Transactions on Transport Sciences 2019, 10(2):18-32 | DOI: 10.5507/tots.2019.012

Effects of a light-based communication approach as an external HMI for Automated Vehicles - a Wizard-of-Oz Study

Ann-Christin Hensch, Isabel Neumann, Matthias Beggiato, Josephine Halama, Josef F. Krems
Cognitive and Engineering Psychology, Department of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Wilhelm-Raabe-Straße 43, 09120 Chemnitz, Germany

Communication between automated vehicles (AVs) and vulnerable road users (VRUs) is highly relevant in coordinating traffic maneuvers and therefore ensuring road safety. Especially in shared spaces such as parking areas, communication is highly important. As automated driving changes the driver's role, communication between different traffic participants will also change. External human-machine interfaces (eHMIs) may enhance safety and effective communication between VRUs and AVs by providing relevant information to other traffic participants if informal communication is insufficient. Hence, a variety of information (e.g., about AVs' driving mode or future maneuvers) is recommended to be communicated to VRUs. Therefore, we investigated the effects of three different light signals, presented by a light bar placed on the test vehicle's roof, as a form of an eHMI: automation mode, starting mode and crossing mode. Moreover, two different driving conditions (i.e., a manual and a simulated automated driving condition) were implemented to investigate the effects between these conditions. Either the driver was visible in the manual condition or the vehicle appeared driverless as a seat suit covered the driver in the simulated automated condition (Wizard-of-Oz design). A total of N = 173 random pedestrians passing by were interviewed and behavioral data were collected from over 1500 pedestrians. Results indicate that participants felt significantly safer during the interaction with the vehicle when a driver was visible. Although VRUs evaluated the general approach of applying light signals as eHMIs for AVs as useful, they assessed the presented light signals as only partially trustworthy and rather unintuitive. Moreover, many participants were unsure of whether the light signals were directed towards them, thus the directedness of light signals should be considered when implementing a light-based eHMI in AVs. Further, moving light signals attracted more attention (i.e., increased pedestrians' head movements towards the vehicle) than a steady or no light signal did. Interestingly, no difference existed between the investigated steady light signal and the baseline condition (i.e., no light signal) regarding head movements towards the vehicle. The results underline the importance of implementing an appropriate eHMI design in AVs.

Keywords: Wizard-of-Oz; automated vehicles; external HMI; light-based communication; vulnerable road users

Received: July 9, 2019; Accepted: November 14, 2019; Prepublished online: December 28, 2019; Published: January 17, 2020  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Hensch, A., Neumann, I., Beggiato, M., Halama, J., & Krems, J.F. (2019). Effects of a light-based communication approach as an external HMI for Automated Vehicles - a Wizard-of-Oz Study. Transactions on Transport Sciences, 10(2), 18-32. doi: 10.5507/tots.2019.012
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Ackermann, C., Beggiato, M., Schubert, S., & Krems, J. F. (2019). An experimental study to investigate design and assessment criteria: What is important for communication between pedestrians and automated vehicles? Applied Ergonomics, 75, 272-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.11.002 Go to original source...
    2. Anderson, J. R. (2014). Cognitive psychology and its implications. London, England: Macmillan Publishers. Go to original source...
    3. Beggiato, M., Witzlack, C., Springer, S., & Krems, J. F. (2018). The right moment for braking as informal communication signal between automated vehicles and pedestrians in crossing situations. In N. Stanton (Ed.), Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation. AHFE 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 597. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93885-1 Go to original source...
    4. Blackvue [Apparatus and software]. (2018). Seoul, Korea: Blackvue.
    5. Böckle, M.-P., Brenden, A. P., Klingegård, M., Habibovic, A., & Bout, M. (2017). SAV2P: Exploring the impact of an interface for shared automated vehicles on pedestrians' experience. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications Adjunct, 136-140. https://doi.org/10.1145/3131726.3131765 Go to original source...
    6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Go to original source...
    7. Chang, C.-M., Toda, K., Sakamoto, D., & Igarashi, T. (2017). Eyes on a car: an Interface design for communication between an autonomous car and a pedestrian. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 65-73. https://doi.org/10.1145/3122986.3122989 Go to original source...
    8. Clamann, M., Aubert, M., & Cummings, M. L. (2017). Evaluation of vehicle-to-pedestrian communication displays for autonomous vehicles. Transportation Research Board 96th Annual Meeting (No. 17-02119).
    9. Dahlbäck, N., Jönsson, A., & Ahrenberg, L. (1993). Wizard of Oz studies - why and how. Knowledge-Based Systems, 6(4), 258-266. https://doi.org/10.1145/169891.169968 Go to original source...
    10. de Clercq, K., Dietrich, A., Núñez Velasco, J. P., de Winter, J., & Happee, R. (2019). External human-machine interfaces on automated vehicles: Effects on pedestrian crossing decisions. Human Factors, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819836343 Go to original source...
    11. Deb, S., Hudson, C. R., Carruth, D. W., & Frey, D. (2018). Pedestrians receptivity in autonomous vehicles: Exploring a video-based assessment. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 62(1), 2061-2065. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931218621465 Go to original source...
    12. ELAN (Version 5.2) [Software] (2004). Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. Retrieved from https://tla.mpi.nl/tools/tla-tools/elan/
    13. Fuest, T., Michalowski, L., Traris, L., Bellem, H., & Bengler, K. (2018). Using the driving behavior of an automatedvehicle to communicate intentions - A Wizard of Oz Study. 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), 3596-3601. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITSC.2018.8569486 Go to original source...
    14. Guéguen, N., Meineri, S., & Eyssartier, C. (2015). A pedestrian's stare and drivers' stopping behavior: A field experiment at the pedestrian crossing. Safety Science, 75, 87-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.01.018 Go to original source...
    15. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Education.
    16. Hamilton-Baillie, B. (2008). Shared space: Reconciling people, places and traffic. Built Environment, 34(2), 161-181. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.34.2.161 Go to original source...
    17. Hensch, A.-C., Neumann, I., Beggiato, M., Halama, J., & Krems, J. F. (2020). How should Automated Vehicles communicate? - Effects of a light-based communication approach in a Wizard-of-Oz study. In Neville Stanton (Ed.), Advances in Human Factors of Transportation. AHFE 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 964. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20503-4_8 Go to original source...
    18. Hölzel, A. (2008). Unterscheidung von formeller und informeller Kommunikation im Straßenverkehr [Distinction of formal and informal communication in traffic.] (Diploma thesis). Universität Wien, Vienna, Austria.
    19. International Organization for Standardization (2018). Road vehicles - Ergonomic aspects of external visual communication from automated vehicles to other road users (ISO/DIS Standard No. 23049). Retrieved from https://www.iso.org/standard/74397.html
    20. Isherwood, S. J., McDougall, S. J., & Curry, M. B. (2007). Icon Identification in context: The changing role of icon characteristics with user experience. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49(3), 465-476. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007x200102 Go to original source...
    21. Jamson, A. H., Merat, N., Carsten, O. M., & Lai, F. C. (2013). Behavioural changes in drivers experiencing highly-automated vehicle control in varying traffic conditions. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 30, 116-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2013.02.008 Go to original source...
    22. Jian, J.-Y., Bisantz, A. M., & Drury, C. G. (2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(1), 53-71. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327566IJCE0401_04 Go to original source...
    23. Lagström, T., & Lundgren, V. M. (2015). AVIP - Autonomous vehicles interaction with pedestrians - An investigation of pedestrian-driver communication and development of a vehicle external interface (Master thesis). Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
    24. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The Measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310 Go to original source...
    25. Litman, T. (2019). Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://www.vtpi.org/avip.pdf
    26. Lundgren, V. M., Habibovic, A., Andersson, J., Lagström, T., Nilsson, M., Sirkka, A., … Saluäär, D. (2017). Will there be new communication needs when introducing automated vehicles to the urban context? In N. Stanton, S. Landry, G. Di Bucchianico, & A. Vallicelli. (Eds.), Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 484. (pp. 485-497). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Go to original source...
    27. Mahadevan, K., Somanath, S., & Sharlin, E. (2018). Communicating awareness and intent in autonomous vehicle-pedestrian interaction. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174003 Go to original source...
    28. Merat, N., Louw, T., Madigan, R., Wilbrink, M., & Schieben, A. (2018). What externally presented information do VRUs require when interacting with fully Automated Road Transport Systems in shared space? Accident Analysis and Prevention, 118, 244-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.018 Go to original source...
    29. Nuñez Velasco, J. P., Rodriguez, P., Farah, H., & Hagenzieker, M. P. (2016). Safety of pedestrians and cyclists when interacting with self-driving vehicles: A case study of the WEpods (PPT). ITRL Conference on Integrated Transport, 782-792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2008.12.001 Go to original source...
    30. Penmetsa, P., Adanu, E. K., Wood, D., Wang, T., & Jones, S. L. (2019). Perceptions and expectations of autonomous vehicles - A snapshot of vulnerable road user opinion. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 143, 9-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.02.010 Go to original source...
    31. Rasouli, A., Kotseruba, I., & Tsotsos, J. K. (2018). Understanding pedestrian behavior in complex traffic scenes. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 3(1), 61-70. https://doi.org/10.1109/tiv.2017.2788193 Go to original source...
    32. Rasouli, A., & Tsotsos, J. K. (2018). Joint attention in driver-pedestrian interaction: from theory to practice. Manuscript submitted for publication. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.02522.pdf
    33. Rodríguez Palmeiro, A., van der Kint, S., Vissers, L., Farah, H., de Winter, J. C., & Hagenzieker, M. (2018). Interaction between pedestrians and automated vehicles: A Wizard of Oz experiment. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 58, 1005-1020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.07.020 Go to original source...
    34. Rothenbücher, D., Li, J., Sirkin, D., Mok, B., & Ju, W. (2016). Ghost driver: A field study investigating the interaction between pedestrians and driverless vehicles. 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), 795-802. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745210 Go to original source...
    35. SAE International's new standard J3016. (2018). Levels of driving automation. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/P141661
    36. Schieben, A., Wilbrink, M., Kettwich, C., Madigan, R., Louw, T., & Merat, N. (2019). Designing the interaction of automated vehicles with other traffic participants: design considerations based on human needs and expectations. Cognition, Technology and Work, 21(1), 69-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0521-z Go to original source...
    37. Schneemann, F., & Gohl, I. (2016). Analyzing driver-pedestrian interaction at crosswalks: A contribution to autonomous driving in urban environments. IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, (IV), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2016.7535361 Go to original source...
    38. Straßenverkehrsordnung (StVO). (2013). Retrieved from https://www.stvo.de/strassenverkehrsordnung
    39. ©ucha, M., Dostal, D., & Risser, R. (2017). Pedestrian-driver communication and decision strategies at marked crossings. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 102, 41-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.02.018 Go to original source...
    40. Wilbrink, M., Schieben, A., Kaup, M., Willrodt, J.-H., Weber, F., & Lee, Y. M. (2018). Preliminary interaction strategies for the interACT automated vehicles. Retrieved from https://www.interact-roadautomation.eu/wp-content/uploads/interACT_WP4_D4.1_Preliminary_Human_Vehicle_Interaction_Strategies_v1.0_draftWebsite.pdf
    41. Willrodt, J.-H., Strothmann, H., & Wallaschek, J. (2017). Optical car-to-human communication for Automated Vehicles. In T. Q. Khanh (Ed.), 12th International Symposium on Automotive Lighting (pp. 579-588). Munich, Germany: UTZ Verlag GmbH.
    42. Witzlack, C., Beggiato, M., & Krems, J. F. (2016). Interaktionssequenzen zwischen Fahrzeugen und Fußgängern im Parkplatzszenario als Grundlage für kooperativ interagierende Automatisierung. [Interaction between vehicles and pedestrians as a basis for cooperative automation.]. In VDI (Ed.), 32. VDI/VW-Gemeinschaftstagung, Fahrerassistenz und automatisiertes Fahren, VDI-Berichte 2288 (pp. 323-336). Düsseldorf, Germany: VDI-Verlag GmbH. Go to original source...
    43. Zhang, J., Vinkhuyzen, E., & Cefkin, M. (2018). Evaluation of an autonomous vehicle external communication system concept: A survey study. In N. Stanton (Ed.), Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation. AHFE 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 597 (pp. 650-661). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60441-1_63 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content