skip to main content
10.1145/3349263.3351337acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesautomotiveuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Work in Progress

An empirical investigation of measures for well-being in highly automated vehicles

Published:21 September 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

The advent of automated driving shifts user behavior in vehicles and calls for user-centric design. One potential user-centric variable to consider is passenger well-being. In certain experimental designs and industry applications self-report measures may not be the optimal type of measurement and objective measures for well-being could give more nuanced results. This study investigates the relationship between subjective self-ratings and objective measures for well-being in the context of highly automated vehicles. A static driving simulator was used to create different vehicle interiors. Participants' (n=20) responses using self-reports and objective measures (i.e. heart rate variability, electrodermal activity, facial expression, body motion) were collected. The results showed significant correlations of self-reports with heart rate variability and body motion. Both measures were able to discriminate between different stimuli, suggesting that they may be suitable objective measures to act as proxy and complement subjective measures for well-being in highly automated vehicles.

References

  1. Wolfram Boucsein. 1988. Elektrodermale Aktivität. Grundlagen, Methoden und Anwendungen. Springer, Berlin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Michael Braun, Sarah T. Völkel, Gesa Wiegand, Thomas Puls, Daniel Steidl, Yannick Weiß, and Florian Alt. 2018. The Smile is The New Like. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia - MUM 2018. ACM Press, New York, USA, 383--389. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Luca Caberletti. 2013. Assessment Methods for Optimisation of Innovative Vehicle Interior Lighting. Dissertation. Technische Universität Ilmenau, Illemnau, Germany.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Ed Diener. 1994. Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities. Social Indicators Research 31, 103--157.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Ed Diener, Richard E. Lucas, and Shigehiro Oishi. 2002. Subjective Well-Being. The Science of Happiness and Life Satisfaction. In Handbook of positive psychology, C. R. Snyder and Shane J. Lopez, Eds. Oxford University Press, Oxford England, New York, 63--73.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Florian Eyben, Martin Wöllmer, Tony Poitschke, Björn Schuller, Christoph Blaschke, Berthold Färber, and Nhu Nguyen-Thien. 2010. Emotion on the Road---Necessity, Acceptance, and Feasibility of Affective Computing in the Car. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction 2010, 1768, 1--17. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Fay C.M. Geisler, Nadja Vennewald, Thomas Kubiak, and Hannelore Weber. 2010. The impact of heart rate variability on subjective well-being is mediated by emotion regulation. Personality and Individual Differences 49, 7, 723--728. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Magnus Hjälmdahl, Stas Krupenia, and Birgitta Thorslund. 2017. Driver behaviour and driver experience of partial and fully automated truck platooning - a simulator study. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 9, 1, 1--11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Sylvia D. Kreibig. 2010. Autonomic nervous system activity in emotion. A review. Biological psychology 84, 3, 394--421. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Janilla Lee, Ted Grohs, and Mari Milosic. 1995. Evaluation of Objective Measurement Techniques for Automotive Seat Comfort. SAE Technical Paper Series, 950142.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Sivaprasad Nandyala, Gayathri K, Sharath D H, and Mithun Manalikandy. 2018. Human Emotion Based Interior Lighting Control. SAE Technical Paper Series, 2018-01-1042. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. R Core Team. 2018. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. William E. Rinn. 1984. The Neuropsychology of Facial Expression. A Review of the Neurological and Psychological Mechanisms for Producing Facial Expressions. Psychological Bulletin 95, 1, 52--77.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. SAE. 2016. Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to On-road Motor Vehicle Automated Driving Systems, SAE J3016. SAE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Tim Senn, Mareike Falter, Philipp Ruster, and Karsten Hadwich. 2018. Automated Driving - Creating Gain or Reducing Pain? An Empirical Study of Direct and Mediated Effects on Wellbeing. GMFC 2018, 1580--1583. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Rolf Steyer, Peter Schwenkmezger, Peter Notz, and Michael Eid. 1997. Der Mehrdimensionale Befindlichkeitsfragebogen (MDBF). Hogrefe, Göttingen.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Sabrina Stöckli, Michael Schulte-Mecklenbeck, Stefan Borer, and Andrea C. Samson. 2018. Facial expression analysis with AFFDEX and FACET. A validation study. Behavior research methods 50, 4, 1446--1460. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Peter Vink and S. Hallbeck. 2012. Editorial: Comfort and discomfort studies demonstrate the need for a new model. Applied Ergonomics 43, 2, 271--276.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. J. Winzen, F. Albers, and C. Marggraf-Micheel. 2014. The influence of coloured light in the aircraft cabin on passenger thermal comfort. Lighting Research & Technology 46, 4, 465--475. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

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

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader