Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Passenger-facing vehicle interfaces must inform without disrupting non-driving activities. This study related HMI communication during fully automated driving to passenger physiology and interaction quality during concurrent reading. Twenty-six participants completed a no-communication Baseline drive and one HMI drive with abstract auditory-tactile cues (Simple) or synthesised speech (Extended); 24 contributed physiological data. Electrodermal activity (EDA) was the primary measure, with User Experience Questionnaire ratings. Because HMI variant was assigned between participants, participant-level analyses provided primary condition inference. Mean EDA was lower in both HMI conditions than Baseline, but no contrast was statistically supported (Simple–Baseline −73.1, 95% CI [−160.3, 14.0], p = 0.092; Extended–Baseline −44.7, p = 0.296; Extended–Simple 28.4, p = 0.614). No UEQ scale survived multiplicity correction. Segment-level mixed-effects models (803 segments) reproduced this ordering with narrower intervals reflecting repeated observations, not independent assignments. Participant-level contrasts matched the unit of assignment; segment-level models characterised temporal physiological variation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Strle et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: