Abstract
In the future, car-to-car communication and car-to-infrastructure communication will be a central part of automated driving experience. Cooperative interactive driving is seen as a promising approach, in which cars interact cooperatively with drivers and the environment. However, to ensure drivers’ acceptance and their trust in such systems, it is important to understand the underlying mechanisms of human cooperation in traffic context. Therefore, this study investigated potential influencing parameters for cooperative behaviour in a lane change situation on a highway. As central influencing parameters the situation’s criticality and the distance in time and space to the driver asking for cooperation were manipulated. This was done by selecting appropriate levels for the time to collision (TTC) in conjunction with the variation of distances to other involved agents. In a video-based experiment with the perspective of driving on the left lane, 43 participants (M = 23.2 years; SD = 4.26 years) had to decide if they would give way to a driver in the right lane situated behind a slower truck. The results showed that the willingness to cooperate was strongly influenced by aspects of the situation: the driver’s costs (operationalized by the distance in time and space to the driver asking for cooperation) and the criticality of the situation for the other driver. A large distance in time and space to the driver asking for cooperation and, therefore, low costs of cooperation facilitate the driver’s willingness to cooperate via accelerating and decelerating. The results also indicated that in situations with high criticality drivers seemed to show strong uncertainty about how to behave or solve this situation. Consequently, cooperatively interacting systems with well-developed user interfaces might support drivers’ cooperative behaviour in critical situations.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baumann MRK, Krems JF (2009) A comprehension based cognitive model of situation awareness. In: Duffy VG (ed) Digital human modeling: second international conference, ICDHM 2009, held as part of HCI International 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19–24, 2009, Proceedings, Springer, Berlin, pp 192–201
Benenson Z, Girald A (2015) User acceptance factors for anonymous credentials: an empirical investigation. In: WEIS
Bengler K, Zimmermann M, Bortot D, Kienle M, Damböck D (2012) Interaction principles for cooperative human–machine systems. In: Information technology
Croissant Y (2012) Estimation of multinomial logit models in R: the m logit Packages. R package version 0.2-2. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mlogit/vignettes/mlogit.pdf
Durso FT, Rawson KA, Girotto S (2007) Comprehension and situation awareness. In: Durso FT, Nickerson RS, Dumais ST, Lewandowsky S, Perfect TJ (eds) Handbook of applied cognition, vol 2. Wiley, Amsterdam, pp 163–193
Fiosins M, Friedrich B, Görmer J, Mattfeld D, Müller JP, Tchouankem H (2016) A multiagent approach to modeling autonomic road transport support systems. In: McCluskey TL, Kotsialos A, Müller JP, Klügl F, Rana O, Schumann R (eds) Autonomic road transport support systems, Springer, New York, pp 67–85
Heesen M, Baumann M, Kelsch J, Nause D, Friedrich M (2012) Investigation of cooperative driving behaviour during lane change in a multi-driver simulation environment. In: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES) Europe Chapter Conference Touluse, pp 305–318
Hoc J-M (2001) Towards a cognitive approach to human–machine cooperation in dynamic situations. Int J Hum Comput Stud 54:509–540
Horst R van der (1990) A time-based analysis of road user behaviour at intersections. In: ICT CT conference proceedings, pp 91–104
van der Horst R (1991) Time-to-collision as a cue for decision-making in braking. In: Gale AG et al (eds) Vision in vehicles–III. Elsevier, Amsterdam
Hurts K, Boer R de (2014) “What is it doing now?” Results of a survey into automation surprise. In Proceedings of the 31st EAAP conference, Valletta, Malta, 22–26 Sept 2014
Kiefer RJ, Flannagan CA, Jerome CJ (2006) Time-to-collision judgments under realistic driving conditions. Hum Fact 48:334–345. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872006777724499
Lee S, Olsen ECB, Wierwille WW (2004) A comprehensive examination of naturalistic lane changes. National Highway Traffic Safety, Washington. https://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NRD/Multimedia/PDFs/Crash%20Avoiance/2004/Lane%20Change%20Final.pdf. Accessed 23 Dec 2017
Li L, Wang F-Y (2006) Cooperative driving at blind crossings using intervehicle communication. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 55:1712–1724. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2006.878730
Lütteken N, Zimmermann M, Bengler KJ (2016) Using gamification to motivate human cooperation in a lane-change scenario. In: 19th International conference on intelligent transportation systems (ITSC), pp 899–906
Marangunić N, Granić A (2015) Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Univ Access Inf Soc 14:81–95
Martin J (2001) Organizational culture: mapping the terrain. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
Moriarty DE, Handley S, Langley P (1998) Learning distributed strategies for traffic control. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference of the society for adaptive behavior, pp 437–446
Skrondal A, Rabe-Hesketh S (2003) Multilevel logistic regression for polytomous data and rankings. Psychometrika 68:267–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294801
Tamke A, Dang T, Breuel G (2011) A flexible method for criticality assessment in driver assistance systems. In: Intelligent vehicles symposium (IV). IEEE, pp 697–702
Vogel K (2003) A comparison of headway and time to collision as safety indicators. Accid Anal Prev 35:427–433
Winsum W van, Heino A (1996) Choice of time-headway in car-following and the role of time-to-collision information in braking. Ergonomics 39:579–592. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139608964482
Yan F, Weber L, Luedtke A (2015) Classifying driver’s uncertainty about the distance gap at lane changing for developing trustworthy assistance systems. In: Intelligent vehicles symposium (IV). https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2015.7225858
Zimmermann M, Fahrmeier L, Bengler K (2015) A Roland for an Oliver? Subjective percept ion of cooperation during conditionally automated driving. In: Smari WW (ed) 2015 International conference on collaboration technologies and systems (CTS), 1–5 June 2015, Atlanta, Georgia. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ
Acknowledgements
This project was funded within the Priority Programme “CoInCar—Cooperatively Interacting Automobiles” of the German Science Foundation DFG.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stoll, T., Müller, F. & Baumann, M. When cooperation is needed: the effect of spatial and time distance and criticality on willingness to cooperate. Cogn Tech Work 21, 21–31 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0523-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0523-x