Haptic Shared Planning and Control: Enabling Coordination of Future Actions in Human-Autonomous Vehicle Teams Through a Haptic Negotiation Interface.

IF 3.6 3区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Hannah Báez, Haochi Pan, Jean Costa, John Gideon, Nadine Sarter, R Brent Gillespie
{"title":"Haptic Shared Planning and Control: Enabling Coordination of Future Actions in Human-Autonomous Vehicle Teams Through a Haptic Negotiation Interface.","authors":"Hannah Báez, Haochi Pan, Jean Costa, John Gideon, Nadine Sarter, R Brent Gillespie","doi":"10.1177/00187208261483656","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveWe examine how human-automation shared steering control combined with a haptic shape-changing interface for communicating and negotiating future intent affects driving performance and trust recovery.BackgroundSteering fights in haptic shared control can negatively impact driving performance. Existing solutions do not feature automation explicitly communicating its intent nor supporting intent negotiation with the driver. Trust recovery after faults is also expected to improve with explicit intent communication.MethodThirty participants took part in a continuous driving task consisting of 39 turns at intersections in which the pre-planned turn direction either matched or differed. Haptic communication of intent between driver and automation was metered under three conditions: From automation to driver (One-Way), in both directions (Two-Way), or not available (No-Way). Road obstacles were present at certain intersections to test handling of contingencies and faults. Automation faults were restricted to a second experimental period, leaving a third period to examine trust before and after a period of faults.ResultsDrivers in Two-Way communication displayed significantly improved driving performance when turn intents did not match. After the period of automation faults, drivers in Two-Way communication displayed significantly better overall trust recovery than drivers in One-Way or No-Way communication.ConclusionNegotiation is a viable means to avoid driver overrides and leads to improved trust recovery. Negotiation through a haptic interface should be considered an effective strategy to ensure function and cohesion in human-automation teams.ApplicationHuman-autonomy planning and team building.</p>","PeriodicalId":56333,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors","volume":" ","pages":"187208261483656"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208261483656","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveWe examine how human-automation shared steering control combined with a haptic shape-changing interface for communicating and negotiating future intent affects driving performance and trust recovery.BackgroundSteering fights in haptic shared control can negatively impact driving performance. Existing solutions do not feature automation explicitly communicating its intent nor supporting intent negotiation with the driver. Trust recovery after faults is also expected to improve with explicit intent communication.MethodThirty participants took part in a continuous driving task consisting of 39 turns at intersections in which the pre-planned turn direction either matched or differed. Haptic communication of intent between driver and automation was metered under three conditions: From automation to driver (One-Way), in both directions (Two-Way), or not available (No-Way). Road obstacles were present at certain intersections to test handling of contingencies and faults. Automation faults were restricted to a second experimental period, leaving a third period to examine trust before and after a period of faults.ResultsDrivers in Two-Way communication displayed significantly improved driving performance when turn intents did not match. After the period of automation faults, drivers in Two-Way communication displayed significantly better overall trust recovery than drivers in One-Way or No-Way communication.ConclusionNegotiation is a viable means to avoid driver overrides and leads to improved trust recovery. Negotiation through a haptic interface should be considered an effective strategy to ensure function and cohesion in human-automation teams.ApplicationHuman-autonomy planning and team building.

触觉共享规划和控制:通过触觉协商界面实现人类自动驾驶车辆团队未来行动的协调。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Factors
Human Factors 管理科学-行为科学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society publishes peer-reviewed scientific studies in human factors/ergonomics that present theoretical and practical advances concerning the relationship between people and technologies, tools, environments, and systems. Papers published in Human Factors leverage fundamental knowledge of human capabilities and limitations – and the basic understanding of cognitive, physical, behavioral, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational aspects of human performance – to yield design principles; enhance training, selection, and communication; and ultimately improve human-system interfaces and sociotechnical systems that lead to safer and more effective outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书