eHMI on the Vehicle or on the Infrastructure? A Driving Simulator Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59490/ejtir.2024.24.2.7273Abstract
Automated vehicles (AVs) may require the implementation of an external human-machine interface (eHMI) to communicate their intentions to human-driven vehicles. The optimal placement of the eHMI, either on the AV itself or as part of the road infrastructure, remains undetermined. The current driving simulator study investigated the effect of eHMI positioning on human driving behavior, during the approach and execution of right turns at T-intersections. Forty-three participants drove under three conditions: absence of eHMI, eHMI on the AV (eHMIv), and eHMI integrated into the infrastructure (eHMIi). Participants encountered AVs that either yielded or did not yield to their vehicles. The results regarding the placement of the eHMI showed that both concepts are advantageous, but for different reasons. eHMIv was appreciated because implicit and explicit communication are congruent, although the AV must first be visually identified to respond to it. eHMIi was appreciated because a familiar cue is always at a known location in the environment; as a result, participants braked earlier for the intersection and came less close to the AV (which can be interpreted as a safety advantage or efficiency disadvantage). Although there are limitations to a driving simulator study like this, this research provides important insights into the fundamental question of how information placement affects drivers’ visual attention demands and driving behavior, topics that are important in view of the development of future cities.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Avsar, H., Utesch, F., Wilbrink, M., Oehl, M. and Schießl, C. (2021). Efficient communication of automated vehicles and manually driven vehicles through an external human-machine interface (eHMI): Evaluation at t-junctions. In Stephanidis, C., Antona, M. and Ntoa, S. (eds) HCI International 2021 - Posters. HCII 2021 (pp. 224–232), Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78645-8_28
Bazilinskyy, P., Dodou, D. and De Winter, J. (2019). Survey on eHMI concepts: The effect of text, color, and perspective. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 67, 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.10.013
Bazilinskyy, P., Dodou, D. and De Winter, J.C.F. (2020). External Human-Machine Interfaces: Which of 729 colors is best for signaling ‘Please (do not) cross’? Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC) (pp. 3721–3728). Toronto, Canada. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC42975.2020.9282998
Bimberg, P., Weissker, T. and Kulik, A. (2020). On the usage of the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire for virtual reality research. 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW) (pp. 464–467). Atlanta, GA. https://doi.org/10.1109/VRW50115.2020.00098
Bindschädel, J., Krems, I. and Kiesel, A. (2021). Interaction between pedestrians and automated vehicles: Exploring a motion-based approach for virtual reality experiments. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 82, 316–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2021.08.018
BMW. (2021). Owner’s handbook. The BMW X7. https://ownersmanuals2.com/bmw-auto/x7-2021-owners-manual-80712
Bradley, M.M. and Lang, P.J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Bulumulle, G. and Bölöni, L. (2016). Reducing side-sweep accidents with vehicle-to-vehicle communication. Journal of Sensor and Actuator Networks, 5(4), 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/jsan5040019
Colley, M., Bajrovic, E. and Rukzio, E. (2022a). Effects of pedestrian behavior, time pressure, and repeated exposure on crossing decisions in front of automated vehicles equipped with external communication. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New Orleans, LA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517571
Colley, M., Fabian, T. and Rukzio, E. (2022b). Investigating the effects of external communication and automation behavior on manual drivers at intersections. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(MHCI), 176. https://doi.org/10.1145/3546711
Crosato, L., Tian, K., Shum, H.P.H., Ho, E.S.L., Wang, Y. and Wei, C. (2023). Social interaction‐aware dynamical models and decision‐making for autonomous vehicles. Advanced Intelligent Systems, 6(3), 2300575. https://doi.org/10.1002/aisy.202300575
CROW. (2012). ASVV 2012 : Aanbevelingen voor verkeersvoorzieningen binnen de bebouwde kom [ASVV 2012: Recommendations for traffic facilities in built-up areas]. CROW Kenniscentrum voor Verkeer, Vervoer en Infrastructuur, Ede.
Deb, S., Strawderman, L.J. and Carruth, D.W. (2018). Investigating pedestrian suggestions for external features on fully autonomous vehicles: A virtual reality experiment. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 59, 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.08.016
De Clercq, G.K., Dietrich, A., Núñez Velasco, P., De Winter, J.C.F. and Happee, R. (2019). External human-machine interfaces on automated vehicles: Effects on pedestrian crossing decisions. Human Factors, 61(8), 1353–1370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819836343
De Winter, J.C.F. and Dodou, D. (2010). Five-point Likert items: t test versus Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon (Addendum added October 2012). Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 15(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.7275/bj1p-ts64
De Winter, J.C.F. and Dodou, D. (2022). External human–machine interfaces: Gimmick or necessity? Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 15, 100643. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRIP.2022.100643
Dey, D., Ackermans, S., Martens, M., Pfleging, B. and Terken, J. (2022). Interactions of automated vehicles with road users. In Riener, A., Jeon, M. and Alvarez, I. (eds) User Experience Design in the Era of Automated Driving (pp. 533–581), Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77726-5_20
Dey, D., Habibovic, A., Löcken, A., Wintersberger, P., Pfleging, B., Riener, A., Martens, M. and Terken, J. (2020). Taming the eHMI jungle: A classification taxonomy to guide, compare, and assess the design principles of automated vehicles’ external human-machine interfaces. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 7, 100174. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRIP.2020.100174
Dey, D. and Terken, J. (2017). Pedestrian interaction with vehicles: Roles of explicit and implicit communication. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 109–113). Oldenburg, Germany. https://doi.org/10.1145/3122986.3123009
Eisele, D. and Petzoldt, T. (2022). Effects of traffic context on eHMI icon comprehension. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 85, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2021.12.014
Eisma, Y.B., Cabrall, C.D.D. and De Winter, J.C.F. (2018). Visual sampling processes revisited: Replicating and extending Senders (1983) using modern eye-tracking equipment. IEEE Transactions on Human Machine Systems, 48(5), 526–540. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2018.2806200
Eisma, Y.B., Van Bergen, S., Ter Brake, S.M., Hensen, M.T.T., Tempelaar, W.J. and De Winter, J.C.F. (2020). External human-machine interfaces: The effect of display location on crossing intentions and eye movements. Information, 11(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11010013
Faas, S.M., Kao, A.C. and Baumann, M. (2020). A longitudinal video study on communicating status and intent for self-driving vehicle–pedestrian interaction. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Honolulu, HI. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376484
Faas, S.M., Kraus, J., Schoenhals, A. and Baumann, M. (2021). Calibrating pedestrians’ trust in automated vehicles: Does an intent display in an external HMI support trust calibration and safe crossing behavior? Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Yokohama, Japan. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445738
Ferenchak, N.N. and Shafique, S. (2022). Pedestrians’ perceptions of autonomous vehicle external human-machine interfaces. ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part B: Mechanical Engineering, 8(3), 034501. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4051778
Gruenefeld, U., Weiß, S., Löcken, A., Virgilio, I., Kun, A.L. and Boll, S. (2019). VRoad: Gesture-based interaction between pedestrians and automated vehicles in virtual reality. 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: Adjunct Proceedings (pp. 399–404). Utrecht, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1145/3349263.3351511
Habibovic, A., Malmsten Lundgren, V., Andersson, J., Klingegård, M., Lagström, T., Sirkka, A., Fagerlönn, J., Edgren, C., Fredriksson, R., Krupenia, S., Saluäär, D. and Larsson, P. (2018). Communicating intent of automated vehicles to pedestrians. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1336. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01336
Hart, S.G. and Staveland, L.E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Hancock, P.A. and Meshkati, N. (eds) Human Mental Workload (pp. 139–183), North Holland Press, Amsterdam.
