Skip to main content

Training and Education: Human Factors Considerations for Automated Driving Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Road Vehicle Automation 5

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Mobility ((LNMOB))

Abstract

Vehicles with partial automation, forerunners to those with higher levels of automation, are already being deployed by automakers. These current deployments, although incremental, have the potential to disrupt how people interact with vehicles. This chapter reports on a discussion of related issues that was held as part of the Human Factors Breakout session at the 2017 Automated Vehicle Symposium. The session, titled “Automated Vehicle Challenges: How can Human Factors Research Help Inform Designers, Road Users, and Policy Makers?”, included discussions between industry experts and human factors researchers and professionals on immediate human factors issues surrounding deployment of vehicles with Automated Driving Systems (ADS).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. SAE On-road Automated Vehicle Standards Committee (2014) Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to on-road motor vehicle automated driving systems. SAE International

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lee JD, Moray N (1994) Trust, self-confidence, and operators’ adaptation to automation. Int J Hum Comput Stud 40(1):153–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sheridan TB (1987) Supervisory control. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors. Wiley, New York, pp 1243–1268

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dickie DA, Boyle LN (2009) Drivers’ understanding of adaptive cruise control limitations. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet 53(23):1806–1810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. McDonald AB, McGehee DV, Chrysler ST, Askelson NM, Angell LS, Seppelt BD (2016) National survey identifying gaps in consumer knowledge of advanced vehicle safety systems. Transp Res Rec: J Transp Res Board 2559:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2013) Preliminary statement of policy concerning automated vehicles. Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Horswill MS, Taylor K, Newnam S, Wetton M, Hill A (2013) Even highly experienced drivers benefit from a brief hazard perception training intervention. Accid Anal Prev 52(28):100–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pradhan AK, Pollatsek A, Knodler M, Fisher DL (2009) Can younger drivers be trained to scan for information that will reduce their risk in roadway traffic scenarios that are hard to identify as hazardous? Ergonomics 52(6):657–673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. McDonald AB, Reyes ML, Row CA, Friberg JE, Faust KS, McGehee DV (2016) University of Iowa Technology Demonstration Study

    Google Scholar 

  10. Parasuraman R, Riley V (1997) Humans and automation: use, misuse, disuse abuse. Hum Factors 39(2):230–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Moray N, Inagaki T (2000) Attention and complacency. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 1:354–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Parasuraman R, Molloy R, Singh IL (1993) Performance consequences of automation-induced ‘‘complacency’’. Int J Aviat Psychol 3:1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wickens CD, Hollands JG (2000) Engineering psychology and human performance, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lee JD, See KA (2004) Trust in automation: designing for appropriate reliance. Hum Factors 46(1):50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Carroll JM, Olson JR (1988) Mental models in human-computer interaction. In: Helander M (ed) Hand book of human-computer interaction, vol 2. Elsevier Science Publishers BV, North-Holland, pp 45–65

    Google Scholar 

  16. Skitka LJ, Mosier KL, Burdick M (2000) Accountability and automation bias. Int J Hum Comput Stud 52:701–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bahner JE, Hüper AD, Manzey D (2008) Misuse of automated decision aids: complacency, automation bias and the impact of training experience. Int J Hum Comput Stud 66(9):688–699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sauer J, Chavaillaz A, Wastell D (2016) Experience of automation failures in training: effects on trust, automation bias, complacency and performance. Ergonomics 59(6):767–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anuj K. Pradhan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Pradhan, A.K., Sullivan, J., Schwarz, C., Feng, F., Bao, S. (2019). Training and Education: Human Factors Considerations for Automated Driving Systems. In: Meyer, G., Beiker, S. (eds) Road Vehicle Automation 5. Lecture Notes in Mobility. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94896-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94896-6_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-94895-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-94896-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics