skip to main content
10.1145/3239092.3265969acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesautomotiveuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Man vs. Machine: Comparing a Fully Automated Bus Shuttle with a Manually Driven Group Taxi in a Field Study

Published: 23 September 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Automated driving functions are traditionally tested in on-road studies, however, mainly focusing on technological aspects (sensor accuracy, etc.). Field studies addressing users' individual needs and expectations are still rare. As a consequence, it is still unclear whether or not automated driving systems will reach a comprehensive market penetration. To address this issue, we set-up a user study and compared users' acceptance (utilizing TAM) as a passenger (N=12) of a traditional group taxi vs. an automated bus shuttle both driving in regular traffic. Results show that participants questioned the usefulness of the automated bus shuttle, mainly due to the reduced speed, but, on the other hand, rated their perceived ease of use and their attitude towards using the ADS more positive than expected. Thus, we conclude that with further development of the technology and by including a user-centered design approach, high user acceptance of ADSs can finally be achieved.

References

[1]
Prateek Bansal and Kara M. Kockelman. 2017. Forecasting Americans' long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 95 (2017), 49--63.
[2]
Daniel Belanche, Luis V Casaló, and Carlos Flavián. 2012. Integrating trust and personal values into the Technology Acceptance Model: The case of e-government services adoption. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa 15, 4 (2012), 192--204.
[3]
Fred D Davis and Viswanath Venkatesh. 1996. A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: three experiments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 45, 1 (1996), 19--45.
[4]
Verena Distler, Carine Lallemand, and Thierry Bellet. 2018. Acceptability and Acceptance of Autonomous Mobility on Demand: The Impact of an Immersive Experience. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 612.
[5]
Anna-Katharina Frison, Philipp Wintersberger, Andreas Riener, and Clemens Schartmüller. 2017. Driving Hotzenplotz: A Hybrid Interface for Vehicle Control Aiming to Maximize Pleasure in Highway Driving. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 236--244.
[6]
Satu Innamaa, Scott Smith, Isabel Wilmink, and Nick Reed. 2018. Impact Assessment. In Road Vehicle Automation 4. Springer, 45--55.
[7]
Vincenzo Luca. 2017. TÜV SÜD schafft Grundlagen für ersten automatisiert fahrenden öffentlichen Bus. (Oct. 2017). https://www.presseportal.de/pm/38406/3770565 last access July 17, 2018.
[8]
Sina Nordhoff, Joost De Winter, B Van Arem, and Riender Happee. 2018. Acceptance of driverless vehicles: Results from a large cross-national questionnaire study. Journal of Advanced Transportation March (2018).
[9]
Steven E Polzin, Xuehao Chu, and Jodi Godfrey. 2014. The impact of millennials' travel behavior on future personal vehicle travel. Energy Strategy Reviews 5 (2014), 59--65.
[10]
Christina Rödel, Susanne Stadler, Alexander Meschtscherjakov, and Manfred Tscheligi. 2014. 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. ACM, 1--8.
[11]
Stefan Trommer, Viktoriya Kolarova, Eva Frädrich, Lars Kröger, Benjamin Kickhöfer, Tobias Kuhnimhof, Barbara Lenz, and P Phleps. 2016. Autonomous driving: The impact of vehicle automation on mobility behaviour. (2016).
[12]
Viswanath Venkatesh, Michael G Morris, Gordon B Davis, and Fred D Davis. 2003. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly (2003), 425--478.
[13]
Philipp Wintersberger, Andreas Riener, and Anna-Katharina Frison. 2016. Automated Driving System, Male, or Female Driver: Who'd You Prefer? Comparative Analysis of Passengers' Mental Conditions, Emotional States & Qualitative Feedback. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications - Automotive'UI 16 October (2016), 51--58.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Move, Connect, Interact: Introducing a Design Space for Cross-Traffic InteractionProceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36785808:3(1-40)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2024
  • (2024)Only Trust a Hidden Wizard: Investigating the Effects of Wizard Visibility in Automotive Wizard of Oz StudiesProceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3640792.3675738(74-82)Online publication date: 22-Sep-2024
  • (2024)The Development of Human-Centered Design in Public Transportation: A Literature ReviewHCI in Mobility, Transport, and Automotive Systems10.1007/978-3-031-60480-5_3(40-62)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Man vs. Machine: Comparing a Fully Automated Bus Shuttle with a Manually Driven Group Taxi in a Field Study

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      AutomotiveUI '18: Adjunct Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications
      September 2018
      282 pages
      ISBN:9781450359474
      DOI:10.1145/3239092
      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 the author(s) 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].

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 23 September 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Automated Driving
      2. Field Studies
      3. SAE J3016
      4. User Acceptance

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Funding Sources

      Conference

      AutomotiveUI '18
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 248 of 566 submissions, 44%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)27
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
      Reflects downloads up to 10 Feb 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Move, Connect, Interact: Introducing a Design Space for Cross-Traffic InteractionProceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36785808:3(1-40)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2024
      • (2024)Only Trust a Hidden Wizard: Investigating the Effects of Wizard Visibility in Automotive Wizard of Oz StudiesProceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3640792.3675738(74-82)Online publication date: 22-Sep-2024
      • (2024)The Development of Human-Centered Design in Public Transportation: A Literature ReviewHCI in Mobility, Transport, and Automotive Systems10.1007/978-3-031-60480-5_3(40-62)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2024
      • (2024)Next Stop: Passenger Perspectives on Autonomous TrainsHCI in Mobility, Transport, and Automotive Systems10.1007/978-3-031-60480-5_1(3-25)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
      • (2023)AutoVis: Enabling Mixed-Immersive Analysis of Automotive User Interface Interaction StudiesProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544548.3580760(1-23)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
      • (2022)You’ll Never Ride Alone: Insights into Women’s Security Needs in Shared Automated VehiclesProceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3543174.3546848(13-23)Online publication date: 17-Sep-2022
      • (2022)Acceptance of driverless shuttles in pilot and non-pilot citiesJournal of Public Transportation10.1016/j.jpubtr.2022.10001824(100018)Online publication date: 2022
      • (2022)Acceptance of Autonomous Vehicles: An Overview of User-Specific, Car-Specific and Contextual DeterminantsUser Experience Design in the Era of Automated Driving10.1007/978-3-030-77726-5_3(51-83)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2022
      • (2021)Evaluating feedback requirements for trust calibration in automated vehiclesit - Information Technology10.1515/itit-2020-002463:2(111-122)Online publication date: 16-Jan-2021
      • (2021)Why Autonomous Driving Is So Hard: The Social Dimension of TrafficCompanion of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3434074.3447133(81-85)Online publication date: 8-Mar-2021
      • Show More Cited By

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media