Comparing User Acceptance in Human–Machine Interfaces Assessments of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Standardized Test Procedure

Human–Machine Interfaces (HMIs) in autonomous driving technology have recently gained significant research interest in public transportation. However, most of the studies are biased towards qualitative methods, while combining quantitative and qualitative approaches has yet to receive commensurate attention in measuring user acceptance of design outcome evaluation. To the best of our knowledge, no standardized test procedure that combines quantitative and qualitative methods has been formed to evaluate and compare the interrelationships between different designs of HMIs and their psychological effects on users. This paper proposes a practical and comprehensive protocol to guide assessments of user acceptance of HMI design solutions. We first defined user acceptance and analyzed the existing evaluation methods. Then, specific ergonomic factors and requirements that the designed output HMI should meet were identified. Based on this, we developed a protocol to evaluate a particular HMI solution from in- and out-of-vehicle perspectives. Our theoretical protocol combines objective and subjective measures to compare users’ behavior when interacting with Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) in a virtual experimental environment, especially in public transportation. Standardized testing procedures provide researchers and interaction designers with a practical framework and offer theoretical support for subsequent studies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Sciences
Published
2024-12-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010045
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.86
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparing User Acceptance in Human–Machine Interfaces Assessments of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Standardized Test Procedure

Giandomenico Caruso, Ming Yan, Lucia Rampino
6 citations
Applied Sciences
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
3.86
article

Comparing User Acceptance in Human–Machine Interfaces Assessments of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Standardized Test Procedure

Giandomenico Caruso, Ming Yan, Lucia Rampino
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Human–Machine Interfaces (HMIs) in autonomous driving technology have recently gained significant research interest in public transportation. However, most of the studies are biased towards qualitative methods, while combining quantitative and qualitative approaches has yet to receive commensurate attention in measuring user acceptance of design outcome evaluation. To the best of our knowledge, no standardized test procedure that combines quantitative and qualitative methods has been formed to evaluate and compare the interrelationships between different designs of HMIs and their psychological effects on users. This paper proposes a practical and comprehensive protocol to guide assessments of user acceptance of HMI design solutions. We first defined user acceptance and analyzed the existing evaluation methods. Then, specific ergonomic factors and requirements that the designed output HMI should meet were identified. Based on this, we developed a protocol to evaluate a particular HMI solution from in- and out-of-vehicle perspectives. Our theoretical protocol combines objective and subjective measures to compare users’ behavior when interacting with Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) in a virtual experimental environment, especially in public transportation. Standardized testing procedures provide researchers and interaction designers with a practical framework and offer theoretical support for subsequent studies.

Applied SciencesVol. 15(1)
Politecnico di Milano (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
3.86
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.