skip to main content
10.1145/3613905.3650776acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Work in Progress

Podscape: Exploring the Comfort Level with Pods in Pedestrian Spaces through Immersive Simulation

Published: 11 May 2024 Publication History

Abstract

As autonomous vehicles (AVs) advance in navigating complex settings, investigating their coexistence with people and how they are perceived becomes crucial. Pods, also known as low-speed autonomous transport systems (L-SATS), are emerging in pedestrian spaces, such as museums and malls, impacting people’s comfort in these environments. This research explores how incidentally copresent persons (InCoPs) perceive pods in pedestrian spaces, focusing on their comfort levels as a preliminary factor. We conducted a virtual reality study with 10 participants, examining the importance of various variables, including pod quantity, pod group formation, passenger presence, and InCoP position. Informed by our results, we discussed insights on factors improving InCoPs’ comfort, highlighting the significance of having an enhanced sense of control, the space and freedom to move around, passengers’ awareness, and the social behaviors of other copresent pedestrians.

Supplemental Material

MP4 File - Video Preview
Video Preview
Transcript for: Video Preview

References

[1]
Anna M. H. Abrams, Pia S. C. Dautzenberg, Carla Jakobowsky, Stefan Ladwig, and Astrid M. Rosenthal-von der Pütten. 2021. A Theoretical and Empirical Reflection on Technology Acceptance Models for Autonomous Delivery Robots. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction(HRI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 272–280. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434073.3444662
[2]
Ashratuz Zavin Asha, Fahim Anzum, Patrick Finn, Ehud Sharlin, and Mario Costa Sousa. 2020. Designing External Automotive Displays: VR Prototypes and Analysis. In 12th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (Virtual Event, DC, USA) (AutomotiveUI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 74–82. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409120.3410658
[3]
Ashratuz Zavin Asha and Ehud Sharlin. 2023. Designing Inclusive Interaction with Autonomous Vehicles for Older Passengers. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (Pittsburgh, PA, USA) (DIS ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2138–2154. https://doi.org/10.1145/3563657.3596045
[4]
Richard E Boyatzis. 1998. Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. SAGE Publications Inc.
[5]
United States Census Bureau. 2022. Economic Characteristics - Table DP03. https://data.census.gov
[6]
Christopher Burns, Luis Oliveira, Vivien Hung, Peter Thomas, and Stewart Birrell. 2019. Pedestrian Attitudes to Shared-Space Interactions with Autonomous Vehicles – A Virtual Reality Study. 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20503-4_29
[7]
John Travis Butler and Arvin Agah. 2001. Psychological effects of behavior patterns of a mobile personal robot. Autonomous Robots 10 (2001), 185–202.
[8]
Stéphanie Cœugnet, Béatrice Cahour, and Sami Kraiem. 2019. Risk-taking, emotions and socio-cognitive dynamics of pedestrian street-crossing decision-making in the city. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 65 (Aug. 2019), 141–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.07.011
[9]
Koen de Clercq, Andre Dietrich, Juan Pablo Núñez Velasco, Joost de Winter, and Riender Happee. 2019. External Human-Machine Interfaces on Automated Vehicles: Effects on Pedestrian Crossing Decisions. Human Factors 61, 8 (Dec. 2019), 1353–1370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819836343
[10]
Stef de Groot. 2019. Pedestrian Acceptance of Delivery Robots. Master’s Thesis. Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
[11]
Debargha Dey, Marieke Martens, Chao Wang, Felix Ros, and Jacques Terken. 2018. Interface Concepts for Intent Communication from Autonomous Vehicles to Vulnerable Road Users. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (Toronto, ON, Canada) (AutomotiveUI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 82–86. https://doi.org/10.1145/3239092.3265946
[12]
Daniel J. Fagnant and Kara Kockelman. 2015. Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 77 (July 2015), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.003
[13]
Pedro Fernandes and Urbano Nunes. 2012. Platooning With IVC-Enabled Autonomous Vehicles: Strategies to Mitigate Communication Delays, Improve Safety and Traffic Flow. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 13, 1 (March 2012), 91–106. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2011.2179936
[14]
Marlena R. Fraune, Yusaku Nishiwaki, Selma Sabanović, Eliot R. Smith, and Michio Okada. 2017. Threatening Flocks and Mindful Snowflakes: How Group Entitativity Affects Perceptions of Robots. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction(HRI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 205–213. https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020248
[15]
Marlena R. Fraune, Steven Sherrin, Selma Sabanović, and Eliot R. Smith. 2015. Rabble of Robots Effects: Number and Type of Robots Modulates Attitudes, Emotions, and Stereotypes. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction(HRI ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696483
[16]
Elliott Hauser, Yao-Cheng Chan, Parth Chonkar, Geethika Hemkumar, Huihai Wang, Daksh Dua, Shikhar Gupta, Efren Mendoza Enriquez, Tiffany Kao, Justin Hart, Reuth Mirsky, Joydeep Biswas, Junfeng Jiao, and Peter Stone. 2023. “What’s That Robot Doing Here?”: Perceptions Of Incidental Encounters With Autonomous Quadruped Robots. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Trustworthy Autonomous Systems. ACM, Edinburgh United Kingdom, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3597512.3599707
[17]
Lynn M. Hulse. 2023. Pedestrians’ perceived vulnerability and observed behaviours relating to crossing and passing interactions with autonomous vehicles. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 93 (Feb. 2023), 34–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2022.12.007
[18]
Mirjam Lanzer, Ina Koniakowsky, Mark Colley, and Martin Baumann. 2023. Interaction Effects of Pedestrian Behavior, Smartphone Distraction and External Communication of Automated Vehicles on Crossing and Gaze Behavior. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 768, 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581303
[19]
