On-Road Pilot Study on the Need for Integrated Interfaces of In-Vehicle Driver Support Systems

  • Evangelia Portouli
  • Vassilis Papakostopoulos
  • Nicolas Marmaras
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6767)


An on-road experiment has been performed with an equipped vehicle, to study whether the effects on driving behaviour and acceptance of a forward collision warning system and of a lane deviation warning system are different when the systems are isolated or when they are used in parallel. 24 participants were assigned in three experimental and one reference group and were asked to drive the equipped vehicle for 15 consecutive trips on a highway at similar traffic and environmental conditions. The effects of the two isolated systems improve the longitudinal and lateral driving behaviour respectively and are rated as useful and satisfactory, while the use of the systems in parallel does not have a positive effect on driving behaviour. In the latter case the systems are not considered satisfactory and cause frustration to the drivers, thus the need emerges to integrate systems and interfaces.


integration of interfaces forward collision warning lane deviation warning on-road study long-term effects evaluation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Hoedemaeker, M., Kopf, M.: Visual sampling behaviour when driving with adaptive cruise control. In: Ninth International Conference on Vision in Vehicles, Australia (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Törnros, J., Nilsson, L., Östlund, J., Kircher, A.: Effects of ACC on driver behaviour, workload and acceptance in relation to minimum time headway. In: 9th World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems, Chicago, Illinois, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fancher, P., Ervin, R., Sayer, J., Hagan, M., Bogard, S., Bareket, Z., Mefford, M., Haugen, J.: Intelligent cruise control field operation test. Final Report. NHTSA Report No. DOT HS 808 849 (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Saad, F., Villame, T.: Assessing new driving support systems: contribution of an analysis of drivers’ activity in real situations. In: Third Annual World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee, J.D., McGehee, D.V., Brown, T.L., Reyes, M.L.: Collision warning timing, driver distraction, and driver response to imminent rear-end collisions in a high-fidelity driving simulator. Hum. Factors 44(2), 314–334 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alkim, T.P., Bootsma, G., Hoogendoorn, S.P.: Dutch Field Operational Test experience with “the Assisted Driver”. In: 14th World Congress on ITS, October 9-13, Beijing, Peoples’ Republic of China (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Orban, J., Hadden, J., Stark, G., Brown, V.: Evaluation of the Mack Intelligent Vehicle Initiative Field Operational Test, Final Report, US Department of Transportation, Report no. FMCSA-06-016 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fancher, P., Ervin, R., Bogard, S.: A field operational test of adaptive cruise control: System operability in naturalistic use. SAE Technical Paper No. 980852, Special Publication SP- 1332, Detroit, MI (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weinberger, M., Winner, H., Bubb, H.: Adaptive cruise control Field operational test - the learning phase. JSAE Review 22, 487–494 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bayly, M., Young, K.L., Regan, M.A.: Sources of distraction inside the vehicle and their effects on driving performance. In: Regan, M.A., et al. (eds.) Driver Distraction – Theory, Effects and Mitigation, pp. 191–213. CRC Press, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Young, M.S., Stanton, N.A.: What’s skill got to do with it? Vehicle automation and driver mental workload. Ergonomics 50, 1324–1339 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saad, F.: Some critical issues when studying behavioural adaptations to new driver support systems. Cogn. Tech. Work 8, 175–181 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Van Der Laan, J., Heino, A., De Waard, D.: A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telematics. Transportation Research, Part C 5, 1–10 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evangelia Portouli
    • 1
  • Vassilis Papakostopoulos
    • 2
  • Nicolas Marmaras
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Mechanical Engineering, Sector of Industrial Management and Operations Research, Ergonomics UnitNational Technical University of AthensZografouGreece
  2. 2.Department of Product and Systems Design EngineeringUniversity of the AegeanErmoupolisGreece

Personalised recommendations