Hensch, A.-C., Neumann, I., Beggiato, M., Halama, J. and 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. https://doi.org/10.5507/tots.2019.012
Kaleefathullah, A.A., Merat, N., Lee, Y.M., Eisma, Y.B., Madigan, R., Garcia, J. and De Winter, J.C.F. (2022). External human–machine interfaces can be misleading: An examination of trust development and misuse in a CAVE-based pedestrian simulation environment. Human Factors, 64(6), 1070–1085. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720820970751
Kennedy, R.S., Lane, N.E., Berbaum, K.S. and Lilienthal, M.G. (1993). Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3(3), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3
Kettwich, C., Haus, R., Temme, G. and Schieben, A. (2016). Validation of a HMI concept indicating the status of the traffic light signal in the context of automated driving in urban environment. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV) (pp. 1374–1379). Gothenburg, Sweden. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2016.7535569
Lau, M., Le, D.H. and Oehl, M. (2021). Design of external human-machine interfaces for different automated vehicle types for the interaction with pedestrians on a shared space. In Black, N.L., Neumann, W.P. and Noy, I. (eds) Proceedings of the 21st Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (pp. 710–717), Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74608-7_87
Lee, Y.M., Madigan, R., Giles, O., Garach-Morcillo, L., Markkula, G., Fox, C., Camara, F., Rothmueller, M., Vendelbo-Larsen, S.A., Holm Rasmussen, P., Dietrich, A., Nathanael, D., Portouli, V., Schieben, A. and Merat, N. (2021). Road users rarely use explicit communication when interacting in today’s traffic: implications for automated vehicles. Cognition, Technology & Work, 23, 367–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-020-00635-y
Löcken, A., Golling, C. and Riener, A. (2019). How should automated vehicles interact with pedestrians? A comparative analysis of interaction concepts in virtual reality. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 262–274). Utrecht, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1145/3342197.3344544
Madigan, R., Lee, Y.M., Lyu, W., Horn, S., De Pedro, J.G. and Merat, N. (2023). Pedestrian interactions with automated vehicles: Does the presence of a zebra crossing affect how eHMIs and movement patterns are interpreted? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 98, 170–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2023.09.003
Mahadevan, K., Somanath, S. and Sharlin, E. (2018). Communicating awareness and intent in autonomous vehicle-pedestrian interaction. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Montréal, Canada. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174003
Martins, V., Rufino, J., Silva, L., Almeida, J., Fernandes Silva, B.M., Ferreira, J. and Fonseca, J. (2019). Towards personal virtual traffic lights. Information, 10(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/info10010032
Métayer, N. and Coeugnet, S. (2021). Improving the experience in the pedestrian’s interaction with an autonomous vehicle: An ergonomic comparison of external HMI. Applied Ergonomics, 96, 103478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103478
Mirnig, A.G., Gärtner, M., Wallner, V., Gafert, M., Braun, H., Fröhlich, P., Suette, S., Sypniewski, J., Meschtscherjakov, A. and Tscheligi, M. (2021). Stop or go? Let me know! A field study on visual external communication for automated shuttles. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 287–295). Leeds, UK. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409118.3475131
Mok, C.S., Bazilinskyy, P. and De Winter, J.C.F. (2022). Stopping by looking: A driver-pedestrian interaction study in a coupled simulator using head-mounted displays with eye-tracking. Applied Ergonomics, 105, 103825. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APERGO.2022.103825
Neukum, A., Lübbecke, T., Krüger, H.-P., Mayser, C. and Steinle, J. (2008). ACC-Stop&Go: Fahrverhalten an funktionalen Systemgrenzen. In Maurer, M. and Stiller, C. (eds) 5. Workshop Fahrerassistenzsysteme (FAS) (2008) (pp. 141–150).
Norman, D. (2014). Turn Signals Are the Facial Expressions of Automobiles. Diversion Books, New York.
Ohn-Bar, E. and Trivedi, M.M. (2016). Looking at humans in the age of self-driving and highly automated vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 1(1), 90–104. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2016.2571067
Othersen, I., Conti-Kufner, A.S., Dietrich, A., Maruhn, P. and Bengler, K. (2018). Designing for automated vehicle and pedestrian communication: Perspectives on eHMIs from older and younger persons. In De Waard, D., Brookhuis, K., Coelho, D., Fairclough, S., Manzey, D., Naumann, A., Onnasch, L., Röttger, S., Toffetti, A. and Wiczorek, R. (eds) Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Europe Chapter 2018 Annual Conference (pp. 135–148).