Haeryung Lee and Seung-Nam Kim. 2019. Shared Space and Pedestrian Safety: Empirical Evidence from Pedestrian Priority Street Projects in Seoul, Korea. Sustainability 11, 1717 (Jan. 2019), 4645. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174645
[20]
Karthik Mahadevan, Elaheh Sanoubari, Sowmya Somanath, James E. Young, and Ehud Sharlin. 2019. AV-Pedestrian Interaction Design Using a Pedestrian Mixed Traffic Simulator. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference(DIS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 475–486. https://doi.org/10.1145/3322276.3322328
[21]
Karthik Mahadevan, Sowmya Somanath, and Ehud Sharlin. 2018. Communicating Awareness and Intent in Autonomous Vehicle-Pedestrian Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174003
[22]
Natasha Merat, Tyron Louw, Ruth Madigan, Marc Wilbrink, and Anna Schieben. 2018. What externally presented information do VRUs require when interacting with fully Automated Road Transport Systems in shared space?Accident Analysis & Prevention 118 (Sept. 2018), 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.018
[23]
Baichuan Mo, Yu Shen, and Jinhua Zhao. 2018. Impact of Built Environment on First- and Last-Mile Travel Mode Choice. Transportation Research Record 2672, 6 (Dec. 2018), 40–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118788423
[24]
Elaine M. Murtagh, Jacqueline L. Mair, Elroy Aguiar, Catrine Tudor-Locke, and Marie H. Murphy. 2021. Outdoor Walking Speeds of Apparently Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Sports Medicine 51, 1 (Jan. 2021), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01351-3
[25]
M. Newman, B. Gatersleben, K. J. Wyles, and E. Ratcliffe. 2022. The use of virtual reality in environment experiences and the importance of realism. Journal of Environmental Psychology 79 (Feb. 2022), 101733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101733
[26]
Manon Prédhumeau, Anne Spalanzani, and Julie Dugdale. 2023. Pedestrian Behavior in Shared Spaces With Autonomous Vehicles: An Integrated Framework and Review. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles 8, 1 (Jan. 2023), 438–457. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2021.3116436
[27]
Nowar Raad and Matthew I. Burke. 2018. What Are the Most Important Factors for Pedestrian Level-of-Service Estimation? A Systematic Review of the Literature. Transportation Research Record 2672, 35 (Dec. 2018), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118790623
[28]
Hayne W. Reese. 1997. Counterbalancing and Other Uses of Repeated-Measures Latin-Square Designs: Analyses and Interpretations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 64, 1 (Jan. 1997), 137–158. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1996.2333
[29]
Astrid Rosenthal-von Der Pütten, David Sirkin, Anna Abrams, and Laura Platte. 2020. The Forgotten in HRI: Incidental Encounters with Robots in Public Spaces. In Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, Cambridge United Kingdom, 656–657. https://doi.org/10.1145/3371382.3374852
[30]
Nebiyou Tilahun, Piyushimita (Vonu) Thakuriah, Moyin Li, and Yaye Keita. 2016. Transit use and the work commute: Analyzing the role of last mile issues. Journal of Transport Geography 54 (June 2016), 359–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.06.021
[31]
Jean Toner. 2009. Small is not too Small: Reflections Concerning the Validity of Very Small Focus Groups (VSFGs). Qualitative Social Work 8, 2 (June 2009), 179–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325009103374
[32]
Tram Thi Minh Tran, Callum Parker, and Martin Tomitsch. 2021. A Review of Virtual Reality Studies on Autonomous Vehicle–Pedestrian Interaction. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems 51, 6 (Dec 2021), 641–652. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2021.3107517
[33]
Christian Vassallo, Anne-Hélène Olivier, Philippe Souères, Armel Crétual, Olivier Stasse, and Julien Pettré. 2017. How do walkers avoid a mobile robot crossing their way?Gait & Posture 51 (Jan. 2017), 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.09.022
[34]
Roger Woodman, Ke Lu, Matthew D. Higgins, Simon Brewerton, Paul Jennings, and Stewart Birrell. 2019. A Human Factors Approach to Defining Requirements for Low-speed Autonomous Vehicles to Enable Intelligent Platooning. In 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV). IEEE, Paris, France, 2371–2376. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2019.8814128
[35]
Roger Woodman, Ke Lu, Matthew D. Higgins, Simon Brewerton, Paul A. Jennings, and Stewart Birrell. 2019. Gap acceptance study of pedestrians crossing between platooning autonomous vehicles in a virtual environment. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 67 (Nov. 2019), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.09.017
[36]
Su Yang. 2017. Driver behavior impact on pedestrians’ crossing experience in the conditionally autonomous driving context. Master’s Thesis. KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
[37]
Cheng Zhang, Bo Du, Zuduo Zheng, and Jun Shen. 2023. Space sharing between pedestrians and micro-mobility vehicles: A systematic review. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 116 (March 2023), 103629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2023.103629

Index Terms

  1. Podscape: Exploring the Comfort Level with Pods in Pedestrian Spaces through Immersive Simulation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    CHI EA '24: Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    May 2024
    4761 pages
    ISBN:9798400703317
    DOI:10.1145/3613905
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 11 May 2024

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Pods
    2. copresence
    3. pedestrians
    4. virtual reality

    Qualifiers

    • Work in progress
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Funding Sources

    Conference

    CHI '24

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 6,164 of 23,696 submissions, 26%

    Upcoming Conference

    CHI 2025
    ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    April 26 - May 1, 2025
    Yokohama , Japan

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 161
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)161
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)13
    Reflects downloads up to 15 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Full Text

    View this article in Full Text.

    Full Text

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media