Annika Stampf, Ann-Kathrin Knuth, Mark Colley, Enrico Rukzio
{"title":"法律与秩序:在德国样本中调查手动和自动驾驶中冲突情况的影响","authors":"Annika Stampf, Ann-Kathrin Knuth, Mark Colley, Enrico Rukzio","doi":"10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103260","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Minor violations of traffic regulations are common today and partially socially accepted. Automated vehicles (AVs), however, will be obliged to <em>keep to the letter of the law</em>. This can lead to situations where user requests cause the AV to reach its legal boundaries, creating novel user-vehicle conflicts. To investigate whether traffic-violating driver interests are transferred to the automated context, we conducted an online survey with three conflict-prone scenarios (N=49). The results indicate that legally compliant AV behavior is desired but that users would intervene in the vehicle’s behavior to enforce interests. In a subsequent Virtual Reality study (N=30), we evaluated the effect of legal boundary-handling strategies (Responsibility and Control Shift, Responsibility Shift, No Shift) and other traffic participants’ violating traffic regulations on behavior, conflict, and trust in a legally conflict-prone parking scenario. Results show that conflict is perceived significantly higher in all strategies compared to the manual baseline, while situational trust in the vehicle is higher in the automated conditions but independent of the handling strategy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54955,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581924000442/pdfft?md5=3616b47848afeb7fa241700d53dabe30&pid=1-s2.0-S1071581924000442-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Law and order: Investigating the effects of conflictual situations in manual and automated driving in a German sample\",\"authors\":\"Annika Stampf, Ann-Kathrin Knuth, Mark Colley, Enrico Rukzio\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103260\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Minor violations of traffic regulations are common today and partially socially accepted. Automated vehicles (AVs), however, will be obliged to <em>keep to the letter of the law</em>. This can lead to situations where user requests cause the AV to reach its legal boundaries, creating novel user-vehicle conflicts. To investigate whether traffic-violating driver interests are transferred to the automated context, we conducted an online survey with three conflict-prone scenarios (N=49). The results indicate that legally compliant AV behavior is desired but that users would intervene in the vehicle’s behavior to enforce interests. In a subsequent Virtual Reality study (N=30), we evaluated the effect of legal boundary-handling strategies (Responsibility and Control Shift, Responsibility Shift, No Shift) and other traffic participants’ violating traffic regulations on behavior, conflict, and trust in a legally conflict-prone parking scenario. Results show that conflict is perceived significantly higher in all strategies compared to the manual baseline, while situational trust in the vehicle is higher in the automated conditions but independent of the handling strategy.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581924000442/pdfft?md5=3616b47848afeb7fa241700d53dabe30&pid=1-s2.0-S1071581924000442-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581924000442\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, CYBERNETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581924000442","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, CYBERNETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Law and order: Investigating the effects of conflictual situations in manual and automated driving in a German sample
Minor violations of traffic regulations are common today and partially socially accepted. Automated vehicles (AVs), however, will be obliged to keep to the letter of the law. This can lead to situations where user requests cause the AV to reach its legal boundaries, creating novel user-vehicle conflicts. To investigate whether traffic-violating driver interests are transferred to the automated context, we conducted an online survey with three conflict-prone scenarios (N=49). The results indicate that legally compliant AV behavior is desired but that users would intervene in the vehicle’s behavior to enforce interests. In a subsequent Virtual Reality study (N=30), we evaluated the effect of legal boundary-handling strategies (Responsibility and Control Shift, Responsibility Shift, No Shift) and other traffic participants’ violating traffic regulations on behavior, conflict, and trust in a legally conflict-prone parking scenario. Results show that conflict is perceived significantly higher in all strategies compared to the manual baseline, while situational trust in the vehicle is higher in the automated conditions but independent of the handling strategy.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Human-Computer Studies publishes original research over the whole spectrum of work relevant to the theory and practice of innovative interactive systems. The journal is inherently interdisciplinary, covering research in computing, artificial intelligence, psychology, linguistics, communication, design, engineering, and social organization, which is relevant to the design, analysis, evaluation and application of innovative interactive systems. Papers at the boundaries of these disciplines are especially welcome, as it is our view that interdisciplinary approaches are needed for producing theoretical insights in this complex area and for effective deployment of innovative technologies in concrete user communities.
Research areas relevant to the journal include, but are not limited to:
• Innovative interaction techniques
• Multimodal interaction
• Speech interaction
• Graphic interaction
• Natural language interaction
• Interaction in mobile and embedded systems
• Interface design and evaluation methodologies
• Design and evaluation of innovative interactive systems
• User interface prototyping and management systems
• Ubiquitous computing
• Wearable computers
• Pervasive computing
• Affective computing
• Empirical studies of user behaviour
• Empirical studies of programming and software engineering
• Computer supported cooperative work
• Computer mediated communication
• Virtual reality
• Mixed and augmented Reality
• Intelligent user interfaces
• Presence
...