–2952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.824

Rahman MM, Lesch MF, Horrey WJ, Strawderman L (2017) Assessing the utility of TAM, TPB, and UTAUT for advanced driver assistance systems. Accid Anal Prev 108:361–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.09.011

Richardson NT, Flohr L, Michel B (2018) Takeover requests in highly automated truck driving: how do the amount and type of additional information influence the driver-automation interaction? Multim Technol Interact 2(4):68

Richardson N, Doubek F, Kuhn K, Stumpf A (2017) Assessing truck drivers’ and fleet managers’ opinions towards highly automated driving. In: Stanton N, Landry S, Di Bucchianico G, Vallicelli A (eds) Advances in human aspects of transportation. advances in intelligent systems and computing, vol 484. Springer, Cham https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41682-3_40

Rogers EM (1995) Diffusion of innovations, 4th ed. Free Press, New York

Saffarian M, de Winter JCF, Happee R (2012) Automated driving: human-factors issues and design solutions. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Society Annu Meet 56(1):2296–2300. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181312561483

Taklikar C (2016) Occupational stress and its associated health disorders among bus drivers. Int J Community Med Public Health 3(1):208–211

Vanderhaegen F (2021) Heuristic-based method for conflict discovery of shared control between humans and autonomous systems—a driving automation case study. Robot Auton Syst 146:103867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2021.103867

Venkatesh V (2000) Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Inf Syst Res 11(4):342–365. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872

Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 27(3):425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Xu Y, Ye Z, Wang C (2021) Modeling commercial vehicle drivers’ acceptance of advanced driving assistance system (ADAS). J Intell Connect Veh 4(3):125–135. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICV-07-2021-0011

Yang S, Shladover SE, Lu X-Y, Spring J, Nelson D, Ramezani H (2018) A first investigation of truck drivers’ on-the-road experience using cooperative adaptive cruise control. UC Berkeley: California Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology

Yu B, Bao S, Zhang Y, Sullivan J, Flannagan M (2021) Measurement and prediction of driver trust in automated vehicle technologies: an application of hand position transition probability matrix. Transport Res Part C Emerg Technol 124:102957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2020.102957