Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A user-centred approach for designing driving support systems: the case of collision avoidance

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The work described in this paper is focused on an approach for implementing in real working contexts the guidelines of user-centred design contained in formal standards and in many research studies. The application concerns the EUCLIDE project (enhanced human–machine interface for on vehicle integrated driving support system), which aimed at developing a driving support system to avoid collisions with obstacles in reduced visibility conditions. The design of the system followed a user-centred approach which started by identifying the model of cognition to be applied throughout the whole design process. The definition of the warning strategies of the system was firstly analysed with the aim to achieve the highest balance between a totally supportive system and a non-disturbing system. Then an initial set of design solutions for the human–machine interface was tested in a static driving simulator. A second set of possible interfaces was evaluated in a dynamic simulator before developing a final design. This solution was implemented in two real vehicles and tested in real traffic situations. This paper describes the whole design process and concentrates on the final step of “in-vehicle” integration process. The road tests performed at the end of the whole process are discussed in detail focusing on the safety implications associated with the design solution finally selected and implemented.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. The EUCLIDE project was co-funded by the European Commission under the “Competitive and Sustainable Growth” Programme (1998–2002)

References

  • Andreone L, Eschler J, Kempf D, Widlroither H, Amditis A, Cacciabue PC (2002) An application of the human centred design approach to the interaction between the driver and the vehicle: the EUCLIDE project. In: 9th world congress on intelligent transport systems (ITS-2002), Chicago, IL, USA, 14–17 October 2002

  • Bannon L (1991) From human factors to human actors: the role of psychology and human computer interaction studies in systems design. In: Greenbaum J, Kyng M (eds) Design at work: cooperative design of computer systems. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Bevan N (1999) Design for usability. In: Proceedings of international conference on human computer interaction (HCI), Munich, Germany, 22–26 August 1999

  • Bevan N, Macleod D (1994) Usability measurement in context. Behav Inf Technol 13(1–2):132–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Billings CE (1997) Aviation automation: the search for a human-centered approach. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Cacciabue PC (1998) Modelling and simulation of human behaviour in system control. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  • Cacciabue PC (2004) Guide to applying human factors methods. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cacciabue PC, Donato E, Rossano S (2002) Designing human machine systems for automotive safety: a cognitive ergonomics perspective. European Commission, EUR 20378, EN

  • Cacciabue PC, Martinetto M, Re A (2002) The effect of car drivers’ attitudes and national cultures on design of an anti-collision system. In: 11th European conference cognitive ergonomics (ECCE-11), Catania, Italy, 8–11 September 2002

  • EC—European Commission (1998) Commission Mandate to the European Standard Bodies for standardization in the field of information and communication technologies (IT) for disabled and elderly people. EC, 1998, M/273, EN

  • EC—European Commission (1999) Commission Recommendation of 21 December 1999, “on safe and efficient in-vehicle information and communication systems: a European statement of principles on human machine interface. Notified under document number C(1999)4786, 2000/53/EC

  • European Parliament, Directorate-General for Research (1998). The European Community and Road Safety, W.P., Transport series, TRAN 103 EN. http://www.europarl.eu.int/workingpapers/tran/pdf/103_en.pdf

  • Eurostat (2000) Transport Safety in the EU, No. 76/2000

  • Hollnagel E, Woods DD (1983) Cognitive systems engineering: new wine in new bottles. Int J Man Mach Stud 18:583–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO—International Standard Organisation (1993) Guidance on usability. ISO/DIS 9241-11

  • ISO—International Standard Organisation (1999) Human-centred design processes for interactive systems. ISO/FDIS 13407(E)

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayhew D (1999) The usability engineering: a practitioner’s handbook for user interface design. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Muir BM, Moray N (1996) Trust in automation: part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics 39(3):429–460

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Muller M (2003) Participatory design: the third space in HCI. In: Jako J, Sears A (eds) The human computer interaction handbook: evolving technologies and emerging applications. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman DA, Draper S (1986) User centered system design: new perspectives in human–computer interaction. Erlbaum, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Polychronopoulos A, Kempf D, Martinetto M, Amditis A, Cacciabue PC, Andreone L (2003) Warning strategies adaptation in a collision avoidance/vision enhancement system. In: Proceedings of international conference on human computer interaction (HCI), Crete, Greece, 22–27 June 2003

  • Rouse WB (1980) Systems engineering models of human–machine interaction. North Holland, Oxford

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rouse WB (1991) Design for success: a human-centered approach to designing successful products and systems. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders MS, McCormick EJ (1976) Human factors in engineering and design. McGraw-Hill, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan TB (1992) Telerobotics, automation and human supervisory control. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan TB (1999) Human supervisory control. In: Sage AP, Rouse WB (eds) Handbook of systems engineering and management. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener EL (1981) Complacency: is the term useful for air safety? In: Proceedings of the 26th Corporate Aviation Safety Seminar, Denver, pp 116–125

  • Wilde GJS (1994) Target risk: dealing with the danger of death, disease and damage in everyday decisions. PDE Publications, Toronto. http://www.pavlov.psyc.queensu.ca/target/#contents

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, 21020, Ispra, VA, Italy

    P. C. Cacciabue & M. Martinetto

Authors
  1. P. C. Cacciabue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Martinetto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. C. Cacciabue.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cacciabue, P.C., Martinetto, M. A user-centred approach for designing driving support systems: the case of collision avoidance. Cogn Tech Work 8, 201–214 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-006-0039-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-006-0039-7

Keywords