It will not be long until Level 3 Automated Driving Systems (L3 ADS) enter the consumer market. An important role corresponds to methodology development. The present paper gives impetus to the process of developing robust methods for evaluating Human-Machine Interfaces (HMI) for L3 ADS. First, a literature review on automotive interfaces concerning methodology application is outlined showing that studies often lack to provide both self-report and observational data. To derive a comprehensive image of HMI quality, we recommend multi-method approach in user research. Subsequently, we provide an overview of state-of-the-art self-report and observational measures. From the availability of measures and the necessity to include both in user studies, the issue of the performance-preference dissociation arises. It threatens study designs and interpretation of results. Following methodological recommendations from the present work supports researchers and practitioners in the area of automated driving for proper study design and interpretation of study results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Forster et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: