Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Awareness Messages for Road Traffic Hazards in Experimental Tests

  • Published:
Automotive Innovation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Advanced driver assistance systems, especially autonomous emergency braking and forward collision warnings, have become popular in Japan. To reduce the number of road traffic accidents, safety information should be provided to a driver earlier than avoidance or warning messages so as to avoid a risky situation. A series of actual running tests was conducted to evaluate the activation timing and effectiveness of awareness messages. Objective analysis showed that the drivers could avoid an obstacle with a sufficient safety margin thanks to any of the awareness messages. Subjective ratings showed that the best timing is 10 s before encountering the obstacle. The results of objective analysis are limited in the present paper, and further analyses are required.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fildes, B., Keall, M., Bos, N., et al.: Effectiveness of low speed autonomous emergency braking in real-world rear-end crashes. Accid. Anal. Prev. 81, 24–29 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cicchino, J.B.: Effectiveness of Forward Collision Warning Systems With and Without Autonomous Emergency Braking in Reducing Police-Reported Crash Rates. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Arlington (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brochure on “Achievements of Promotion in ASV phase2”. http://www.mlit.go.jp/jidosha/anzen/01asv/resourse/data/asv2development.pdf (2001)

  4. Grover, C., Knight, I., Okoro, F., et al.: Automated emergency braking systems: technical requirements, costs and benefits, PPR 227, TRL. https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/3ab87fdc-5715-4733-af50-c3608034ca56/report_aebs_en.pdf (2008). Accessed 2 April 2017

  5. UN Regulation No. 131, EU Regulation No. 347. Advanced emergency braking systems (2012)

  6. Toyota News Release: Toyota enhances pre-crash safety system with eye monitor (2008)

  7. Jamson, A.H., Lai, F.C.H., Carsten, O.M.J.: Potential benefits of an adaptive forward collision warning system. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 16(4), 471–484 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Park, M., Lee, H., Lee, S., et al.: Development of communication based collision warning systems. In: AVEC ’12 (2012)

  9. Marumo, Y., Tanaka, K., Suzuki, H.: Assistance system to predict driving behavior considering information on pre-preceding vehicle. In: FAST-Zero, 20134665 (2013)

  10. Machida, T., Mimuro, T., Takanashi, H.: Effectiveness evaluation of adaptive forward collision warning using actual vehicles. In: AVEC’14 (2014)

  11. Yan, X., Zhang, Y., Ma, L.: The influence of in-vehicle speech warning timing on drivers’ collision avoidance performance at signalized intersections. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 51, 231–242 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Liu, H., Wei, H., Yao, Z., et al.: Effects of collision avoidance system on driving patterns in curve road conflicts. Soc. Behav. Sci. 96, 2945–2952 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Research on the influence of information presentation for safety driving support on driving behaviour. Japan Safe Driving Center (in Japanese) (2009). https://www.jsdc.or.jp/library/research/tabid/123/Default.aspx. Accessed 2 April 2017

  14. Oppenheim, I., Shinar, D.: A context-sensitive model of driving behaviour and its implications for in-vehicle safety systems. Cognit. Technol. Work 14, 261–281 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Shinar, D.: Traffic Safety and Human Behaviour. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2007)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Kroon, E.C.M., Martens, M.H., Brookhuis, K.A., et al.: Human factor guidelines for the design of safe in-car traffic information services. Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu (2014)

  17. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism of Japan: The guideline of driving assist system by communication. (in Japanese) (2013). http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000288894.pdf. Accessed 2 April 2017

  18. Intelligent transport systems—external hazard detection and notification systems—basic requirements [M]. ISO 18682:2016

  19. Diederichs, J.P.F., Marberger, C., Hinder, V.: Iterative design and assessment of an audio visual warning concept for Car2x communication systems. In: 17th ITS World Congress (2010)

  20. Hirose, T., Ohtsuka, Y., Gokan, M.: Activation timing of a collision avoidance system with V2V communication. SAE Paper 2017-01-0039 (2017)

Download references

Acknowledgements

Part of this work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 26350455. Advice and comments given by Mr. Kenji Kimura helped in the construction of the onboard system. We express our gratitude to faculty members and laboratory students for participating in the tests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Systems Science and Technology, Akita Prefectural University, 84-4 Ebinokuchi, Yurihonjo, Akita, 015-0055, Japan

    Ai Takeda

  2. Akita Prefectural University, 84-4 Ebinokuchi, Yurihonjo, Akita, 015-0055, Japan

    Makoto Kondo & Tetsushi Mimuro

Authors
  1. Ai Takeda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Makoto Kondo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tetsushi Mimuro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tetsushi Mimuro.

Appendices

Appendix A

Attributes of Research Participants

See Table 3.

Appendix B

Subjective Rating Items After Each Run

Q11: Did you sense danger when you encountered the obstacle?

0: Not at all

1: Slightly

2: Moderately

3: Very

4: Extremely

Q12: How about the awareness message timing?

− 2: Too early

− 1: Slightly early

0: Appropriate

1: Slightly late

2: Too late

Q13: Was the awareness message effective?

0: Not at all effective

1: Slightly effective

2: Moderately effective

3: Very effective

4: Extremely effective

Q14: Was the awareness message bothersome for you?

0: Not at all

1: Slightly

2: Moderately

3: Very

4: Extremely

Q15: Did you expect the obstacle location before entering the curve?

0: No

1: I expected the location

2: I could see it

Appendix C

Questionnaire Items After a Series of Runs

Descriptions in \(<>\) were not given to the drivers.

Q21: Was the awareness message function effective?

0: Not at all effective

1: Slightly effective

2: Moderately effective

3: Very effective

4: Extremely effective

Q22: Which awareness message timing was the best?

5 s, 10 s, 15 s, 20 s

<Evaluation of the test management>

Q23: Please check anything that applies to you.

Q231: The messages were hard to catch because of the subtasks.

Q232: The messages were hard to catch because of the speaking quality.

Q233: I paid attention to other things during the tests.

(Write down details:)

Q234: Because there were many runs, it was difficult to make an evaluation for each one.

<Understanding of awareness message>

Q24: The tests were for evaluating the awareness message, not for warning. Please check anything that applies to you.

Q241: I correctly understood the purpose of awareness messages and received the tests.

Q242: I am not sure that I received the tests dedicated for awareness messages.

Q243: I could not understand the meaning of awareness messages.

<Expectation of the awareness message function>

Q25: Please check anything that applies to you.

Q251: An awareness message is more important than warning or collision avoidance.

Q252: There is no need for an awareness message function if my car is equipped with a warning function or collision avoidance function.

Q253: It may be helpful if my car is equipped with an awareness message function.

Q254: It would be better if there is also a display.

Q255: It would be better if there are awareness messages on multiple occasions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Takeda, A., Kondo, M. & Mimuro, T. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Awareness Messages for Road Traffic Hazards in Experimental Tests. Automot. Innov. 1, 76–84 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42154-018-0011-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42154-018-0011-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation