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.
- 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 Scholar
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- Barber, B. (1983). The logic and limits of trust.Google Scholar
- Beale, R., & Creed, C. (2009). Affective interaction: How emotional agents affect users. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67(9), 755--776. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77--101. Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to research methods.Google Scholar
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- Ekman, P. E., & Davidson, R. J. (1994). The nature of emotion: Fundamental questions. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of advanced nursing, 62(1), 107--115. Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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 Scholar
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- 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 ScholarDigital Library
- 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 ScholarDigital Library
- Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. biometrics, 159--174. Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- Lee, J., & Moray, N. (1992). Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics, 35(10), 1243--1270. Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. 1979. John Willey & Sons.Google Scholar
- Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family practice, 13(6), 522--526. Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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 Scholar
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- Omodei, M. M., & McLennan, J. (2000). Conceptualizing and measuring global interpersonal mistrust-trust. The journal of social psychology, 140(3), 279--294. Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- 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 ScholarCross Ref
- 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 ScholarDigital Library
- Rotter, J. B. (1980). Interpersonal trust, trustworthiness, and gullibility. American psychologist, 35(1), 1. Google ScholarCross Ref
- 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 Scholar
- 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 ScholarDigital Library
- Ullmann-Margalit, E. 2004. Trust, Distrust, and in Between, in Distrust, R. Hardin (ed.), New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 60--82.Google Scholar
- 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 ScholarDigital Library
- Ziegler, C. N., & Lausen, G. (2005). Propagation models for trust and distrust in social networks. Information Systems Frontiers, 7(4-5), 337--358. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
A Question of Trust: An Ethnographic Study of Automated Cars on Real Roads
Recommendations
Traffic Augmentation as a Means to Increase Trust in Automated Driving Systems
CHItaly '17: Proceedings of the 12th Biannual Conference on Italian SIGCHI ChapterMany human factor issues regarding automated driving systems are still unresolved. For instance, it is not fully clear if, and to what extent, drivers will accept and trust this novel technology. Trust in technology is of utmost importance to avoid both ...
Autonomous Driving: Investigating the Feasibility of Bimodal Take-Over Requests
Autonomous vehicles will need de-escalation strategies to compensate when reaching system limitations. Car-driver handovers can be considered one possible method to deal with system boundaries. The authors suggest a bimodal auditory and visual handover ...
(Over)Trust in Automated Driving: The Sleeping Pill of Tomorrow?
CHI EA '19: Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsBoth overtrust in technology and drowsy driving are safety-critical issues. Monitoring a system is a tedious task and overtrust in technology might also influence drivers' vigilance, what in turn could multiply the negative impact of both issues. The ...
Comments