Papakostopoulos, V., Nathanael, D., Portouli, E. and Amditis, A. (2021). Effect of external HMI for automated vehicles (AVs) on drivers’ ability to infer the AV motion intention: A field experiment. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 82, 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2021.07.009
Rettenmaier, M., Albers, D. and Bengler, K. (2020). After you?! – Use of external human-machine interfaces in road bottleneck scenarios. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 70, 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.03.004
Rettenmaier, M., Pietsch, M., Schmidtler, J. and Bengler, K. (2019). Passing through the bottleneck – The potential of external human-machine interfaces. Proceedings of the IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (pp. 1687–1692). Paris, France. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2019.8814082
Rudenko, A., Palmieri, L., Herman, M., Kitani, K. M., Gavrila, D.M. and Arras, K.O. (2020). Human motion trajectory prediction: A survey. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 39(8), 895–935. https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364920917446
Sadeghian, S., Hassenzahl, M. and Eckoldt, K. (2020). An exploration of prosocial aspects of communication cues between automated vehicles and pedestrians. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 1687–1692). Virtual Event. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409120.3410657
Schwarting, W., Pierson, A., Alonso-Mora, J., Karaman, S. and Rus, D. (2019). Social behavior for autonomous vehicles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(50), 24972–24978. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1820676116
Siebert, F.W., Oehl, M. and Pfister, H.-R. (2014). The influence of time headway on subjective driver states in adaptive cruise control. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 25, 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.05.005
Tabone, W., De Winter, J.C.F., Ackermann, C., Bärgman, J., Baumann, M., Deb, S., Emmenegger, C., Habibovic, A., Hagenzieker, M., Hancock, P.A., Happee, R., Krems, J., Lee, J. D., Martens, M., Merat, N., Norman, D.A., Sheridan, T.B. and Stanton, N.A. (2021). Vulnerable road users and the coming wave of automated vehicles: Expert perspectives. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 9, 100293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100293
Taghavifar, H., Wei, C. and Taghavifar, L. (2024). Socially intelligent reinforcement learning for optimal automated vehicle control in traffic scenarios. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2023.3347264
Tang, K. and Kuwahara, M. (2011). Implementing the concept of critical post-encroachment time for all-red clearance interval design at signalized intersections. Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 8, 299–299. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/eastpro/2011/0/2011_0_299/_pdf
Tran, T.T.M., Parker, C., Wang, Y. and Tomitsch, M. (2022). Designing wearable augmented reality concepts to support scalability in autonomous vehicle-pedestrian interaction. Frontiers in Computer Science, 4, 866516. https://doi.org/10.3389/FCOMP.2022.866516
Tscharn, R., Naujoks, F. and Neukum, A. (2018). The perceived criticality of different time headways is depending on velocity. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 58, 1043–1052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.08.001
Umbrellium. (2017). Make roads safer, more responsive & dynamic. https://umbrellium.co.uk/case-studies/south-london-starling-cv
Van der Laan, J.D., Heino, A. and De Waard, D. (1997). A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telematics. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 5(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0968-090X(96)00025-3
Von Sawitzky, T., Wintersberger, P., Löcken, A., Frison, A.-K. and Riener, A. (2020). Augmentation concepts with HUDs for cyclists to improve road safety in shared spaces. Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Honolulu, HI. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.3383022
Von Sawitzky, T., Wintersberger, P., Riener, A. and Gabbard, J.L. (2019). Increasing trust in fully automated driving: Route indication on an augmented reality head-up display. Proceedings of the 8th ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays. Palermo, Italy. https://doi.org/10.1145/3321335.3324947
Wickens, C.D., McCarley, J.S., Alexander, A.L., Thomas, L.C., Ambinder, M. and Zheng, S. (2008). Attention-situation awareness (A-SA) model of pilot error. In Foyle, D.C. and Hooey, B.L. (eds) Human Performance Modeling in Aviation (pp. 213–239), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Wilbrink, M., Lau, M., Illgner, J., Schieben, A. and Oehl, M. (2021). Impact of external human–machine interface communication strategies of automated vehicles on pedestrians’ crossing decisions and behaviors in an urban environment. Sustainability, 13(15), 8396. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158396
Winzer, O.M., Conti-Kufner, A.S. and Bengler, K. (2018). Intersection Traffic Light Assistant – An evaluation of the suitability of two human machine interfaces. Proceedings of the 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC) (pp. 1687–1692). Maui, HI. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITSC.2018.8569708
Witmer, B.G., Jerome, C.J. and Singer, M.J. (2005). The factor structure of the Presence Questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 14(3), 298–312. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474605323384654
Yang, B., Zheng, R., Yin, Y., Yamabe, S. and Nakano, K. (2016). Analysis of influence on driver behaviour while using in‐vehicle traffic lights with application of head‐up display. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, 10(5), 347–353. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-its.2015.0179
Zimmermann, M., Schopf, D., Lütteken, N., Liu, Z., Storost, K., Baumann, M., Happee, R. and Bengler, K.J. (2018). Carrot and stick: A game-theoretic approach to motivate cooperative driving through social interaction. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 88, 159–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.01.017
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Shiva Nischal Lingam, Joost De Winter, Yongqi Dong, Anastasia Tsapi, Bart Van Arem, Haneen Farah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
