skip to main content
10.1145/3003715.3005405acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesautomotiveuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A Question of Trust: An Ethnographic Study of Automated Cars on Real Roads

Authors Info & Claims
Published:24 October 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Recent technological advances in automated cars have brought them closer to regular use on the roads. Accordingly, research on the driver's perspective is increasing. However, previous studies have limitations in terms of the length of the study period and richness of the user's experience. In this paper, we conducted an ethnographic experiment to observe the interaction between humans and automated cars. Six participants rode in a prototype automated car on a real road one hour a day for six days under various weather conditions. We found that even after six days of utilizing it, participants did not fully trust the automated car. We identified nine distrust factors that strongly influenced their experiences in the automated car, classifying them according to Lee and See's classification of three trust categories: process, performance, and purpose. We also present serval ideas based on the study results.

References

  1. Adell, E., Várhelyi, A., & dalla Fontana, M. (2011). The effects of a driver assistance system for safe speed and safe distance--a real-life field study. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 19(1), 145--155.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Shihabi, T., & Mourant, R. (2003). Toward more realistic driving behavior models for autonomous vehicles in driving simulators. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1843), 41--49.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Barber, B. (1983). The logic and limits of trust.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Beale, R., & Creed, C. (2009). Affective interaction: How emotional agents affect users. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67(9), 755--776. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77--101. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Choi, J. K., & Ji, Y. G. (2015). Investigating the Importance of Trust on Adopting an Autonomous Vehicle. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(10), 692--702. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to research methods.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Dixon, S. R., Wickens, C. D., & McCarley, J. S. (2007). On the independence of compliance and reliance: Are automation false alarms worse than misses?. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49(4), 564--572. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Ekman, P. E., & Davidson, R. J. (1994). The nature of emotion: Fundamental questions. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., O'Sullivan, M., Chan, A., Diacoyanni-Tarlatzis, I., Heider, K., ... & Scherer, K. (1987). Universals and cultural differences in the judgments of facial expressions of emotion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 53(4), 712. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of advanced nursing, 62(1), 107--115. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Gans, G., Jarke, M., Kethers, S., & Lakemeyer, G. (2001, May). Modeling the impact of trust and distrust in agent networks. In Proc. of AOIS'01 (pp. 45--58).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Ghazizadeh, M., Peng, Y., Lee, J. D., & Boyle, L. N. (2012, September). Augmenting the technology acceptance model with trust: Commercial drivers' attitudes towards monitoring and feedback. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 2286--2290). Sage Publications. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Im, I., Kim, Y., & Han, H. J. (2008). The effects of perceived risk and technology type on users' acceptance of technologies. Information & Management, 45(1), 1--9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Krome, S., Walz, S. P., & Greuter, S. (2016, May). Contextual Inquiry of Future Commuting in Autonomous Cars. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3122--3128). ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. biometrics, 159--174. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46(1), 50--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Lee, J., & Moray, N. (1992). Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics, 35(10), 1243--1270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Lin, C. H., Shih, H. Y., & Sher, P. J. (2007). Integrating technology readiness into technology acceptance: The TRAM model. Psychology & Marketing, 24(7), 641--657. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. 1979. John Willey & Sons.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family practice, 13(6), 522--526. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. McKnight, D. H., & Chervany, N. (2001). While trust is cool and collected, distrust is fiery and frenzied: A model of distrust concepts. Amcis 2001 Proceedings, 171.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Merat, N., Jamson, A. H., Lai, F. C., Daly, M., & Carsten, O. M. (2014). Transition to manual: Driver behaviour when resuming control from a highly automated vehicle. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 27, 274--282. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. Jossey-Bass.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Moretti, F., van Vliet, L., Bensing, J., Deledda, G., Mazzi, M., Rimondini, M., ... & Fletcher, I. (2011). A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries. Patient education and counseling, 82(3), 420--428. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Omodei, M. M., & McLennan, J. (2000). Conceptualizing and measuring global interpersonal mistrust-trust. The journal of social psychology, 140(3), 279--294. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 39(2), 230--253. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T. B., & Wickens, C. D. (2008). Situation awareness, mental workload, and trust in automation: Viable, empirically supported cognitive engineering constructs. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2(2), 140--160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Payre, W., Cestac, J., & Delhomme, P. (2014). Intention to use a fully automated car: Attitudes and a priori acceptability. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 27, 252--263. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Rhiu, I., Kwon, S., Bahn, S., Yun, M. H., & Yu, W. (2015). Research Issues in Smart Vehicles and Elderly Drivers: A Literature Review. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(10), 635--666. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Rödel, C., Stadler, S., Meschtscherjakov, A., & Tscheligi, M. (2014, September). Towards autonomous cars: The effect of autonomy levels on acceptance and user experience. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 1--8). ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Rotter, J. B. (1980). Interpersonal trust, trustworthiness, and gullibility. American psychologist, 35(1), 1. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Schoettle, B., & Sivak, M. (2014). A survey of public opinion about autonomous and self-driving vehicles in the US, the UK, and Australia (No. UMTRI-2014-21).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Suh, H., Shahriaree, N., Hekler, E. B., & Kientz, J. A. (2016, May). Developing and Validating the User Burden Scale: A Tool for Assessing User Burden in Computing Systems. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3988--3999). ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Ullmann-Margalit, E. 2004. Trust, Distrust, and in Between, in Distrust, R. Hardin (ed.), New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 60--82.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Urmson, C., Anhalt, J., Bagnell, D., Baker, C., Bittner, R., Clark, M. N., ... & Gittleman, M. (2008). Autonomous driving in urban environments: Boss and the urban challenge. Journal of Field Robotics, 25(8), 425--466. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Ziegler, C. N., & Lausen, G. (2005). Propagation models for trust and distrust in social networks. Information Systems Frontiers, 7(4-5), 337--358. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. A Question of Trust: An Ethnographic Study of Automated Cars on Real Roads

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      Automotive'UI 16: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications
      October 2016
      296 pages
      ISBN:9781450345330
      DOI:10.1145/3003715

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 24 October 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Automotive'UI 16 Paper Acceptance Rate39of85submissions,46%Overall Acceptance Rate248of566submissions,44%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader