Skip to main content

Improving Design Understanding of Inclusivity in Autonomous Vehicles: A Driver and Passenger Taskscape Approach

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Breaking Down Barriers (CWUAAT 2018)

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Recent developments in autonomous vehicle technology now make SAE Levels 3–5 vehicles (Walker Smith in SAE levels of driving automation. http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/sae-levels-driving-automation, 2016) a realisable goal for transportation over the next 10 years. In particular, SAE Level 3 (conditional automation) automates the main aspects of driving including steering, accelerating and braking on the basis that the driver will frequently respond to a request to intervene. It is likely that in the coming 5 years Level 4 (high automation) will handle all aspects of driving even if a human driver does not intervene. It is also likely that autonomous vehicles will be available in various forms, including conventionally equipped contemporary Original Equipment Manufacturers’ (OEMs) cars and public transport ‘pods’ with no conventional controls. Public perception of such developments has been sampled more frequently in the past 3 years and this reveals increasing awareness of the key technologies and positivity towards introduction. However, while attitudes appear to be changing rapidly, the nature of this awareness throughout the population is partial and opinions vary with methods of sampling. We examine data regarding the public’s understanding of how autonomously capable vehicles could be used to benefit the inclusive population, including those with capability impairments; their carers, and those who require transportation to support dependent family members. We then use a driver and passenger taskscape approach for the analysis of the perceived benefits of use and barriers to use in these populations. This analysis is made in the context of existing transportation conditions and citizen’s needs, and leads towards a tangible conceptual design criterion that may be implemented by design engineers.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albercht G (2003) Disability values, representations and realities. In: Devlieger P, Rusch F, Pfeiffer D (eds) Rethinking disability: the emergence of new definitions, concepts and communities. Garant, Antwerpen

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark B, Parkhurst G, Ricci M (2016) Understanding the socioeconomic adoption scenarios for autonomous vehicles: a literature review. University of the West of England, Bristol, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen T, Jones P, Cavoli C (2017) Social and behavioural questions associated with automated vehicles: final report scoping study. UCL Transport Institute, Department for Transport, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Devlieger P, Strickfaden M (2012) Reversing the {im}material sense of a non-place: the impact of blindness on the Brussels metro. Space Cult 15(2):224–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingold T (1993) The temporality of the landscape. World Archaeol 25(2):152–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsh D (1996) Adapting the environment instead of oneself. Adapt Behav 4(3/4):415–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyriakidis M, Happee R, De Winter JCF (2015) Public opinion on automated driving: results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 32:127–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald A (2003) Humanizing technology. In: Clarkson J, Coleman R, Keates S, Lebbon C (eds) Inclusive design: design for the whole population. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfleging B, Schmidt AL (2015) (Non-)driving-related activities in the car: defining driver activities for manual and automated driving. In: Workshop on experiencing autonomous vehicles: crossing the boundaries between a drive and a ride. CHI’15, Seoul, Korea, 18–23 Apr 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • Strickfaden M (2016) In focus: blind photographers challenge visual expectations. In: Devlieger P, Miranda-Galarza B, Brown S, Strickfaden M (eds) Rethinking disability: world perspectives in culture and society. Garant Publishers, Antwerpen

    Google Scholar 

  • Strickfaden M, Vildieu A (2014) On the quest for better communication through tactile images. J Aesthetic Educ (JAE) 48(2):105–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennant C, Howard S, Franks B, Bauer MW, Stares S (2016) THINKGOOD MOBILITY survey. In: Autonomous vehicles: negotiating a place on the road. A study on how drivers feel about interacting with autonomous vehicles on the road. LSE Consulting, London School of Economics and Political Science, City University of London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • UK Autodrive (2017) www.ukautodrive.com/. Accessed 15 Nov 2017

  • Walker Smith B (2016) SAE levels of driving automation. Update 2: 2016 version of SAE J3016. CIS, the Center for Internet and Society. http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/sae-levels-driving-automation. Accessed 15 Nov 2017

  • Wockatz P, Schartau P (2015) IM traveller needs and UK capability study: supporting the realisation of intelligent mobility in the UK. Transport Systems Catapult, Milton Keynes, UK. https://ts.catapult.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Traveller-Needs-Study-1.pdf. Accessed 15 Nov 2017

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work includes material partly funded by UK EPSRC/JLR TASCC and UK Autodrive.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Strickfaden .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Strickfaden, M., Langdon, P.M. (2018). Improving Design Understanding of Inclusivity in Autonomous Vehicles: A Driver and Passenger Taskscape Approach. In: Langdon, P., Lazar, J., Heylighen, A., Dong, H. (eds) Breaking Down Barriers. CWUAAT 2018. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75028-6_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75028-6_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-75027-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-75028-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics