Key result
Automated vehicle controllers elicited lower skin conductance responses and higher heart-rate variability compared to manual driving, with no significant differences between the AV controllers.
Why the study?
The study investigated how driver discomfort is influenced by different automated vehicle controllers compared to manual driving, and across different road environments, using physiological metrics.
Do different automated vehicle controllers affect driver discomfort (measured by HRV and EDA) compared to manual driving?
Do different automated vehicle controllers affect driver discomfort (measured by HRV and EDA) compared to manual driving?
Skin conductance response is more sensitive than HRV for assessing real-time driver discomfort in automated vehicles.
SCR may outperform HRV for real-time AV driver discomfort assessment; leaves open controller-specific effects.
This study investigated how driver discomfort was influenced by different types of automated vehicle (AV) controllers, compared to manual driving, and whether this response changed in different road environments, using heart-rate variability (HRV) and electrodermal activity (EDA). A total of 24 drivers were subjected to manual driving and four AV controllers: two modelled to depict “human-like” driving behaviour, one conventional lane-keeping assist controller, and a replay of their own manual drive. Each drive lasted for ~15 min and consisted of rural and urban environments, which differed in terms of average speed, road geometry and road-based furniture. Drivers showed higher skin conductance response (SCR) and lower HRV during manual driving, compared to the automated drives. There were no significant differences in discomfort between the AV controllers. SCRs and subjective discomfort ratings showed significantly higher discomfort in the faster rural environments, when compared to the urban environments. Our results suggest that SCR values are more sensitive than HRV-based measures to continuously evolving situations that induce discomfort. Further research may be warranted in investigating the value of this metric in assessing real-time driver discomfort levels, which may help improve acceptance of AV controllers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Radhakrishnan et al. (2020) studied Driver discomfort (n=24). Automated vehicle (AV) controllers vs. Manual driving was evaluated on Driver discomfort measured by heart-rate variability (HRV) and electrodermal activity (EDA). Automated vehicle controllers elicited lower skin conductance responses and higher heart-rate variability compared to manual driving, with no significant differences between the AV controllers.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: